"We have the statement of a person who said after he heard gunshots, he went to his balcony and saw the light was on. Then he heard a female screaming two-three times, then more gunshots," Detective Botha told the court.
How can Oscar P. explain this away?
Let's assume that the OP's intruder story is what actually happened, and what the jurors believe? What is the correct charge... manslaughter, 2nd degree murder, 1st degree murder??? Curious to hear from legal minds what the appropriate charge should be in this case.
Wikiwatcher wrote:
"We have the statement of a person who said after he heard gunshots, he went to his balcony and saw the light was on. Then he heard a female screaming two-three times, then more gunshots," Detective Botha told the court.How can Oscar P. explain this away?
This testimony seems to match Botha's statement that police "found three spent cartridges in the bathroom and one in the hallway connecting the bathroom to the bedroom." To me, it suggests he shot her once (most likely in the hip) as she fled to the toilet. She locked the door behind her. Screaming followed. He then fired the shots through the door.
Do we know for sure if her skull was "crushed" and the cricket bat was bloody, as previously reported? If true, those two items are highly, highly incriminating, but I don't see them mentioned in the most recent articles.
Mr Botha told the magistrate that a second witness had heard gunfire and gone out to his balcony to see "that the lights in the house were on". He then heard a female scream before two more shots were fired.
The defence countered that the screams from the house were those of Pistorius, in anguish at what had happened.
Mr Botha said Pistorius' brother, Carl, and a lawyer had removed from the house a memory stick with the details of the athlete's offshore accounts and that both "testosterone" and an unlicensed 38mm handgun were found in the house.
where is the 5th cellphone used to call emergency?
why take a memory stick from the scene? what else taken?
gun holster under her side of bed, and he doesn't check on her or wake her to say, hey baby we got a problem?
why would these witnesses lie? Presumably their statements were taken by police before Oscar's affidavit given, so they do not even know the significance of lights or timing of shots
the Reeva Steenkamp in the bathroom is so different from the Trayvon Martin story, yet the OP camp seems to be making headway in setting the playing field upon which the case should be heard and interpreted
Where is the apology by OP for his actions? Other than the legal affidavit reference to his emotions at his actions? Wouldn't an innocent man apologize , carefully worded by lawyers but done nonetheless?
https://twitter.com/OscarTrial
Simon Stitchfield wrote:
It is truly remarkable to me how people can now read what we know is fact (his affidavit) and STILL possibly believe him in any shape or form.
Aside from any other detail, this, is so utterly implausible it defies belief.
'I grabbed my 9mm pistol from underneath my bed. On my way to the bathroom I screamed words to the effect for him/them to get out of my house and for Reeva to phone the police'
So in the 7 meters (distance from bed to bethroom from police report), he is presumably screaming at the top of his lungs something to the effect of 'Who the f$§k is in there, what the f%$k are you doing, I have a f&%king gun and I will use it' and she sits there and doesn't say a word? No 'Oscar its me don't shoot' no female scream that obviously identifies her to him?
PEOPLE. THIS IS RIDICULOUS. GET A GRIP.
So she wakes up for a wee, locks herself in the toilet of the ensuite of the man she is deeply in love with and then falls asleep - to be woken up by him pumping bullets into her. Except when know this isnt true because
'I heard movement inside the toilet' so 'I fired shots at the toilet door and shouted to Reeva to phone the police'
So she's not asleep - she's just playing hide and seek while he is screaming at the top of his lungs he is going to shoot her?
I mean I'm not a forensic scientist - I am a mechanical engineer. Not a super genius but smart enough. I challenge anyone to possible rebutt what I just wrote above and how this crucial part of his story can possibly be true.
Thanks, I am waiting.
I'll take a stab at it. I'm not saying that I think this is true, just that it is a possible scenario based on the evidence presented in court so far.
Oscar wakes up in the middle of the night and goes out to the balcony to bring in the fan. His getting up wakes up Reeva, who gets up to pee. Oscar is on the balcony and doesn't hear her get out of bed. As he comes back in, he hears noises in the bathroom and freaks out.
The bedroom is pitch black, and when bedspreads are lumped up on the bed it can be really hard to tell in the dark if someone else is in bed. Oscar grabs his gun and starts yelling.
Reeva is in the bathroom and hears Oscar yelling about an intruder. She is probably terrified and has no idea he thinks she is the intruder. She figures her best bet is to hide in the toilet and keep quiet. Maybe she had locked the door out of habit when she went to pee (that's fairly common for girls to do, even when at home or with a loved one), or maybe she locked it when she heard the yelling. By the time the bullets came through the door, everything happened so fast. She may have never known it was Oscar who shot her, she might have believed it was an intruder.
It was horribly irresponsible for Oscar to shoot through the bathroom door, and even if this story is true, he deserves to be locked up for committing a terrible crime.
quote]
I'll take a stab at it. I'm not saying that I think this is true, just that it is a possible scenario based on the evidence presented in court so far.
Oscar wakes up in the middle of the night and goes out to the balcony to bring in the fan. His getting up wakes up Reeva, who gets up to pee. Oscar is on the balcony and doesn't hear her get out of bed. As he comes back in, he hears noises in the bathroom and freaks out.
The bedroom is pitch black, and when bedspreads are lumped up on the bed it can be really hard to tell in the dark if someone else is in bed. Oscar grabs his gun and starts yelling.
Reeva is in the bathroom and hears Oscar yelling about an intruder. She is probably terrified and has no idea he thinks she is the intruder. She figures her best bet is to hide in the toilet and keep quiet. Maybe she had locked the door out of habit when she went to pee (that's fairly common for girls to do, even when at home or with a loved one), or maybe she locked it when she heard the yelling. By the time the bullets came through the door, everything happened so fast. She may have never known it was Oscar who shot her, she might have believed it was an intruder.
It was horribly irresponsible for Oscar to shoot through the bathroom door, and even if this story is true, he deserves to be locked up for committing a terrible crime.[/quote]
Not a bad stab at it (as implausible as it all seems). As we saw with OJ, it is amazing what a good defense team can come up with. The trial may come down to a few other things that have been reported, but not necessarily presented in court yet:
1) What forensics says about the bloody cricket bat (and Reeva's crushed skull)
2) If forensics proves she was shot once prior to entering the bathroom. Surely she would have yelled/screamed at him to stop. It obviously took a bit before he entered the bathroom and shot her through the door.
3) Reports that police had been called to the house 2 hours prior to the shooting because of an argument the couple was having. Additionally, it is reported that after the shooting he first called his family, police were alerted by a neighbor. Neither of these two prove murder, but they certainly fit the prosecution's narative significantly better than his.
ukathleticscoach wrote:
Look at this:
"So Botha has effectively admitted he couldn't find any inconsistencies in OP's version."
"We're in terrible trouble" says junior prosecution official leaving court.
How much is the prosecutor paid compared to the defence? I bet if you reversed their roles it would be a different story
Botha is not the one under trial which is how this transcript comes across.
Wrong. Both the Prosecutor and the defence is hot shots in SA.
no trigger lock wrote:
Where is the apology by OP for his actions? Other than the legal affidavit reference to his emotions at his actions? Wouldn't an innocent man apologize , carefully worded by lawyers but done nonetheless?
He have.
[/quote]
Wrong. Both the Prosecutor and the defence is hot shots in SA.[/quote]
Any muppet could do a better job than the prosecutor
Oscar was just sick and tired of burglars breaking into his house to poop in his bathroom and wasn\'t going to take it any more. Who can blame him?
Too many people are focused on disproving OP's story. This is not how court works. The prosecution has to prove their own version of events beyond a shadow of a doubt and the defense need only poke around and find holes. He introduced this version as a distraction to bring up the shadow of doubt. But when they get to the court room, nothing from his version will be relevant.
What can the police prove?
From what we truly know I don't know if Premeditated Murder flies.
If they can bring in some ballistics, get the bat involved with skull fragments, find some credible witnesses that don't live a mile away....that could start to strengthen their case to the point that doubt is removed.
But I think this is a far weaker court case than we know right now, especially given that the lead detective said today that OP's version was plausible (OUCH!).
In our opinions, we don't need such stringent proof, but in court he may walk free.
Wikiwatcher wrote:
How can Oscar P. explain this away?
Doesn't need to.
So today we heard from the detective on the case that the shots fired into the door came from a high angle fired downwards, meaning he had his legs on him at the time. Not exactly what Oscars claiming.
Tommy2Nuttz wrote:
So today we heard from the detective on the case that the shots fired into the door came from a high angle fired downwards, meaning he had his legs on him at the time. Not exactly what Oscars claiming.
It will be interesting to see if that's true or not.
To provide some context, burgalry is a major issue in South Africa, I don't have the crime statistics, although I suspect that rates of burglary are high. But what is important in this case is the perceived danger of burgalry. Fear of house breakers and burglars is very much part of the cultural consiousness in SA. According to studies 6 out of 10 South Africans fear burgalry more than any other crime. Both before and after apartheid, the white middle and upper class (and probably now the growing black middle class) live in fear of the desperately poor black underclass. Even Alan Patton's famous novel Cry the Beloved Country centers around a case of burgalry. Add this to corruption and distrust of the police, and you have people taking the defense of their homes into their own hands.
I remember when I first arrived in SA while visiting there, being shocked walking through Pretoria and seeing that every single building, both business and residential, had three meter high fences topped with razor wire or electric wire. That Oscar P would keep a gun under is pillow, and freak out that some one broke into his house, despite living in a fortress would not be all that unusual. (Indeed, Oscar apparently has a history of mistaking things for burglars)
That being said, I think the evidences indicates that he is guilty of purposefully killing his girlfriend. But considering the cultural fear of burglary, his defense may seem more reasonable to the SA public, and those judging him.
Apparently, males killing their female significant others is also a very big problem in SA, with 3 women being killed this way every day. Way to contribute to that stat, Oscar.
Got my facts from these articles, good reads.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/feb/14/fear-arming-south-africa-guns
And, just for fun, I'll add that even those in the ivory tower have something to say on the issue
His story checks out with me
coach bigfoot wrote:
Did the "robber" decide to take a dump mid-heist? How can anyone possibly believe this defense?
Thanks for making me laugh.
Tommy2Nuttz wrote:
So today we heard from the detective on the case that the shots fired into the door came from a high angle fired downwards, meaning he had his legs on him at the time. Not exactly what Oscars claiming.
I think it is opinion at this time.
They are going to have to make a real ballistics/forensics case.... you know, mock up the whole thing, figure out how her body was positioned when shot, with the bullet holes, and how tall (legs or no legs) he would have had to been while shooting.
