Author Topic: Oscar Pistorius trial commences in Pretoria, South Africa. Includes Court video.  (Read 151710 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline John

Professor says Oscar Pistorius' disability explains his reaction in intruder theory: 'If one cannot flee the other option is to fight'

University of Cape Town professor Wayne Derman testified Thursday that the Blade Runner, a double-amputee, must choose a “fight” over “flight” response because ‘the individual has no lower legs,’ and that could be why the athlete took a gun to confront who he thought was an intruder, but instead ended up shooting and killing his girlfriend, Reeva Steenkamp.



Oscar Pistorius (left) speaks with members of his legal team.


For Oscar Pistorius, it was fight or flight.

And because he’s a double-amputee, the South African sprinter chose fight when he thought a burglar was in his bathroom and accidentally killed girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp.

So claimed a University of Cape Town professor Thursday who has worked with Pistorius for years.

“In this context fleeing is not an option, the individual has no lower legs,” Wayne Derman testified at Pistorius’ murder trial. “If one cannot flee the other option is to fight.”

When Pistorius heard a noise coming from inside the toilet cubicle, he opened fire because “he was aiming to neutralize the threat,” Derman testified.

Prosecutor Gerrie Nel contends a furious Pistorius deliberately neutralized his lover after a Valentine’s Day 2013 fight by firing four shots through a bathroom door.

Pistorius insists it was an accident and that he loved the 29-year-old bikini model.



Oscar Pistorius during his trial on Thursday. 


While Nel grilled Derman and questioned his credentials, the 27-year-old athlete sat clenching his teeth in the Pretoria courtroom.

It wasn’t clear if Pistorius was angry with Nel — or with Derman’s depiction of him as a “paradox” who is one of the fastest men in the world and also “significantly disabled.”

“Although he loathes to be pitied in any way, the hard truth is that he does not have lower legs,” said Derman.

Pistorius’ “disability never sleeps.”

“It’s there when you go to sleep at night and it's there when you wake up in the morning,” the professor said. “It affects nearly every aspect of your life.”

Born without fibulas, Pistorius was 11-months-old when his legs were amputated halfway between his knees and ankles. He uses distinctive scythe-like prosthetics to compete and regular prosthetics to get around.

www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/oscar-pistorius-choose-fight-flight-article-1.1853596


Court adjourned until 9.30am on Monday when Professor Derwent will continue to give evidence.
« Last Edit: July 05, 2014, 06:23:37 PM by John »
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. An exposé of egregious malfeasance by public officials.
Indeed, the truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline Tim Invictus

The problem with that theory is Pistorius could have escaped either on his stumps or with his legs on! There was a 5m passage from his room to the bathroom but there was also a door out of the bedroom he could have used. Opening that door would also have set off the house alarm too!

Pistorius's story just doesn't stand up to the facts!

Offline Mr Moderator

Monday, 7 July 2014 - Session 1




Monday, 7 July 2014 - Session 2




Monday, 7 July 2014 - Session 3




Monday, 7 July 2014 - Session 4

Not available at this time.
« Last Edit: July 12, 2014, 08:01:51 PM by John »

Offline Tim Invictus

Another month! Why on earth do they need a month to prepare closing arguments!

Scheduled for 7 & 8 Aug!

And then another estimated month for the judge to reach her verdict! What a joke!


Tuesday, 8 July 2014 - Morning session only

« Last Edit: July 12, 2014, 08:08:21 PM by John »

Offline Andrea

I would rather have Oscars defence than Brazils, 6-0! Hammering so far!
« Last Edit: July 08, 2014, 10:27:24 PM by Andrea »

Offline scipio_usmc

Professor says Oscar Pistorius' disability explains his reaction in intruder theory: 'If one cannot flee the other option is to fight'

University of Cape Town professor Wayne Derman testified Thursday that the Blade Runner, a double-amputee, must choose a “fight” over “flight” response because ‘the individual has no lower legs,’ and that could be why the athlete took a gun to confront who he thought was an intruder, but instead ended up shooting and killing his girlfriend, Reeva Steenkamp.



Oscar Pistorius (left) speaks with members of his legal team.


For Oscar Pistorius, it was fight or flight.

And because he’s a double-amputee, the South African sprinter chose fight when he thought a burglar was in his bathroom and accidentally killed girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp.

So claimed a University of Cape Town professor Thursday who has worked with Pistorius for years.

“In this context fleeing is not an option, the individual has no lower legs,” Wayne Derman testified at Pistorius’ murder trial. “If one cannot flee the other option is to fight.”

When Pistorius heard a noise coming from inside the toilet cubicle, he opened fire because “he was aiming to neutralize the threat,” Derman testified.

Was it reasonable for someone in his position to believe there was a threat at all let alone a threat to his life?  Could someone in the bathroom threaten his life?

Was he home alone?  No his girl was wih him.  Any reasonable person would think that it is their girl in the bathroom when she is not next to him and someone is in the bathroom.  At minimum one should check before opening fire.

Was there access from outside to get into the bathroom?  No, someone could only get into the bathroom by being in the bedroom first.

Who would break into a bedroom and then go burglarize a bathroom?  So that is even less reason to think it could be someone who broke in. 

What if is was a kid who broke in who was unarmed could such person be a threat to his life?  Can he just blow away anyone even in the back as they are running from him?

Hearing noise and shooting someone through a door is reckless. But he lied about how high she shot and pausing and other things.  It is not credible he forgot she was with him and he thought it was someone who was threatening his life. The guy deserves to rot in prison for murder not simply manslaughter.  If he is truly as paranoid as he claims he is a threat to ordinary people and doesn't deserve to live in society anyway.  But his claims are not credible at all.     
“...there are three classes of intellects: one which comprehends by itself; another which appreciates what others comprehend; and a third which neither comprehends by itself nor by the showing of others; the first is the most excellent, the second is good, the third is useless.”  Niccolò Machiavelli

Offline Tim Invictus

Was it reasonable for someone in his position to believe there was a threat at all let alone a threat to his life?  Could someone in the bathroom threaten his life?

Was he home alone?  No his girl was wih him.  Any reasonable person would think that it is their girl in the bathroom when she is not next to him and someone is in the bathroom.  At minimum one should check before opening fire.

Was there access from outside to get into the bathroom?  No, someone could only get into the bathroom by being in the bedroom first.

Who would break into a bedroom and then go burglarize a bathroom?  So that is even less reason to think it could be someone who broke in. 

What if is was a kid who broke in who was unarmed could such person be a threat to his life?  Can he just blow away anyone even in the back as they are running from him?

Hearing noise and shooting someone through a door is reckless. But he lied about how high she shot and pausing and other things.  It is not credible he forgot she was with him and he thought it was someone who was threatening his life. The guy deserves to rot in prison for murder not simply manslaughter.  If he is truly as paranoid as he claims he is a threat to ordinary people and doesn't deserve to live in society anyway.  But his claims are not credible at all.   

Oscar's contention is the burglar entered the bathroom through the bathroom window having climbed up to the window by ladder. Totally improbable of course but slightly more plausible that he entered the bathroom having passed by Oscar and Reeva through the bedroom.

Not that I believe a word of Oscar's story of course!

Offline abs

I can already picture the smirk on his face when he gets his light sentence. I hope I am wrong!

Offline Tim Invictus

I can already picture the smirk on his face when he gets his light sentence. I hope I am wrong!

Maybe Abs although I have a feeling he is going to get what he deserves. Life in prison minimum 25 years is my guess!

Offline abs

Maybe Abs although I have a feeling he is going to get what he deserves. Life in prison minimum 25 years is my guess!

Let´s hope so, I just worry a little - because I think his defence was good (even though I don´t buy their stories!), and the sarcastic tone of the prosecutor, which can be vary off-putting.
We saw that in the Casey Anthony case. Jeff Ashton had that tone - and Jose Baez was soft spoken and polite. Those things shouldn´t matter, but I think they do.


Offline Tim Invictus

Let´s hope so, I just worry a little - because I think his defence was good (even though I don´t buy their stories!), and the sarcastic tone of the prosecutor, which can be vary off-putting.
We saw that in the Casey Anthony case. Jeff Ashton had that tone - and Jose Baez was soft spoken and polite. Those things shouldn´t matter, but I think they do.

I think the defence advocates are good on their feet but the defence as a coherent story has been a joke. Pistorius was a terrible witness in his own defence too. Although Gerrie Nell is a bit too aggressive at times, I think he has done an excellent job is dismantling the defence's various excuses for OP!

Offline John

Court will resume on Thursday and Friday, 7th and 8th August at 9.30am to hear final arguments on behalf of both the prosecution and the defence. 
« Last Edit: August 08, 2014, 11:17:59 AM by Mr Moderator »
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. An exposé of egregious malfeasance by public officials.
Indeed, the truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline Tim Invictus

Court will resume on Thursday and Friday, 7th and 8th August at 9.30am to hear final arguments on behalf of both the prosecution and the defence.

Then the judge and her 2 assessors are expected to take a month to reach a verdict! So slow!

Offline puglove

Then the judge and her 2 assessors are expected to take a month to reach a verdict! So slow!

Too bloody slow. I was reading an interview with Reeva's mum this week, it broke my heart. She was such a lovely girl, with so much promise. And he treated her so badly, before he destroyed her. I hope the arrogant little brat gets life. Without his stupid boingy legs.
« Last Edit: August 08, 2014, 11:18:11 AM by Mr Moderator »
Jeremy Bamber kicked Mike Tesko in the fanny.

Offline Tim Invictus

Closing arguments begin today 7th Aug ... it's the end game now!