Oscar Pistorius

[nrico2006]

Surely what's the point of absconding? No matter where he would end up he'd be extradited - unless he went to some tin pot place like Mali or North Korea. But perhaps life in a shed on The North Pole would be preferable to a South African jail where surely he'll be a bitch for the rest of his natural

Is there not quite a number of countries that dont allow extradition?  As for the bail hearing, the South African Police have been made to look like fools already. 

[EC Unique]

Early prediction.... He will get off.

[muppet]

Early prediction.... He will get off.

I think the defence will be seen to win the bail hearing. However I think he will be convicted after the trial of manslaughter. You can't shoot people, even burglars without some warning.

[muppet]

Roux ... but on the night in question he slept on the left because he had a problem with his shoulder.

Left is closer to the gun and the balcony. If he slept on the right he would have surely noticed she wasn't there when he got the gun which was in a holster with her overnight bag.

[muppet]

On the suggestion that he might jump bail and flee the country:

Magistrate: would gold medal Olympic athlete forsake career and avoid chance to clear name in court?

Changed my mind, he will walk free.

He might find it difficult to bring girls home though.

[mouview]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/feb/19/oscar-pistorius-south-africa-anc

A question that many are asking is how someone that has achieved so much, that has so much going for him, that is so well-loved across the world could do something such as Pistorius is alleged to have done. There are two possible answers that also speak to aspects of the state of our nation.
The first is that precisely because of a sense of power that derives from such widespread acclaim, there is a possible measure of impunity. We see this too in our national life, where many in power engage in acts of criminality with impunity, believing that they will, or could, get away with it.

The second is that Pistorius simply did not possess the emotional, psychological and other personal tools to deal with and manage his fame, his wealth, his deep personal challenges and flaws so that ultimately, there was an inevitable explosion. There are now suggestions that the signs were there for many to see, but there was a reluctance to act because of the powerful position Pistorius occupied in the public's mind, because he did not invite such help and because, it is alleged, he kept a black book of people who crossed him, using intimidation and threats against those who might expose his flaws

Third solution; 'roid rage.

[NAG1]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/feb/19/oscar-pistorius-south-africa-anc

A question that many are asking is how someone that has achieved so much, that has so much going for him, that is so well-loved across the world could do something such as Pistorius is alleged to have done. There are two possible answers that also speak to aspects of the state of our nation.
The first is that precisely because of a sense of power that derives from such widespread acclaim, there is a possible measure of impunity. We see this too in our national life, where many in power engage in acts of criminality with impunity, believing that they will, or could, get away with it.

The second is that Pistorius simply did not possess the emotional, psychological and other personal tools to deal with and manage his fame, his wealth, his deep personal challenges and flaws so that ultimately, there was an inevitable explosion. There are now suggestions that the signs were there for many to see, but there was a reluctance to act because of the powerful position Pistorius occupied in the public's mind, because he did not invite such help and because, it is alleged, he kept a black book of people who crossed him, using intimidation and threats against those who might expose his flaws

Third solution; 'roid rage.

This has already been discredited, it was not steroids in the bottles removed from the house.

[heganboy]

this is  very interesting case, no witness, bumbling police work, internationally famous defendant, forensics already compromised. If OP presents a case which does not directly contradict the evidence then his version of events must be accepted...

[muppet]

this is  very interesting case, no witness, bumbling police work, internationally famous defendant, forensics already compromised. If OP presents a case which does not directly contradict the evidence then his version of events must be accepted...

Leave aside the cops for a minute.

His version still shoots her unarmed, innocent and dead at his hand. He can only be cleared of all charges if it is ok in South Africa to blindly shoot dead first and ask questions later, which I doubt.

[orangeman]

this is  very interesting case, no witness, bumbling police work, internationally famous defendant, forensics already compromised. If OP presents a case which does not directly contradict the evidence then his version of events must be accepted...

Leave aside the cops for a minute.

His version still shoots her unarmed, innocent and dead at his hand. He can only be cleared of all charges if it is ok in South Africa to blindly shoot dead first and ask questions later, which I doubt.

Strange place SA.

[nrico2006]

this is  very interesting case, no witness, bumbling police work, internationally famous defendant, forensics already compromised. If OP presents a case which does not directly contradict the evidence then his version of events must be accepted...

Leave aside the cops for a minute.

His version still shoots her unarmed, innocent and dead at his hand. He can only be cleared of all charges if it is ok in South Africa to blindly shoot dead first and ask questions later, which I doubt.

Are there any South African Law experts on here?  It would seem that there is a good chance that he will ghet off though as there is at least one high profile similar case to this that has happened not so long ago in South Africa. 

[seafoid]

He's from a wealthy family as well so they have the PR covered

[muppet]

He's from a wealthy family as well so they have the PR covered

It may all come down to his own performance. Both sides agree he shot her. They have the gun the ammo, the body, time of death, all of the stuff that is usually difficult to determine. However the question really is what was going on in his head. That is harder to prove and if he sticks solidly to his story he might get off the serious charges. However if he performs as badly as the Police guy did today he will go down.

[brokencrossbar1]

The facts are not in question here, simply the 'interpretation' of these facts.  There was a case simliar in some respects.  In 2004, former Springbok rugby player Rudi Visagie awoke to the sound of his car driving away in the predawn hours. He opened fire with a handgun at the car, fatally wounding the driver _ who turned out to be his 19-year-old daughter, Maryle. After an investigation, however, prosecutors declined to press charges on what they described as "humanitarian grounds."  While this case is different you can see what the Defence are going to push as a precedent.  I can't see it staking up as his defence though, as there seems to be a bot of history of domestic violence and also previous incidents of rage over a woman.  Also, it will not just be him on trial but the South African legal system.  I don't think it will easy for him to get off, much will depend on who the jury believes most.  He should be granted bail though tomorrow, it's not like he will do a runner   ( Bad taste, I know, but couldn't resist!)

[Never beat the deeler]

The facts are not in question here, simply the 'interpretation' of these facts.  There was a case simliar in some respects.  In 2004, former Springbok rugby player Rudi Visagie awoke to the sound of his car driving away in the predawn hours. He opened fire with a handgun at the car, fatally wounding the driver _ who turned out to be his 19-year-old daughter, Maryle. After an investigation, however, prosecutors declined to press charges on what they described as "humanitarian grounds."  While this case is different you can see what the Defence are going to push as a precedent.  I can't see it staking up as his defence though, as there seems to be a bot of history of domestic violence and also previous incidents of rage over a woman.  Also, it will not just be him on trial but the South African legal system.  I don't think it will easy for him to get off, much will depend on who the jury believes most.  He should be granted bail though tomorrow, it's not like he will do a runner   ( Bad taste, I know, but couldn't resist!)

That case is similar enough to his story that the cynic in me thinks having his lawyer on the scene so early may have something to do with it