What I indicated is probably closer to the truth that what anyone else here has indicated
What I indicated is probably closer to the truth that what anyone else here has indicated
He lives in a secure area.. there was no intruder. He has security cameras
what_happened_ wrote:
He lives in a secure area.. there was no intruder. He has security cameras
Yeah. It is a gated area with armed guards right? Why wouldn't you just call them instaed of blow someone away.
Anyway, here is part of the prosecution's statement:
prosecution wrote:
"There is no possible explanation to support his report that he thought that it was a burglar. Even (in) his own version, he readied himself, walked to the bathroom with the clear intention and plan to kill the 'burglar' and did so whilst the burglar was harmless and contained in a toilet. This in itself also constitutes premeditated murder of a 'defenceless burglar'.
The more that I think about it - the fact that she's in a locked bathroom toilet makes me think guilty as hell.
Why would the burglar lock himself in the toilet?
rojo wrote:
what_happened_ wrote:He lives in a secure area.. there was no intruder. He has security cameras
Yeah. It is a gated area with armed guards right? Why wouldn't you just call them instaed of blow someone away.
Anyway, here is part of the prosecution's statement:
prosecution wrote:
"There is no possible explanation to support his report that he thought that it was a burglar. Even (in) his own version, he readied himself, walked to the bathroom with the clear intention and plan to kill the 'burglar' and did so whilst the burglar was harmless and contained in a toilet. This in itself also constitutes premeditated murder of a 'defenceless burglar'.
The more that I think about it - the fact that she's in a locked bathroom toilet makes me think guilty as hell.
Why would the burglar lock himself in the toilet?
Perhaps after OP yelled out, the burglar got scared and hid.
Perhaps OP did not see his girlfriend in bed because he was on his stumps and only 3 to 4 feet tall. My bed is high enough that a 3 to 4 foot tall person would not be able to see who is in it.
About him finding a "key" for the bathroom. Though I have never lived in SA, most of the European countries I lived in had bathroom doors with old school key locks in the doors. I think this is common.
Perhaps OP was drunk when all this went down and his judgment was not normal. That doesn't make it ok, but it is a factor that must be considered.
A possible motive that would lead to a fight/murder: it was Valentine's Day (very early in the morning). Perhaps Reeva got an email/text/sext from her ex-boyfriend the rugby guy. OP sees it and flies into a jealous rage. Tragedy ensues.
My opinion is that OPs statement looks thin. At the very best, he is guilty of manslaughter for grossly mishandling his firearm.
I'm interested in the steroid angle. If OP tests negative for steroids I am predicting that he makes a statement that they were Reeva's steroids. Now that she has been cremated there is no way to prove she was not using (unless they have a blood sample of hers that they can test).
I believe OPs grief is real though. I've been angry at someone I loved before (certainly not enough to physically harm anyone though), and later when I came to my senses realized what an a-hole I was. It must be a million times worse when you killed someone you loved.
I predict that if OP gets a significant sentence he will off himself.
All in all it is a tragic, horrible thing that occurred.
when you have money and celeberity you will always have a good defense...
Feel sorry for the model he murdered. Not sure why a model would date such a loser....At least we won't have to deal with watching the circus act next Olympics.
Roux is picking apart every claim from the police, this is looking really good in favour of Pistorious:
"Advocate Roux, Mr Pistorius' defence barrister, is in his element - alternating condescending and disbelieving tones, chipping away at the credibility of police evidence, firing a barrage of questions."
"We're in terrible trouble" says junior prosecution official leaving court.
It was not steroids:
The testosterone claim, the most potentially damaging for Pretorius as a defendant and an athlete, turns out to have not been quite as clear cut as the officer suggested either (and was it perhaps deliberately, for effect that he said "steroids" then corrected himself?)
Mr Roux points out that the packages contained a herbal remedy that can be bought in any pharmacy. "It's not a steroid and it's not a banned substance," he barks at the stuttering detective."
Follow it live here:
It is reported that a police officer found 1 cartridge outside and 3 inside the bathroom
ukathleticscoach wrote:
It is reported that a police officer found 1 cartridge outside and 3 inside the bathroom
We'll see. Theres been reported a lot which have turned out to be wrong.
The autopsy showed her bladder to be empty, therefore the toilet will be the key.
If the toilet water is clean (i.e. flushed): His defence goes out the window as he would have heard the flush which suggests no intruder, and/or She locked herself in for her own protection and not to use the toilet (but why not lock the bathroom door instead?). If the toilet was not flushed (i.e. she used the toilet) his story is supported, but it doesn’t rule out that he went crazy.
The more interesting this is that the ballistics supports the theory that he was on prosthetics, and that she was apparently dressed (not for sleeping). This all suggests they were not yet in bed.
RunningHigh wrote:
The more interesting this is that the ballistics supports the theory that he was on prosthetics, and that she was apparently dressed (not for sleeping). This all suggests they were not yet in bed.
Found that interesting as well, until this part:
"So Botha has effectively admitted he couldn't find any inconsistencies in OP's version."
Wouldn't he point to the the ballistics as something that didn't support OPs theory?
I can't figure out why he would have said he was not on prosthetics if he was. What was to gain from it?
He could have easily said he put them on before going to get the fan, or even that he sometimes falls asleep whilst wearing them.
We will have to wait for his trial before understanding more - this is just a bail hearing afterall.
Wasn't SA a racist country before like Israel is today? If so OP can't get a fair trial.
The prosecutions contentions are easily falling apart one by one.
This is looking more and more like a horrible tragedy...born more of a guy skittishly concerned for safety at his home...
no taste in music wrote:
The prosecutions contentions are easily falling apart one by one.
This is looking more and more like a horrible tragedy...born more of a guy skittishly concerned for safety at his home...
Agree, almost seems like the prosecutors just want him jailed, no matter what the facts are.
But, this is still terrible behaviour. 3-4 shots against against someone you dont know who are on the other side of a door? Thats not good regardless.
rojo wrote:
what_happened_ wrote:He lives in a secure area.. there was no intruder. He has security cameras
Yeah. It is a gated area with armed guards right? Why wouldn't you just call them instaed of blow someone away.
Anyway, here is part of the prosecution's statement:
prosecution wrote:
"There is no possible explanation to support his report that he thought that it was a burglar. Even (in) his own version, he readied himself, walked to the bathroom with the clear intention and plan to kill the 'burglar' and did so whilst the burglar was harmless and contained in a toilet. This in itself also constitutes premeditated murder of a 'defenceless burglar'.
The more that I think about it - the fact that she's in a locked bathroom toilet makes me think guilty as hell.
Why would the burglar lock himself in the toilet?
SA is more akin to the WW West, than how you are thinking of it.
History of massive police corruption.
History of black security workers being bribed to let criminals in, or security workers held at gun point.
There is a reason lots of white SA's have guns and considered themselves their first line of security.
Put that in the hands of an insecure amputee, gun nut, and you might have a recipe for tragedy.
Barakus Obama wrote:
no taste in music wrote:The prosecutions contentions are easily falling apart one by one.
This is looking more and more like a horrible tragedy...born more of a guy skittishly concerned for safety at his home...
Agree, almost seems like the prosecutors just want him jailed, no matter what the facts are.
But, this is still terrible behaviour. 3-4 shots against against someone you dont know who are on the other side of a door? Thats not good regardless.
Perhaps we make the mistake of thinking of him as this buff athlete...when he internally has thought of himself as a person who is handicapped on some level...had a hard time defending himself if pushed around as a kid, could have had a life long insecurity...not unfounded, about being caught in a home invasion situation without being able bodied or without a gun.
Before this tragedy...ironically there was that article and that tweet both showing he was very/overly concerned / skittish / paranoid about being safe in his home.
It's beginning to sound more and more like a horrible tragedy born of legit need for personals security in SA, and his being a little too into being able and ready with the guns.
That its for the day, bail hearing resumes for a 3rd day tomorrow.
Prosecutions case was well debunked.
Officer back tracks at end and calls woman's house 300meters away, not 600 meters away. Ahem. Cops were described as looking "keystone-ish."
It's starting to look like a tragic and massively stupid accident.
Not one piece of OP statement yesterday was debunked, not one.
Prosecution...debunked on everything.
Barakus Obama wrote:
ukathleticscoach wrote:It is reported that a police officer found 1 cartridge outside and 3 inside the bathroom
We'll see. Theres been reported a lot which have turned out to be wrong.
So if he was outside the bathroom how did he manage to accurately shoot her 3 times behind a closed door
Why did she reply when he shouted out to the supposed. 'I'm in the bathroom' is the standard reply. Is it the first time she used the bathroom in the house!
Big coincidence that he suddenly decided to wander on the balcony at the same time she went to the bathroom. Also how come he did not hear her go
Why would she lock the bathroom door, especially in the middle of the night. Does anyone here do that who just lives with their partner
If she was still alive why did he not call an ambulance
If you so bothered about security why would you leave a window open knowing there is a ladder there. That is just completely ridiculous
There are just too many unlikely coincidences which added up mean there is about a 1 in a million chance he is telling the truth.
ukathleticscoach wrote:
Why would she lock the bathroom door, especially in the middle of the night. Does anyone here do that who just lives with their partner
I don't agree that this is suspicious. If it's your habit to lock the door then you do it regardless of where you are as it's not a conscious choice that you make each time.
Anyone who grew up in a house with lots of siblings is likely to do the same.