Oscar Pistorius shoot's girlfriend dead

Existing thread : Here

as this is the earlier thread, reopened...

Well, here's his side of the story according to the guardian website:

Pistorius's statement

Briefly, in a statement to the court, Oscar Pistorius has set out his version of events on the night Reeva Steenkamp died.

He said they went to bed and fell asleep.

He woke to close a sliding door and get a fan and went out on to the balcony, he said.

At that point he heard a noise in the bathroom and felt a "sense of terror" rush through him.

He was scared and didn't switch on the light, he said.

He was acutely aware of violent crime and had received death threats in the past, and had been a victim of crime in the past, he said. For that reason he kept a 9mm pistol under the bed.

He said he got his gun and moved towards the bathroom, and screamed at the "intruder" to get out of the house and for Steenkamp to call the police. He thought she was still in bed.

He did not have his prosthetic legs on, and said he felt vulnerable for both himself and Steenkamp. For that reason, he said, he fired through the bathroom door.

He then saw that Steenkamp was not in bed, he said. That was when he realised she could have been in the bathroom, he said. The bathroom door was locked.

He said he went to the balcony and called for help, and then put his legs on.

He said he opened the toilet door by smashing it with a cricket bat. Steenkamp was alive inside, slumped over, he said. He took her to the bathroom, called paramedics and tried to carry her downstairs to get help, he said.

He tried to revive her but she died in his arms, he said.

www.guardian.co.uk...

To be honest, I don't find his account of events impossible to fathom. Granted, as a gun owner, he'd be expected to be more responsible than that, and exercise better caution than shooting through a closed door without being 100% sure what's going on the other side. At best, his own account makes him sound paranoid and reckless, and an innocent life has been lost as a result -- he can't pass the buck for that. Interested to see what evidence the state has for the premeditated murder charge, particularly what they believe his motive was.

On another note, I'm curious how he gets around his house without the prosthetic legs - wheelchair, crutches, or what? And how did he not notice his gf wasn't in bed if he had to collect his gun from under it before pursuing the intruder?

Guardian's summary of the day's events:

Here are today’s key points:

• Oscar Pistorius has given his account of the night his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp died at his house in Pretoria. In a statement read out by his lawyer, the Paralympic and Olympic star said the two were in bed asleep on Wednesday night when he got up and went to the balcony to close a sliding door and get a fan. He heard a noise in the bathroom and assumed it was an intruder, he said. Feeling vulnerable without his prosthetic legs, he got his gun and shot through the door, he said. He then saw that Steenkamp was not in bed, he said. He broke the bathroom door down with a cricket bat, he said; Steenkamp was still alive but died in his arms. He denied that he had murdered her, saying nothing could be further from the truth.

• The prosecution gave a different version of events. Prosecutor Gerrie Nel said there was an argument before the shooting, and laterPistorius got up from bed, put on his prosthetic legs, armed himself, walked seven metres to the toilet door and shot Steenkamp four times; three of the shots killed her. Even if he thought she was a burglar, it was still premeditated murder, Nel said. But he asked why a burglar would lock himself in the toilet.

• Magistrate Desmond Nair ruled that Pistorius should be charged with premeditated murder, a “category six” offence that will make it very difficult for the defendant to be granted bail. Pistorius must argue that there are “exceptional circumstances” that mean he should get bail. In his statement Pistorius stressed that he would not leave the country if granted bail and intended to stand trial. He said he would surrender his passport and would not interfere with witnesses, saying he knew of none in this case. Nair did suggest at one point that he may change his mind about categorising the offence as schedule six once he had heard all the evidence.

• Pistorius, the world’s best known disabled athlete, broke down frequently throughout the hearing, which was adjourned at one point to allow him to compose himself. In his statement he said he was “mortified” at having killed Steenkamp and could not stand how much hurt he had caused. He said he and Steenkamp had been “deeply in love”.

• The funeral of Reeva Steenkamp was held this morning in the coastal South African city of Port Elizabeth.

• Pistorius will be held overnight at Brooklyn police station in Pretoria. The bail hearing will continue tomorrow at 9am local time (7am GMT). I hope you can join me again then.

His side of the story is suspect.

Unless he is super paranoid, he had a long drawn out roid argument, lost his mind and shot her dead.

He will get life in prison. It is tragic and sad. She lost her life. He caused her loss of life. If it was me I would kill myself in shame and grief.

Originally posted by magma
His side of the story is suspect.

Unless he is super paranoid, he had a long drawn out roid argument, lost his mind and shot her dead.

He will get life in prison. It is tragic and sad. She lost her life. He caused her loss of life. If it was me I would kill myself in shame and grief.

Well, after today's proceedings, it would appear the prosecution's claims are even more suspect. The investigating officer they called upon was made to look like an absolute muppet.

Here are some of the things he's been forced to concede under cross-examination:

- Steenkamp probably did go to the bathroom initially with the intent to use it (not hide)
- Admitted he'd have locked the bathroom door too if he were in Steenkamp's position when she heard him screaming about an intruder
- No signs of defensive wounds on her body
- Cannot be certain of Pistorius's position at the time of the shooting (even though he'd made contrary claims earlier)
- Cannot be certain of the angle of the shots described by himself earlier
- He'd personally contaminated the scene during the investigation
- No evidence that Pistorius attached his prosthetic legs prior to the shooting like the prosecution proposed
- The witness who claimed to have heard the argument before the shooting lives 600m (1969 ft) away. And then later changed his testimony to 300m (984 ft) away.
- The same witness was wrong about the number of shots fired
- The same witness could not say if the voices she heard belonged to Pistorius and Steenkamp
- Neglected to investigate whether Pistorius had called for medical help (which he had at 3:20 AM)
- Admitted he did not read the name of the medication he claimed to be steroids found in Pistorius's home. It was actually a legal herbal remedy, and not a banned substance like the prosecution insinuated
- The offshore accounts he suggested belonged to Pistorius were actually either dormant or not his at all
- Neglected to investigate where Pistorius obtained the supposedly illegal ammo - defense claimed it legally belonged to Pistorius's father - the prosecution failed to comment on this.
- Admitted no evidence found at the crime scene contradicted Pistorius's account

www.guardian.co.uk...

All in all, shocking 'investigating' practices demonstrated by the investigating officer. Not only has he shown himself to be embarrassingly inept, his testimony appears to have heavily undermined the prosecution's case. As questionable as Pistorius's account may seem, the state has failed to dismiss the vast majority of it, nor have they provided an alternate scenario backed up with any credible evidence. At this rate, I can't see how they are going to get the premeditated murder charge to stick.

reply to post by namine


Those are really good responses namine, thank you!!

Behind the story is a story too, reporter Barry Bateman went from 30k to 100k followers in about 3 days. Journalists are saying how the press room at their offices goes quiet while the court is in session: DailyMaverick. There's something overwhelming about this incident, it's like that wave that catches you by surprise and suddenly you're fighting for air.

The whole of South Africa is reeling with this, but it's not just this incident, this is just a big shiny cherry on top of the cake.

reply to post by harryhaller


Thank you!!

I know what you mean -- incidents like this often make reality feel so surreal. Very unfortunate and tragic. I feel for the victim's family.

Crazy to see all the reporters and various media practically trampling over each other to get their piece in the courtroom. 30K to 100K, I guess that was inevitable. I was too young to grasp the OJ case while it was still going on, must have been absolutely nuts. I was following the live feed on the guardian site earlier on, and now it's been extended to another day. Are bail hearings usually this intense and prolonged? Have to say, if his account is true, can't help but feel sorry for him. Bad enough to have to live with that, let alone face the possibility of some serious jail time. Should he get bail, I wouldn't be surprised if he offed himself before the trail begins...

Wondering what new details may come to light tomorrow...whatever the case, may justice prevail for Reeva Steenkamp's sake R.I.P

reply to post by namine

Is there a precedent for Pistorius in the Rudi Visagie case?

Heres a link to what may be considered a precedent in this case.

News source

I think that it may be resonable to assume he was really super paranoid, did not think clearly and killed his poor girlfriend.

Your right too, the police have made a mess of the evidence.

It will be intersting to see if he gets bail.

reply to post by namine





A few points that just don't quite ring true to me


# He went to close the balcony door and collect a fan....Considering that was supposed

to be a high crime area he must have had some degree of faith in the secure gated estate

he lived in to leave the door open and what happened to the fan?


# He heard a noise in the bathroom, and didn't switch on the light....so there must have

been enough light for him to be able to see a pistol under the bed? and going up to the bed

he would surely have noticed she wasn't in it? specially seeing as he said he was

concerned for her safety!!

# The locked bathroom door?....Do people in an intimate relationship lock

ensuite doors?...It is my experience they don't, they just respect each others privacy

# After he had fired the gun he saw she was not in bed! surely he was more able to notice

that when he went right up to the bed for his gun?

# He smashed the door down with a cricket bat?? (must have been in the bedroom)

Do people really keep cricket bats in the bedroom even when they have a gun?


Smells like a fishy tale to me

reply to post by eletheia


Those same points are being pondered on by most of us. Let's be honest, even if his story is true, he's a criminally dangerous man. And his non stop crying in court has already prompted for calls for this to be called "floodgate". No really, which man cries for 3 days? That alone is just dodgy.

So, the investigating officer IO who got torn to pieces by the defense lawyer in the bail hearing yesterday, has just had 7 counts of attempted murder re-instated against him.

IOL

News24.

I am a conspiricist, admittedly, but the timing on this one is just ... surreal.

And seriously, where are all these hotshot lawyers and reporters when some girl gets found naked raped and dead in the bushes? Nowhere ...

Ok, so charges were re-instated 4 February against the IO.

Oscar's PR flunkey Stuart Higgins is clearly earning his salary.

reply to post by harryhaller




It's my opinion that a person is only as good as their lawyer! and he's got the money for

the slickest and slipperiest...


The case against the investigating officer Hilton Botha was shelved in 2009 (four years ago)

nice timing reinstating it now? wouldn't you say?


Botha states 'his blood was never tested for alcohol' which was part of the case against him.

and illegal steroids found in Oscar Pistorius' home and claimed by his defence to be legal

'herbal' doesn't appear to have been tested either? Is evidence never tested in SA?


Going back to my previous post....If his girlfriend had locked the toilet door she

would obviously have been afraid and would have been using the door as a 'solid barrier'

between them??


I get the feeling that 'the old boys network' is closing ranks and favours are getting called in

for "the golden boy"

Originally posted by eletheia
Is evidence never tested in SA?

I get the feeling that 'the old boys network' is closing ranks and favours are getting called in for "the golden boy"

From what i know of the first, no. No crime investigator is issued with gloves, or shoe protector things. The labs are backed up by several years, and horrible mistakes come out with alarming regularity.

We were touted as the best constitution in the world, but the reality now is that real justice never happens anymore. Not unless it attracts public attention. It's the saddest reality. But also noteworthy how other crimes get prosecuted faster, usually honest people with bad lawyers, but the really bad guys, they're laughing the whole time.

reply to post by magma


I don't imagine too many people would be happy if that ruling happened in this case. He was definitely really super paranoid, and it's surfaced he'd even tweeted about mistaking his washing machine for an intruder in the past.



reply to post by eletheia


Fair points.

I haven't heard anything about what could've happened with the fan. Guessing the interruption from the bathroom noise would've changed his plans, and any subsequent event regarding the fan bears no real consequence on the course of the hearing. Otherwise, can't see why either side wouldn't have elaborated on that detail.

I also question how he would've failed to realise his gf wasn't still asleep, especially if the gun collected was near the bed, and he was so concerned about her well-being?? Yeah, something definitely fishy about that. And according to his house's plan, the sliding door would've been right next to where they were sleeping -- so wouldn't he have heard her getting out of bed to go to the toilet?

As for the locked bathroom door, the defense suggest she went to the toilet to use it, and only locked the door when she heard Pistorius screaming about an intruder in the house, and therefore she would've been using the door as a shield against any potential intruders and not Pistorius. The fact that he slept with a cricket bat and gun just goes to show how paranoid he was. There've been reports that he wanted even more guns. But it begs the question, if he was so paranoid about crime, why sleep with the sliding door open? I'm guessing the defense is going to argue something along the lines of him being comfortable with the improbability of someone climbing onto his balcony.

Also, there have been conflicting reports about what she'd been wearing that night -- there'd been stories about her in a night dress, then yesterday it was revealed she was apparently found in shorts and a t-shirt. Hard to imagine anyone would dress just to go to the bathroom in the dead of night? Another thing is Pistorius presumably lives in one of the more secure estates in South Africa with security on standby 24/7 -- you would think a panic button would be installed in his bedroom. But there's been no mention of him attempting to turn on any sort of alarm system when he first heard the intruder. It seems like he was determined to grab his gun and "take care of things" on his own, so much so he was willing to blast through a closed door without taking the necessary precautionary measures. What's worse is the window in the bathroom was too high for an intruder to escape, and with Pistorius aiming his gun directly at the door, there would've been no place for the intruder to run. His life wasn't in direct danger - self-defense would be hard to argue. It would've been more responsible for him to hold his position, call authorities and wait until they got there. But I guess that's too much to expect when you're really paranoid and feel vulnerable.

IMO, he acted recklessly, and should be punished for that, but I'm not convinced in the prosecution's account that he got out of bed, walked up to the bathroom and just straight up shot her in cold blood. Why on Earth would he do something like that? There'd be so many easier, less messy ways to get rid of her than shooting through a bathroom door if those were his intentions from the get-go. The prosecution stated they have a motive for the murder however, still waiting to hear it.

reply to post by namine

#OscarPistorius Nel: Why were two cellphones, next to gun on carpet in bathroom? Why?

That's a damn good question.

Something stinks here ... Prosecutor Nel is asking why she RS would go to the toilet, and leave her cell phone on the mat by the shower. 2 phones were found with the gun, his and hers, but it's not the cell phone he used to call the police with. Is it possible they were fighting, from midnight already, she said she was leaving, and he sat outside the toilet with his gun reading her messages?

Either way he's a cold blooded murderer, even if there had been an intruder it would STILL be premeditated murder. Best defense team money can buy, Stuart Higgins, former SUN editor as spin doctor, almost non stop crying in court, and honestly, it's not helping much.

reply to post by namine





If he was in a rage,. and she would see the signs. Body builders (who are like athletes in that

think their body is a temple ) all testosterone and steroids and aggressive behaviour which

he apparently exhibits from time to time. I can't believe how docile he is being portrayed by

his friends and family. It appears that it's part of his character, the determination and not liking

to loose. So she locks herself in the toilet till he cools down?? A strong possibility?


Now the defence is putting it forward that she had only gone to the toilet to relieve herself

because her bladder was empty. Not being qualified but always at the back of my mind was

that a person bowel and bladder evacuate at the point of death. The basics that come out on

'google' "The bowel and bladder have muscles that are held closed and when a person dies

these muscles loosen and the contents are released!


Well in that case it shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone then that her bladder was empty

and it didn't have to be that she herself had consciously done it.

reply to post by harryhaller


That is interesting. Although, with the police having already shown themselves to be careless in preserving the crime scene, defense could argue one of the investigators might've moved the phones there. Speculation of course, but even the magistrate pointed out the possibility of Pistorious moving them after the shooting. If there were damning messages on her cell phone, why hasn't the prosecution read them out already? I'm guessing they haven't found any. And even if Pistorius deleted the messages before the police got to them, you would think the person who originally sent them would've come forward by now.

Since they found no defensive wounds on her body, for the argument theory to be considered, you'd have to assume things escalated straight from a verbal confrontation to her shooting, and if he wasn't posing a physical threat to her, what would've made her so frightened to lock herself in the bathroom? Reeva publicly condemned violence against women, encouraging victims to speak out; if there was any hint of violence in her relationship prior to the incident, I think she would've spoken out about it.

But yeah, either way, it seems he had every intent of killing the person he thought was inside the bathroom. The prosecution has done a much better job of presenting their case now that they got rid of that clown.



reply to post by eletheia


To be honest, I don't think it's a strong possibility she felt physically threatened by him. As mentioned before, she was an advocate for stopping violence against women, and she was a public figure in her own right. I doubt she would've been intimidated to come forward if he was an abusive guy. A lot of sportsmen are competitive, and driven by the passion to win - none of them like to lose. I don't think it's uncommon to see sport stars express frustration when things don't go their way. And to be fair, getting pissed off because someone beat you at a game you're passionate about, is a far cry from becoming aggressive and committing murder. I know a lot of really sore losers, but I don't believe any of them are capable of murder based on that.

So far nothing concrete has come out of the steroid allegation. Police admitted they didn't even know what it was before they jumped to the conclusion that it was a dangerous substance. Defense pointed out that it was a legal substance, herbal remedy of some sort, that many athletes use, and the prosecution has yet to refute their claim. With that, the possibility of this incident being a result of roid rage is slim. Before the hearing even began, he was supposed to have undergone tests to determine if any fishy substances were in his system. Haven't heard any update on this since it was first mentioned.

Actually, the possibility of her bladder being empty as a result of "leakage" after death was addressed yesterday, and both prosecution and defense agreed it couldn't have been the case. Although, today the defense conceded she could've emptied her bladder due to the "trauma of events".

For anyone who is interested, you can find a summary of today's proceedings here.

PREDICTION:

No, I'M NOT psychic (because psychic abilities don't exist).........

Pistorius will be found NOT GUILTY.

Even though it's pretty obvious that he almost certainly did do it (why had she locked herself in the bathroom at night in her own home, etc), the lead detective has been removed from the case.

He was certain it was murder.

The PTB don't want him convicted of murder because it will "look bad" he's "a national treasure" and a "beacon of light for disabled people" - whatever all that means.

So, the lead detective is arrested on murder charges to completely and totaly discredit him, and a yes man is brought in to find him not guilty.

This is not criminal investigation at work, it's political shennanigans and is totally bang out of order.

A young woman has lost her life and it's all going to be swept under the carpet because he's too important to go to jail for what he did.

Totally sucks.

Originally posted by Power_Semi
PREDICTION:

No, I'M NOT psychic (because psychic abilities don't exist).........

Pistorius will be found NOT GUILTY.

Even though it's pretty obvious that he almost certainly did do it (why had she locked herself in the bathroom at night in her own home, etc), the lead detective has been removed from the case.

He was certain it was murder.

The PTB don't want him convicted of murder because it will "look bad" he's "a national treasure" and a "beacon of light for disabled people" - whatever all that means.

So, the lead detective is arrested on murder charges to completely and totaly discredit him, and a yes man is brought in to find him not guilty.

This is not criminal investigation at work, it's political shennanigans and is totally bang out of order.

A young woman has lost her life and it's all going to be swept under the carpet because he's too important to go to jail for what he did.

Totally sucks.

edit on 21-2-2013 by Power_Semi because: (no reason given)

So in other words, you haven't followed the story at all and have no idea what you're talking about?

No offense, but I'd believe psychic abilities over yours right about now.

Pistorius is already guilty of shooting and killing his girlfriend.

There is a damn good reason the lead 'detective' (used very loosely here) has been removed from the case, and you would've known that if you'd done a little research instead of automatically assuming "The PTB" are behind everything. I know it's a conspiracy website, but this is getting silly, even by ATS standards.

Not everything is a conspiracy and I bet you haven't got any evidence to back up what you just said.

reply to post by namine





She may have been an advocate against violence to women but if she had never come

across it before she would not be aware of just how insidious it can be

I don't think any battered woman thinks she deserves to be battered but it's

always the last time and they'll never hurt them again, they become experts at covering up

the most appalling abuse. It is well documented that a woman returns to an abusive

relationship many,many times .And as they had only been together around three months it

was early days?....


There's always one who thinks they can buck the system ?