JB Posted April 8, 2014 Share Posted April 8, 2014 He's had a lot of time to carefully orchestrate what he and his defence team consider to be a "convincing" act in my opinion. I agree with Pieface that he seems to talking quite a lot about how all of this has affected him and almost playing the victim to a certain extent. Yes that is a large part of the defence but its not a trial by jury so it won't have the same effect on a lady judge. I hope you're right. On the news just now, I noticed that he claimed that he shouted at the supposed burglar to get out of his house and for Reeva to "get on the floor" before he heard the bathroom door close... If this is true then surely she would've responded in some way to reassure him before he had time to shoot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RimmyJimmer Posted April 8, 2014 Share Posted April 8, 2014 He's lying Thought his missus was still in bed, got up, got a gun and blasted someone through the door without saying anything....like 'who the f**k is that?' He's lying Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr_Dogg Posted April 8, 2014 Share Posted April 8, 2014 but unless someone can come up with a motive etc then I think he still has to go free Free? Surely free isn't an option - he's confessed to killing someone. Personally, I find it difficult to believe he hasn't shot his girlfriend after an argument and I think a murder conviction would be the right result, but if that doesn't come off, he wouldn't just be freed would he? I believe that if the prosecution don't get him for first degree murder then that's it, no other charge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eames Posted April 8, 2014 Share Posted April 8, 2014 He's lying Thought his missus was still in bed, got up, got a gun and blasted someone through the door without saying anything....like 'who the f**k is that?' He's lying Don't matter. The investigation and prosecution have been a shambles. They can't prove anything so lying or not Oscar walks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest av1 Posted April 9, 2014 Share Posted April 9, 2014 He's lying Thought his missus was still in bed, got up, got a gun and blasted someone through the door without saying anything....like 'who the f**k is that?' He's lying Don't matter. The investigation and prosecution have been a shambles. They can't prove anything so lying or not Oscar walks. According to his testimony yesterday he claimed he was shouting for Reeva to hide under the bed whilst shouting 'who's there' at what he thought was an intruder in the bathroom, all before pulling the trigger. In which case you would expect Reeva to shout back 'what you on about you prat I'm having a piss' For me, that one claim proves he is lying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted April 9, 2014 VT Supporter Share Posted April 9, 2014 I suppose it's possible, if he was shouting for Reeva to "Stay there!" and "Get Down!" that she assumed he knew where she was and so was doing exactly that. Staying down and staying where she was. Would she have known the shouts of "Who's there" were directed at her in the bathroom? Couldn't she have thought he was shouting it at somebody else somewhere else in the room/house? If so isn't it possible she kept quiet as she'd have probably been a bit scared? To be honest, I find that all a stretch. But I also think they'd struggle to prove any of that wasn't a possibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samjp26 Posted April 9, 2014 Share Posted April 9, 2014 He's lying Thought his missus was still in bed, got up, got a gun and blasted someone through the door without saying anything....like 'who the f**k is that?' He's lying Don't matter. The investigation and prosecution have been a shambles. They can't prove anything so lying or not Oscar walks. What is there to prove? Intent? She's dead, he shot her to death, surely that deserves punishment whether he believes he meant it or not. He also said that he didn't meant to kill anybody let alone her, in which case why 3 shots through a door? He has to be found guilty of something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest av1 Posted April 9, 2014 Share Posted April 9, 2014 I suppose it's possible, if he was shouting for Reeva to "Stay there!" and "Get Down!" that she assumed he knew where she was and so was doing exactly that. Staying down and staying where she was. Would she have known the shouts of "Who's there" were directed at her in the bathroom? Couldn't she have thought he was shouting it at somebody else somewhere else in the room/house? If so isn't it possible she kept quiet as she'd have probably been a bit scared? To be honest, I find that all a stretch. But I also think they'd struggle to prove any of that wasn't a possibility. All very fair points Stevo. There is so much that does not add up, I believe he is guilty. Trouble is though, no judge is going to sentence someone to life imprisonment because "things don't add up" And rightfully so I suppose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted April 9, 2014 Share Posted April 9, 2014 During his testimony a graphic picture of the murder scene was accidentally projected in the court room - Nice work Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eames Posted April 9, 2014 Share Posted April 9, 2014 That picture being shown was no accident Nel is trying to break Oscar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted April 9, 2014 Moderator Share Posted April 9, 2014 Bored of this now, needs a fast forward to last chapter button 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted April 9, 2014 Share Posted April 9, 2014 He's lying Thought his missus was still in bed, got up, got a gun and blasted someone through the door without saying anything....like 'who the f**k is that?' He's lying Don't matter. The investigation and prosecution have been a shambles. They can't prove anything so lying or not Oscar walks. What is there to prove? Intent? She's dead, he shot her to death, surely that deserves punishment whether he believes he meant it or not. He also said that he didn't meant to kill anybody let alone her, in which case why 3 shots through a door? He has to be found guilty of something. unfortunately not Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wainy316 Posted April 9, 2014 Share Posted April 9, 2014 I find it a bit unnerving because whatever the circumstance, I absolutely cannot take a South African accent seriously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted April 9, 2014 Share Posted April 9, 2014 I don't think he's coming over well at all. He's not answering the questions, he's always on the defensive and putting on this weak helpless voice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villaglint Posted April 9, 2014 Share Posted April 9, 2014 If acquitted, South African law stipulates that the court must consider the separate, lesser charge of culpable homicide, or manslaughter, for which he could receive between six and 15 years in prison. Mr Pistorius also faces charges of illegally firing a gun in public and of illegally possessing ammunition, both of which he denies. - From the BBC website - few people wondering in this thread 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFCDAN Posted April 9, 2014 Share Posted April 9, 2014 I said about a month ago my prediction is he will do 2 years in prison, i'm standing by that at the moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted April 9, 2014 Share Posted April 9, 2014 would he be allowed to wear his legs in prison? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eames Posted April 9, 2014 Share Posted April 9, 2014 Culpable homicide is what it will be then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted April 9, 2014 Share Posted April 9, 2014 If he was shouting out as he did , surely she would have called back to him from inside the toilet ... it's not like she was found dead with headphones in her ears from his testimony it sounded like the events were over a period of time ( maybe minutes?) , it wasn't like he shouted and then pulled the trigger a nano second later I think he's possibly talked himself into a guilty verdict Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted April 9, 2014 VT Supporter Share Posted April 9, 2014 If he was shouting out as he did , surely she would have called back to him from inside the toilet ... it's not like she was found dead with headphones in her ears Dunno, like i said above, if he's shouting something like "REEVA, STAY THERE!" and then shouting "Who's there?" how would she know he was asking her? That "who's there" could be directed at somebody coming in the window or up the stairs or hiding in the wardrobe. She might think he knew where she was and he was asking her to stay in the bathroom. Like I said, it's a bit of a stretch to believe that. But I'm not sure they can prove it's not true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts