Oscar Pistorius

[BennyHarp]

I may be wrong, but I don't think he ever claimed to have woken up and found his partner not in bet. I understood his whole case was that he believed she WAS still in bed and therefore the person in the toilet had to be an intruder.

Was she not in bed with him?

Go and read up on the case 

I understand that the vast majority of people who comment on thread topics on this board are experts in the field of which they are commenting on. But in this occasion I am not and lost interest in this case as it became more of a media event than a trial of the murder of a young woman. I was merely asking a question to clarify a small issue that I had with his defence, without the need to read up the pages and pages of coverage. 

[DuffleKing]

Haven't been following this really. Two questions :

What was the reason put forward for him wanting to murder Reeva and what's the likely sentence for this verdict?

[tyrone girl]

Sentence wise no idea how the south african judicial system works in terms of how long.
There can be no justifiable motive or reason for wanting to kill her but on my reading he was jealous maybe controlling etc and she was at times scared of him.

Maybe she wanted to end it or whatever.
Who knows and they can put forward as many reasons as they like. Only he knows the truth.

[Hardy]

I may be wrong, but I don't think he ever claimed to have woken up and found his partner not in bet. I understood his whole case was that he believed she WAS still in bed and therefore the person in the toilet had to be an intruder.

Was she not in bed with him?

Go and read up on the case 

I understand that the vast majority of people who comment on thread topics on this board are experts in the field of which they are commenting on. But in this occasion I am not and lost interest in this case as it became more of a media event than a trial of the murder of a young woman. I was merely asking a question to clarify a small issue that I had with his defence, without the need to read up the pages and pages of coverage. 

The story in my head is that they were in bed, he got up to go out on the balcony for something/to do something (can't remember what triggered this) heard some noise, came back in, grabbed the gun, went to the bathroom and started shooting. The suggestion was that, in his haste/panic, he didn't check/look at the bed and so assumed she was still in it and that the noise from the jacks was a burgularator.

[AZOffaly]

Even if it was a burglar, which seems to be a fairly radical assumption to make given the circumstances, it's hard to believe that a valid reaction to that is to shoot, without warning, through a closed door. It's crazy stuff.

If I heard a noise in the bathroom, I'd assume it was the wife or kids. I don't think I'd grab the nearest gun and open up.

[deiseach]

Even if it was a burglar, which seems to be a fairly radical assumption to make given the circumstances, it's hard to believe that a valid reaction to that is to shoot, without warning, through a closed door. It's crazy stuff.

If I heard a noise in the bathroom, I'd assume it was the wife or kids. I don't think I'd grab the nearest gun and open up.

About the best that can be said for it is that it's South Africa. A friend of mine lived in Pretoria for a couple of years and he said you didn't stop at red lights after 8pm.

[Hardy]

Deiseach beat me to it. I do think a different set of norms applies there. People have told me, for instance, that if you have a car accident, even injuring/killing somebody, you don't stop but keep driving 'till you get to a police station or meet cops.

It seemed noticeable to me, in as far as I paid attention, that your question, AZ, didn't seem to arise in the trial, as if it was normal to shoot assumed burglars on sight (or even unseen).

[deiseach]

I'm pretty sure that it was mentioned during the trial that even if you could prove that you thought it was a burglar behind the door - say, producing CCTV footage of you shouting "come out burglar or I shoot!" - this wasn't in itself an iron-clad defense.

[BennyHarp]

I may be wrong, but I don't think he ever claimed to have woken up and found his partner not in bet. I understood his whole case was that he believed she WAS still in bed and therefore the person in the toilet had to be an intruder.

Was she not in bed with him?

Go and read up on the case 

I understand that the vast majority of people who comment on thread topics on this board are experts in the field of which they are commenting on. But in this occasion I am not and lost interest in this case as it became more of a media event than a trial of the murder of a young woman. I was merely asking a question to clarify a small issue that I had with his defence, without the need to read up the pages and pages of coverage. 

The story in my head is that they were in bed, he got up to go out on the balcony for something/to do something (can't remember what triggered this) heard some noise, came back in, grabbed the gun, went to the bathroom and started shooting. The suggestion was that, in his haste/panic, he didn't check/look at the bed and so assumed she was still in it and that the noise from the jacks was a burgularator.

Cheers, this is what i thought and i suppose it is a different culture as has been mentioned but it seems an awful stretch to assume he just opened fire as a first course of action when it was highly plausible that his girlfriend could be in the toilet.

[Hardy]

I'm pretty sure that it was mentioned during the trial that even if you could prove that you thought it was a burglar behind the door - say, producing CCTV footage of you shouting "come out burglar or I shoot!" - this wasn't in itself an iron-clad defense.

OK - didn't come across that.

[magpie seanie]

I saw him on the stand and while his name may be Oscar he certainly won't be winning one. It was a pure charade. Totally unbelievable and obviously rehearsed to a tee from the Joey Tribbiani school of acting (I wonder did he have the tweezers in his pocket???!!!!).

I heard some SA journo saying that the prosecution would appeal if he wasn't foung guilty of murder and Pistorius was going to appeal any custodial sentence so this will run and run.

Why is sentencing going to take about a month?

[Tony Baloney]

Some of you lads can read up on the facts of the case when the book hits your local library 

Or you could use google.

[orangeman]

5 years

[johnneycool]

5 years

In the big house or at home?

[orangeman]

5 years

In the big house or at home?

Looking through bars.