Oscar Pistorius

[One Love]

Are we allowed to discuss this upcoming case?

I have an awful feeling he is going to get off.

Saw the Channel 5 programme last night and the main hole in his story is not knowing that his girlfriend wasn't in the toilet. It doesn't take a lot of imagination to realise that in his shoes, thinking that an intruder was in the building, your first and only priority would have been waking your partner.

Even if it had been an intruder, discharging a firearm when she was asleep probably would have killed her from shock.

 

[PILTDOWN MAN]

Are we allowed to discuss this upcoming case?

I have an awful feeling he is going to get off.

Saw the Channel 5 programme last night and the main hole in his story is not knowing that his girlfriend wasn't in the toilet. It doesn't take a lot of imagination to realise that in his shoes, thinking that an intruder was in the building, your first and only priority would have been waking your partner.

Even if it had been an intruder, discharging a firearm when she was asleep probably would have killed her from shock.

Using an old cricket saying I think it will be "stumps drawn" on his freedom.

 

[Coldeanseagull]

Are we allowed to discuss this upcoming case?

I have an awful feeling he is going to get off.

Saw the Channel 5 programme last night and the main hole in his story is not knowing that his girlfriend wasn't in the toilet. It doesn't take a lot of imagination to realise that in his shoes, thinking that an intruder was in the building, your first and only priority would have been waking your partner.

Even if it had been an intruder, discharging a firearm when she was asleep probably would have killed her from shock.

Is it cruel for me to find that funny?
Personally, I think it's another 'the glove doesn't fit' case

 

[The Camel]

A bit strange that we're allowed to speculate about a forthcoming murder case on here, but not the suspension of a football manager and his assistants!

Priorities a little out of proportion imo.

 

[One Love]

A bit strange that we're allowed to speculate about a forthcoming murder case on here, but not the suspension of a football manager and his assistants!

Priorities a little out of proportion imo.

I suppose because NSC isn't based in Johannesburg.

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

Are we allowed to discuss this upcoming case?

I have an awful feeling he is going to get off.

Saw the Channel 5 programme last night and the main hole in his story is not knowing that his girlfriend wasn't in the toilet. It doesn't take a lot of imagination to realise that in his shoes, thinking that an intruder was in the building, your first and only priority would have been waking your partner.

Even if it had been an intruder, discharging a firearm when she was asleep probably would have killed her from shock.

I imagine so as I don't think that in South Africa there is the same concept of contempt of court effecting a jury decision, as there is no jury to be influenced.

 

[One Love]

Is it cruel for me to find that funny?
Personally, I think it's another 'the glove doesn't fit' case

Well done!

Yes, wouldn't surprise me if the case revolves around all the finer points while missing the huge obvious hole in his story.

That's what the Channel 5 programme did last night.

 

[vegster]

Well done!

Yes, wouldn't surprise me if the case revolves around all the finer points while missing the huge obvious hole in his story.

That's what the Channel 5 programme did last night.

I did not see the prog, are you allowed to post the huge obvious hole ? if so please do. For me the huge obvious hole is the fact he went to the veranda for some fresh air.... heard a noise in the toilet, panicked, went back through the bedroom and picked up the gun from the bedside cabinet alongside the bed where his fit girlfriend was no longer sleeping.....and...

 

[KZNSeagull]

It won't go to trial for months yet. I think it will be hard to prove premeditated murder but he has admitted shooting her so he must get convicted of something.

 

[tom]

His fate in this dastardly affair will be determined by two pieces of evidence:
1) The position of the holes in the bathroom door and
2) what she was wearing when he shot her.

You see if I'm not right, Watson.

 

[RowleyBirkinQ.C(deceased)]

According to @notguspoyet not only will he be acquitted, he's going to be security in players bathroom and changing room next season

 

[albion534]

Doesn't help the lead detective was being done for attempted murder, and they ballsed up alot of the evidence

 

[BuddyBoy]

I predict manslaughter and a short sentence of house arrest, followed by a period tagged on curfew. He won't be allowed to compete but his training team will be allowed into his, presumably large, estate. I doubt he'll be back to competing come the Commonwealth Games though.

 

[ali jenkins]

There are too many holes in the evidence to convict him and for that reason I don't think we will ever know if he meant to kill her or what he thought was an intruder.

I do find myself believing some of his story but there are too many questions surrounding it to totally believe it fully. The trial will go on for ages when it does eventually start and it will certainly be interesting.

 

[vegster]

I predict manslaughter and a short sentence of house arrest, followed by a period tagged on curfew. He won't be allowed to compete but his training team will be allowed into his, presumably large, estate. I doubt he'll be back to competing come the Commonwealth Games though.

I also predict an autobiography and a tv special with Oprah Winfrey/ Piers Morgan et al .

 

[BuddyBoy]

I also predict an autobiography and a tv special with Oprah Winfrey/ Piers Morgan et al .

 

[One Love]

I did not see the prog, are you allowed to post the huge obvious hole ? if so please do. For me the huge obvious hole is the fact he went to the veranda for some fresh air.... heard a noise in the toilet, panicked, went back through the bedroom and picked up the gun from the bedside cabinet alongside the bed where his fit girlfriend was no longer sleeping.....and...

The programme last night mentioned the visit to the verandah. The lawyer supposed to be defending him used the fact that after being outside on the verandah he closed the shutters and curtains which would have blinded him for some while as his eyes got used to the change from light into darkness. Part of his defence is that it was too dark for him to see that his girlfriend was no longer in the bed. They seem to have missed the fact that in the act of opening the curtains and shutters to go on the verandah he would have lit the room so that he could see.

The huge hole that I can't get past is that he didn't wake his girlfriend and warn her before getting his gun and going to investigate. In my mind it is completely unbelievable that he would have done this. I don't know about anyone else but I have woken up at home and thought someone who shouldn't be was in the house and the first thing I did was wake my wife. How would you know there was someone else in the house if you hadn't discounted the person that was supposed to be there?

The programme raised other issues that are against his version as well. She was wearing clothes which she wouldn't have done if she was just popping to the toilet during the night and 2 cell phones were found in the bathroom which suggests she was checking his phone. The toilet door is going to show us whether he had his prosthetic legs on when he shot her.

However the programme also showed that the prosecution are stupid.

 

[Fungus]

On the recommendation of a number of people in the original thread, I've been reading "Riotous Assembly" by Tom Sharpe.

I rest my case.

 

[hitony]

A bit strange that we're allowed to speculate about a forthcoming murder case on here, but not the suspension of a football manager and his assistants!

Priorities a little out of proportion imo.

Do you need help?

 

[BuddyBoy]

The programme last night mentioned the visit to the verandah. The lawyer supposed to be defending him used the fact that after being outside on the verandah he closed the shutters and curtains which would have blinded him for some while as his eyes got used to the change from light into darkness. Part of his defence is that it was too dark for him to see that his girlfriend was no longer in the bed. They seem to have missed the fact that in the act of opening the curtains and shutters to go on the verandah he would have lit the room so that he could see.

The huge hole that I can't get past is that he didn't wake his girlfriend and warn her before getting his gun and going to investigate. In my mind it is completely unbelievable that he would have done this. I don't know about anyone else but I have woken up at home and thought someone who shouldn't be was in the house and the first thing I did was wake my wife. How would you know there was someone else in the house if you hadn't discounted the person that was supposed to be there?

The programme raised other issues that are against his version as well. She was wearing clothes which she wouldn't have done if she was just popping to the toilet during the night and 2 cell phones were found in the bathroom which suggests she was checking his phone. The toilet door is going to show us whether he hd his prosthetic legs on when he shot her.

However the programme also showed that the prosecution are stupid.

Indeed. It's a simple process of elimination. "Oh it sounds like someone may be in the bathroom, I'd better check it's not the missus first". The process of elimination being to discount ONE person.