Author Topic: Oscar Pistorius trial commences in Pretoria, South Africa. Includes Court video.  (Read 150595 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Amazon

Unless the prosecution can prove that OP intended to kill HER (Reeva), i.e. that there was an argument and he went after her specifically  etc. (which I'm not sure they have conclusively proved..... YET), what distinguishes OP's case from that of Rudi Visagie? who killed his daughter. In that case there was absolutely no threat or danger, as the car was being driven away from the property.  A court decided not prosecute him. Not saying that OP shouldn't be convicted of, at the very least, culpable homicide, but it's not easy to determine how this will be approached by the judge. I think he has probably lied his ar#e off, but if this is not proven beyond reasonable doubt, if the judge decides she has no option but to conclude he did think it was a burglar, is he then just like Visagie? (whether she thinks he lied or not will possibly be irrelevant unless it has been proven beyond all reasonable doubt that he knew it wasReeva and not a burglar).

I have found this case facinating for lots of reasons.... first televised trial in SA, differences in their legal system, no jury, the fact that the defendant can sit there and text on his phone in the dock! etc.etc. but it does upset me that the victim appears forgotten in all this   8(8-)) This must have been a truly terrifying experience for her and my heart goes out to her family. I absolutely commend them for their dignity during what must be an excrutiating process for them.
« Last Edit: March 21, 2014, 09:17:29 PM by Amazon »

Offline Sherlock Holmes

Unless the prosecution can prove that OP intended to kill HER (Reeva), i.e. that there was an argument and he went after her specifically  etc. (which I'm not sure they have conclusively proved..... YET), what distinguishes OP's case from that of Rudi Visagie? who killed his daughter. In that case there was absolutely no threat or danger, as the car was being driven away from the property.  A court decided not prosecute him. Not saying that OP shouldn't be convicted of, at the very least, culpable homicide, but it's not easy to determine how this will be approached by the judge. I think he has probably lied his ar#e off, but if this is not proven beyond reasonable doubt, if the judge decides she has no option but to conclude he did think it was a burglar, is he then just like Visagie? (whether she thinks he lied or not will possibly be irrelevant unless it has been proven beyond all reasonable doubt that he knew it wasReeva and not a burglar).

I have found this case facinating for lots of reasons.... first televised trial in SA, differences in their legal system, no jury, the fact that the defendant can sit there and text on his phone in the dock! etc.etc. but it does upset me that the victim appears forgotten in all this   8(8-)) This must have been a truly terrifying experience for her and my heart goes out to her family. I absolutely commend them for their dignity during what must be an excrutiating process for them.

I don't know a lot about the Visagie case, but wasn't the reason that the judge decided that there was to be no custodial sentence because, as a father, the loss of Visagie's daughter was punishment enough?

I understand that optimists in 'team Pistorius' have cited this case, but can the loss of a child really be compared to Pistorius' loss of his girlfriend of three months - a relationship he may or may not have been taking seriously?




Offline Sherlock Holmes

I do not trust that judge. I think OP is going to get a compromise decision .... guilty of firearms offenses and some sort of negligent homicide verdict for the murder. 5 years in prison is my guess.

It is poetic justice enough, so far, that Pistorius' entire earthly fate currently rests in the hands of a black female judge.

All he can do is read from his biblical commentary book, as he has been doing in the dock.

Personally I am sitting back and enjoying that situation while it lasts!

As for her verdict, doesn't the fact that she gave a rapist a sentence of more than two hundred years (for 'only' two instances of rape) give us some cause for optimism?

The eyes of the world are upon the new South Africa and its ability to be fair, so could one even go as far as to say that it was because of this judge's track record of being hard on perpetrators of domestic violence ( which includes the perpetrator of those rapes, who committed the crimes indoors) that she was chosen to adjudicate here?
« Last Edit: March 22, 2014, 12:51:15 AM by Sherlock Holmes »

Offline Sherlock Holmes

I must say very baffled about this case. I'm trying to keep an open mind and considering all evidence. He has pulled a gun before it seems and could maybe considered as something of a hot-head but does that make him guilty of a pre-meditated murder? Plus has he lied about what time they went to bed as the evidence says that Reeva last ate around 1am although she might have got up for a snack early morning.

Thanks to Anna for posting videos, will comtinue to watch this case with interest.

Yes, that 1am meal throws out Oscar's whole timeline of events (unless, as you say, she got up for a snack without him noticing).

Offline Anna

I must say very baffled about this case. I'm trying to keep an open mind and considering all evidence. He has pulled a gun before it seems and could maybe considered as something of a hot-head but does that make him guilty of a pre-meditated murder? Plus has he lied about what time they went to bed as the evidence says that Reeva last ate around 1am although she might have got up for a snack early morning.

Thanks to Anna for posting videos, will comtinue to watch this case with interest.

You are all very welcome  ?{)(**
“You should not honour men more than truth.”
― Plato

Offline Anna

She's lucky she got away.

She certainly was a beautiful young woman, who died in the cruellest way. She will live on for some in her photos.
« Last Edit: April 08, 2014, 12:11:42 PM by John »
“You should not honour men more than truth.”
― Plato

Offline John

Lets hope justice prevails in this case and Pistorius gets his just desserts.
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 John

First point I want to make is that the judge will not make the decision on her own and I ain't talking about her two helpers.  As with most cases being considered by a single judge she will be taking advice from behind the scenes from both fellow judges and others.

Whatever happened that fateful night happened in a moment of madness.  Something occurred to light the fuse which ended with Reeva murdered in a hail of bullets but I fear we will never know the truth of it.
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

Lets hope justice prevails in this case and Pistorius gets his just desserts.

Let's hope so John. In my opinion he should spend many decades in prison.

Offline Amazon

Phone evidence today very telling.... and it is bound to be worse for him tomorrow. Classic narcisist I would say.

I know he probably thinks that he really had little to lose by pleading NG to premeditation, if he doesnt want to be in prison until he's well into in middle age that is.....but how he can sit there alongside her family and make up the crap that he has is beyond me. Also, if the judge does find him guilty,  for pleading not guilty and putting her family through this terrible ordeal twice over, she is likely to throw the key away.

I know it's always complicated, but, in this day and age, why do women put uo with men like this?  8(8-)) The signs are nearly always there.

Offline Anna

1.
 
2.
3.
“You should not honour men more than truth.”
― Plato

Offline Tim Invictus

Phone evidence today very telling.... and it is bound to be worse for him tomorrow. Classic narcisist I would say.

I know he probably thinks that he really had little to lose by pleading NG to premeditation, if he doesnt want to be in prison until he's well into in middle age that is.....but how he can sit there alongside her family and make up the crap that he has is beyond me. Also, if the judge does find him guilty,  for pleading not guilty and putting her family through this terrible ordeal twice over, she is likely to throw the key away.

I know it's always complicated, but, in this day and age, why do women put uo with men like this?  8(8-)) The signs are nearly always there.

No wonder OP 'forgot' the code to open his phone! Let's hope the judge does the right thing; no excuses for this animal!

Offline Amazon

In the request to adjourn today, Nel said he wanted to put foward/explain some technical data whilst still with the same witness. Reckon this is going to be evidence of OP having tried to wipe his history on his phones or Ipads? Of course, in comms forensics, it is very difficult to do this, as the expert software can also retrieve deleted history. There may also be more damaging whatsapp texts between them for the night in question, but if so, I think he asked for the adjournment there because he wants them all to be heard together for greatest impact.

Nel obviously and sensibly saved the most compelling testimony until last, so we could have another 3 witnesses with powerful evidence to come, as he said "another 4 to 5 witnesses" and we've had 2 so far today. Mind you, how the hell can they wrap up the prosection by Thursday, as Nel said, with the sort of nit picking pointless cross examination that goes on forever like we had from Oldwage today? Notice how the Judge was more vocal today? I think she prefers to not interupt proceedings unless she absolutely has to, to preserve continuity etc, but Olwadge seemed to p*ss her off today!

Offline Angelo222

It was suggested after the murder that Reeva had already put up with Pistorius' tantrums.  Why do women stay with these abusers, is it because they believe they can change them? 
De troothe has the annoying habit of coming to the surface just when you least expect it!!

Je ne regrette rien!!

Offline abs

It was suggested after the murder that Reeva had already put up with Pistorius' tantrums.  Why do women stay with these abusers, is it because they believe they can change them?

I think Reeva was about to leave him - and that is what got her killed. So with this I answer your question in two ways:
1. Reeva was probably not a woman who would stay with an abuser, remember, their relationship was quite new, and he wouldn´t have shown her the abusive side of himself initially.
2. I think that many women stay with men like that out of fear - some get killed when they want to leave, so they have good reason to be afraid!
Also want to add that many of the women who stay in abusive relationships were abused as children. This is the norm for them, it is very tragic, but all studies show this.