# Pistorius=Doper



## thighmaster (Feb 2, 2006)

Roids found in the house. Another roid rage killer and doper. Face it, every last one is a doper.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

Roid rage sounds about right. I would not want to be in a south african jail if i were him. Hope he does not get off like OJ did


----------



## Bluenote (Oct 28, 2012)

I've tried to be consistent that my biggest problem with doping is practical and not moral. The health effects. And public health impact as more people dope chasing their sporting dreams. 

This may or may not be roid rage, but it doesn't look good.


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

I'm not trying to defend the murderer here. But even the state prosecutor says that the substance was not steroids.


----------



## bigbill (Feb 15, 2005)

Listening to NPR on the way home from work today and it sounds like the Prosecution kind of fell apart on the stand today. No dope, no evidence to refute his story of shooting at what he thought was an intruder. No credible reports from the neighbors who heard arguing, they live 600 yards away. Doesn't change the tragedy that will haunt him the rest of his life but it's not the slam dunk case for the prosecution that was originally portrayed.


----------



## moskowe (Mar 14, 2011)

Also doesn't change the fact that he was most likely doping, like the majority of world-class runners. 

But yeah that was a really weak testimony, to say the least.


----------



## Bluenote (Oct 28, 2012)

I dunno. I'm not buying his story. 

Look at the little floor plan. She reportedly was on the john and he hit her with 3 of 4 shots - on her right side. If you thought an intruder was in your toilet compartment, would you aim at the toilet, or the little walking space in front of it? 

Innocent until proven guilty and all that. But it doesn't look so good.

BBC News - Pistorius witness 'heard shots, screams, more shots'


----------



## moskowe (Mar 14, 2011)

Depending on where the window is you might want to shoot in that direction. The toilet being between the door and the window, whoever was on the toilet would be in the path of the bullets. 
Also you have to consider that if he panicked and fired rapidly through the door, the bullets would have gone all over the place.

Plus really:
1) head investigator's steroids claims changed to testosterone changed to "??? we don't know, we didn't read the label." 
2) head investigator confuses the distance at which witnesses that supposedly heard shouting were, from 300m to 600m. 
3) head investigator admits that none of the evidence effectively discredits Pistorius' account for now.
4) police forgets to pick up a casing on the crime scene, and DEFENSE INVESTIGATORS found it. (seriously ? lol)
That's a lot of blunders for a 20 year old veteran of the force. Sounds like they were trying to rush it through to keep him in jail and they failed. And to be honest, the point had to be made that he's not a huge flight risk. 

I do agree with you though that his story is fishy. What I have the most trouble believing is that he wouldn't have see she was there. He went to his balcony, he got back to his bed, grabbed the gun, walked to the bathroom, all that time not realizing that she wasn't in bed ? It sounds difficult to believe. 
The ballistic report might help to shed more light on what happened, but it's not as clear cut as the media made it look like.


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

Yeah it's pretty obvious that the guy murdered her.

Too bad there are so many overzealous a-holes working as cops and prosecutors. I mean, it works very often when the goal is putting the maximum number of people behind bars, regardless of guilt or innocense. But every so often a guilty guy can afford a proper attorney who makes investigators and prosecutors look like complete idiots. And the guilty guy walks, like OJ. 

This isn't to say that all cops and prosecutors are bad guys. Of course many are honest, upright individuals. All I am saying is that too many of them end up bending the rules and violating rights, all in the name of justice.


----------



## r1lee (Jul 22, 2012)

You're holding a gun and someone is in your washroom. Do you yell out, I have a gun you better leave? Or do you just go blasting for fun.

Murderer...


----------



## Bluenote (Oct 28, 2012)

The window is on the floor plan. Behind the toilet. 

He's supposed to be a very good shot, experienced with guns and all. 

He'd have to be practically in the sink to shoot through the door and hit the window. Shots like that would have hit her in front. 

Plus windows behind toilets are high - (in swanky places, anyhow) if he was aiming for it, how did he get her in the hip? 

We're supposed to believe he's too panicked to realize his gf wasn't in bed? too scared to yell off the intruder? Too freaked to identify his target before blasting away? but he's level headed enough to calculate a tricky angle shot to the window? 

One has to believe a number of unlikely events to believe his innocence.


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

On the other hand, all of this happened in the middle of the night. It's easy for the mind to play tricks on someone who is scared and half asleep, especially in the dark. 

I've been delirious and thought there was an intruder more than once. Years ago I was living in an apartment and heard someone open the front door. I grabbed the shillelagh I kept near my bed and charged out of my bedroom ready to smash the intruder. Then I flipped on the light. I saw...nobody. The door I heard open was down the hall. 

As a child I was scared witless by heavy breathing in the hallway. I inched across my room on my stomach with a flashlight and slowly cracked the door open, only to see the silhouette of a crouching figure. When I turned on the light I saw the idiotic grin of the family dog. 


That's not to say the guy is innocent. But let's not get carried away with "it's not rational that he did X!" as we do not always behave rationally at 2am.


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

Pistorius detective on attempted murder charges

How is the prosecution going to convict Pistorius when their star witness lied about steroids and is up on murder charges? 













What more will it take for Pistorius to walk? Again, this is why I detest dirty cops and prosecutors. And I also detest cops who turn a blind eye to other dirty cops. And prosecutors should be disbarred if they knowingly put perjuring cops on the witness stand.


----------



## moskowe (Mar 14, 2011)

Wow. Just wow. It almost looks like they're purposefully trying to derail their case.


----------



## moskowe (Mar 14, 2011)

The window is right behind the toilet. Assuming the intruder would have come through the window, he would have to get down to the toilet first, which means you would try to angle your shot in that direction.

To expand on what Local Hero said, not only can you be extremely disoriented when waking up in the middle of the night, with the paranoid feeling that someone is in your house, but there is the added fact that this isn't the USA we're talking about here. This is South Africa, and more specifically Johannesburg, where paranoia and fear of aggression pretty much have a daily influence on people's lives. 
If you believe in statistics, murder rates in SA are the 12th highest in the world. The rate of violent crime puts it much higher than that on the list. And that's after a good 15 years of government efforts to reduce violence. Johannesburg has been at the center of that wave of violence and even if things are getting better, fear for one's safety is still deeply ingrained in people's minds. 

So who's to say if you wake up in the middle of a night, hear suspect noises, and feel the added insecurity of not being able to walk (or flee) properly, you won't go into panic mode, grab your gun, and unload through your bathroom door before asking questions ? If you're not used to living with your girlfriend, it's entirely possible that you would forget she was there that night in your panick. 

I still think it's a dubious position to take, but it's not impossible, and that's all the defense has to prove. Which is why I hope that a detailed investigation, where you actually take time to properly interview your witnesses and examine the ballistic and crime scene details properly, will help shed more truth on the whole story and avoid the kind of fiasco the police just put themselves in.


----------



## Bluenote (Oct 28, 2012)

I agree that a cop accused of murder should be on leave, not on cases. 

Just my opinion, but I think the charges will get downgraded to murder. 

I think the crux of the case lies in the forensics. Hard to say he was panicked if he put his legs on. (Shots high). Also, that would directly dispute his testimony - kinda poke holes in his credibility. 

Where she was positioned and where she was hit will play into it, too. 

One has to believe a string of unlikely events to believe his defense. He was asleep, but she was up and dressed. She was up, but all the lights were out. She want to the toilet in total darkness. He didn't realize she was out if bed. 

He didn't call out before shooting. He didn't think - maybe my gf is the one in the toilet? He didn't confirm his target before firing? He was a great shot and experienced with guns, but just blasted away? 

He was in a panic, but hit the toilet area with uncanny accuracy (75% blind). 

Oh, and he has sonar. He wouldn't know where an intruder was in the room (climbing in window, at door, stealing toilet paper) - but he shoots one precise location rather than spray the room? 

She didn't scream at the first shot? He shot 4 times at different angles, but didnt hear a woman screaming and pulled back? 

He's that scared of intruders, but doesn't have a dog? Or body guard? Or panic room? 

He deserves a fair trial and the presumption of innocence. But I find his defense difficult to believe.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

Once you fire a gun inside, you're not going to hear anything for at least several minutes.


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

If we're going to talk about CSI and ballistics, let's not forget that bladerunner kicked through the door. So it's been shot four times and kicked in; the door could be in splinters. Once again it's possible that the overzealous, lying cop (who is up on attempted murder charges) was premature in his claims regarding the height of the gunshots.

Again, this isn't to say that Pistorius is innocent. This is saying that crappy cops and crooked prosecutors put innocent people behind bars. When their shenanigans are exposed, the shoddy work of crappy cops causes guilty people to go free. 



Bluenote said:


> He's that scared of intruders, but doesn't have a dog? Or body guard? Or panic room?


No panic room? 

GUILTY!


Live in a one bedroom apartment but cannot afford a bodyguard? 

GUILTY


Travel all the time as a pro athlete but don't want to take care of a dog? 

GUILTY!


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

nobody go shooting at somebody 4 rounds straight. Most of the time you shoot 1-2 rounds and stop to reassess the situation.

furthermore, anyone who has ever slept with a partner knows dam well that if your partner rolls out of bed at night, you know s/he has, unless you are dead drunk. But seeing how he has no problem shooting 4 rounds in the dark with good accuracy, one would have to say he was not drunk or doped up that would affect his mental awareness.

only a murderer would shoot 4 rounds straight at someone before stopping to think, because the intent was to kill. I hope this mofo does not walk like that fool OJ, but there is a good chance he might because I see a lot of similarities between this case and the OJ case


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

aclinjury said:


> nobody go shooting at somebody 4 rounds straight. Most of the time you shoot 1-2 rounds and stop to reassess the situation.


The police shoot 8-10 rounds into suspects all the time.


> furthermore, anyone who has ever slept with a partner knows dam well that if your partner rolls out of bed at night, you know s/he has, unless you are dead drunk. But seeing how he has no problem shooting 4 rounds in the dark with good accuracy, one would have to say he was not drunk or doped up that would affect his mental awareness.


This works in his favor IMO. The fact that he wasn't drunk tends to show that he wasn't in a drunken rage -- most of the time couples get in big fights one or both have been drinking. 


> only a murderer would shoot 4 rounds straight at someone before stopping to think, because the intent was to kill.


His intent to kill is not an issue. 

Of course he was trying to kill the person in the bathroom. The issue is not whether he was trying to kill the person in the bathroom, it was whether he held the mistaken belief that it was an intruder. 

If you're going to get worked up about the accuracy, take another look at the bathroom diagram. That bathroom is the same size as the shower. Maybe 3X4ft. It's tiny. A real challenge would be shooting through that door four times without hitting someone.


----------



## Bluenote (Oct 28, 2012)

Taking my points totally out if context. Picking on a minor point, but not addressing the crux of the argument. 

First, I said he has the presumption of innocence. 

Second, I said you have to believe a whole string of things to believe his defense. While any one might be possible, if unlikely, To believe his defense, you have to believe a number of unlikely things. 

Occam's razor and all that. 

The crime rate in SA has been offered as 'background' on his emotional state. There is a counter that his preparations - did he have an alarm, dogs, safe room, etc... are also background on his emotional state. 

But this is all speculation. Forensics are a big part of the case. Until forensics are offered under oath and cross examined, it's just an exercise in speculation.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

You do realize he does this for a living, right?


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

I pointed out some ridiculously things you said, Bluenote. But I did not avoid the crux of your argument. You said the crux is forensics:


_I think the crux of the case lies in the forensics. _
-Bluenote


I'm pretty sure that I addressed that when I said: 


_If we're going to talk about CSI and ballistics, let's not forget that bladerunner kicked through the door. So it's been shot four times and kicked in; the door could be in splinters. Once again it's possible that the overzealous, lying cop (who is up on attempted murder charges) was premature in his claims regarding the height of the gunshots._
-Me


It's funny that you are saying forensics are a big part of the case, as it's another thing that the lying, overzealous investigators mucked up, as they left essential evidence at the scene. (And why would forensics being offered *under oath* make any difference? We've already seen that law enforcement are more than willing to lie on the stand.) 

Why not have a dog, bodyguard, panic room, etc? That argument falls flat if one person on the jury owns a gun. Maybe guns are the most reasonable solution for a traveling athlete who lives in a tiny apartment. 


Anyway, I think the guy knew his wife was in the bathroom and was trying to kill his wife. I'm playing devil's advocate here, pointing out how a lying, overzealous cop screwed this one up.


----------



## Bluenote (Oct 28, 2012)

It's more like 6 x 6. Doors are about 3 feet in width. It's about two 'doors' wide by two doors long. 

3 x 4 is more like a public stall. Shitter in a silo.


----------



## Bluenote (Oct 28, 2012)

Post not poster. It would be a shame for good points to decay into a personal pudding contest.


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

Bluenote said:


> It's more like 6 x 6. Doors are about 3 feet in width. It's about two 'doors' wide by two doors long.
> 
> 3 x 4 is more like a public stall. Shitter in a silo.


OK, this is a minor issue as the bathroom is small. But 6X6? LOL

My bathroom is 5X9 and includes a sink and bathtub. This bathroom has only a toilet.


----------



## Bluenote (Oct 28, 2012)

It's a toilet compartment, in a master suite. Not a bathroom. 

You made the assertion that it was 3x4. On this you based that its hard to miss anyone in the room. 

The counter is that the room is 6x6. Harder to hit all shots in 6x6. 

I think the sizes and angles are important. Legs on or legs off?Randomly spraying the room or targeted shots at the John?


----------



## love4himies (Jun 12, 2012)

Local Hero said:


> His intent to kill is not an issue.
> 
> Of course he was trying to kill the person in the bathroom. The issue is not whether he was trying to kill the person in the bathroom, it was whether he held the mistaken belief that it was an intruder.


I agree. If it's an intruder, it's not premeditated murder. If it's your girlfriend that was going to the bathroom and you get your gun to kill her, it's premeditated.

I really have a hard time believing that he was awake enough to get his gun, but not enough to realize his girlfriend wasn't in bed with him. To me it would be different if he was awaken by somebody walking towards the bed and he grabbed his gun on his night table and shot.


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

Bluenote said:


> It's a toilet compartment, in a master suite. Not a bathroom.


Bathroom, loo, water closet, toilet, toilet compartment...call it what you will. It's not going to make it any larger. 


> You made the assertion that it was 3x4. On this you based that its hard to miss anyone in the room.
> 
> The counter is that the room is 6x6. Harder to hit all shots in 6x6.
> 
> I think the sizes and angles are important. Legs on or legs off?Randomly spraying the room or targeted shots at the John?


Yes, I said "Maybe 3X4ft. It's tiny." 

Anyway, these things are important. 

FYI: 6X6 is a fantasy. Go sit on a toilet and spread out your arms. If you cannot touch the walls it's around 6ft wide. Unless you have a bookshelf in there that's a lot of wasted space.


----------



## Bluenote (Oct 28, 2012)

As someone who has owned both dogs and guns for self defense, I find neither ridiculous. 

A dog wakes up at a pin drop. It will run into certain death and die for you. Dogs show a loyalty and bravery that I find noble and humbling. 

We are arguing two different things. What can be proven in a court of law and how believable people find his defense. 

I agree with you that incompetence or malfeasance taint criminal proceedings and make a mockery of justice. 

I think you and I also agree that his defense is hard to believe. A good devil's advocate would argue every angle, but there's a fair amount to overcome.


----------



## Bluenote (Oct 28, 2012)

Terms are important to avoid confusion. 

Master suites waste space. Its a luxury market thing. One could roller skate in that space. 

There is a floor plan. Two doors wide by two doors long. Closer to 6x6. Sitting in a hypothetical bathroom is not relevant. 

Agree to disagree at this point.


----------



## LostViking (Jul 18, 2008)

Initially, it seemed clear to me that he killed her in some sort of lover's spat.

Now, not so clear.

Four shots or seventeen - doesn't matter to me - more shots could just mean more panic - doesn't prove anything.

What I don't get is this - if you think dangerous intruders are breaking into your house - wouldn't you wake up the girlfriend and warn her before you start the gunplay?

Violent crime is off the hook in South Africa - I can understand his shoot first-ask questions later approach. But when you know your girlfriend is also in the apartment - how do you not check that she is still in the bed and not in the bathroom before you unload four bullets into the john? That's where it all falls apart for me.

Until he can explain that - things will continue to look bad.

That said - I suspect he gets off because the police and the prosecution have dropped the ball.


----------



## love4himies (Jun 12, 2012)

LostViking said:


> Violent crime is off the hook in South Africa - I can understand his shoot first-ask questions later approach. But when you know your girlfriend is also in the apartment - how do you not check that she is still in the bed and not in the bathroom before you unload four bullets into the john? That's where it all falls apart for me.


I was just saying that to a co-worker. If it was my hubby, I'm pretty sure he would be whispering for me to get out of the bedroom before he got out his gun.

AND he would make sure he knew where I was before he started shooting.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

Did he have a security system? 

I have a security system and a corgi. He's usually good at alerting us when he hears something funny outside. He also spent about 20 minutes barking at a leaf once.

Very unfortunate he lives in a dangerous area. That changes how one might react.


----------



## BostonG (Apr 13, 2010)

Local Hero said:


> What more will it take for Pistorius to walk?


:thumbsup:


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

His defense as I understand it is ludicrous, high crime area or not. Any intruder in the bathroom would have no idea where he was on the other side of the door, and there was no chance they would start randomly firing through the door from inside. Hence, he was in no danger. He could tell them he was armed and they had to leave, or wait for them to open the door so he could see who it was before he blew them away. Or, here's a thought, turn on a light?

No way the intruder scenario requires him to blaze away through a closed door at a completely unknown target. If she's barricaded in the bathroom and he wants to kill her, though, that's a different story.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

Fireform said:


> His defense as I understand it is ludicrous, high crime area or not. Any intruder in the bathroom would have no idea where he was on the other side of the door, and there was no chance they would start randomly firing through the door from inside. Hence, he was in no danger. He could tell them he was armed and they had to leave, or wait for them to open the door so he could see who it was before he blew them away. Or, here's a thought, turn on a light?
> 
> No way the intruder scenario requires him to blaze away through a closed door at a completely unknown target. If she's barricaded in the bathroom and he wants to kill her, though, that's a different story.


I don't know South Africa gun laws and if they're required to take any sort of training. I agree he reacted wrong. Most of us have never been in a high stress environment where we had to pull a gun while fearing for our life. Even the police make mistakes when they're scared.


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

For some odd reason Bluenote continues to insists that the lavatory is 6ftX6ft. 










Given that, if the apartment floor plan is drawn to scale, the master bedroom is almost 600 square feet. And the toilet bowl is over 30 inches wide.


----------



## cmdrpiffle (Mar 28, 2006)

Yo ! Forum! CSI called and they want all their investigators back...

The first rule in figuring out what happened in a situation is not basing your conclusions on what you read in the media.

Just sayin'


----------



## Bluenote (Oct 28, 2012)

It was your assertion that the bathroom was 3x4. You based other arguments in the "tiny compartment." It is your burden of proof to back that up. 

I clearly stated my reason - The bathroom is about two doors wide by two doors long. Doors are about 3 feet wide. Scaling off 'average' door and window heights is commonly done to estimate scale - in construction, by snipers, in real estate, etc... 

Average crappers are about 30 inches long. (Not wide). 30x2 + the little shelf gets you into 5 foot plus. 

For it to be 3x4 it would have to be rectangular, not square. And that would make the door about 2 feet wide. 

At this point, agree to disagree. 

It's forest for the trees against the larger question of blowing someone away in a toilet compartment.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

The gf is dead so she can't testify. The shooter, obviously, will say he's innocent and was acting out of self-defense.

This case will boil down to forensics. I have this feeling that he'll walk, like OJ did.
(I wonder how all the fools who supported OJ feel now?).

The good thing for this guy is he shot a white girl in South Africa. Now if he shot a black model, wow then I'd imagine it they'd calling for his head if not outright kill him mob style already.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

cmdrpiffle said:


> Yo ! Forum! CSI called and they want all their investigators back...


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

I had lunch with my gf in her apartment today. The front door of her apartment is 36 inches. 

I measured her bathroom door at 26inches. Her bathroom has a sink, toilet, shower, tub, etc. It's dimensions are 4'10X7ft. 

A 6X6 loo for a standalone toilet is HUGE. If Pistorius's loo is 6ft wide, his bedroom is bigger than many two-car garages. And each of his sinks are 2ft wide. 

We're beating a dead horse here but if you think that bathroom is 6X6 you're confused. (And for the record, my gf thinks that I am confused for taking down her bathroom's dimensions.) 



I just thought of something that could completely redeem you, but it's unlikely given the fact that Pistorius is an olympic runner. If it's a handicapped accessible apartment, the doors and rooms could all be extra large to accommodate wheelchairs. But I really doubt that the guy even owns a wheelchair.


Bluenote said:


> It was your assertion that the bathroom was 3x4. You based other arguments in the "tiny compartment." It is your burden of proof to back that up.


Please don't talk to me about burden of proof.


----------



## BostonG (Apr 13, 2010)

spade2you said:


> He also spent about 20 minutes barking at a leaf once.


My bike slipped on some leaves on a commute to work a couple of years ago and I fell. I think that Corgi is a hero.


----------



## Bluenote (Oct 28, 2012)

I already said agree to disagree. 

3x4 would make that a micro throne A bit under 2 feet long, including tank. 

So much of his defense is possible, but unlikely. Occam's razor. 

Presumption of innocence. 

Blah. Blah. Blah.


----------



## Robert1 (Mar 27, 2012)

What? This is just utter non-sense. At first when this all went down I assumed that his girlfriend somehow came into his apartment in the middle of the night, unexpectedly to him. But if she was there with him in bed, woke up to take a leak, and he blasted away at suspicious noises he's either a liar or was under the influence of some serious mind altering drugs. Anyone who knows that they have someone else living with them or a visiting guest is going to have enough common sense before shooting someone without 1)identifying the target, and 2)being sure it's not someone that's supposed to be there...which is 1000 times more likely than an intruder!



moskowe said:


> So who's to say if you wake up in the middle of a night, hear suspect noises, and feel the added insecurity of not being able to walk (or flee) properly, you won't go into panic mode, grab your gun, and unload through your bathroom door before asking questions ? If you're not used to living with your girlfriend, it's entirely possible that you would forget she was there that night in your panick.


----------



## Robert1 (Mar 27, 2012)

Of course you would. You'd wake her up and tell her to call 911 while you got the gun. This is a pretty standard home defense tactic and anyone that is a gun enthusiast would surely know.



LostViking said:


> Initially, it seemed clear to me that he killed her in some sort of lover's spat.
> 
> 
> What I don't get is this - if you think dangerous intruders are breaking into your house - wouldn't you wake up the girlfriend and warn her before you start the gunplay?


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

Robert1 said:


> What? This is just utter non-sense. At first when this all went down I assumed that his girlfriend somehow came into his apartment in the middle of the night, unexpectedly to him. But if she was there with him in bed, woke up to take a leak, and he blasted away at suspicious noises he's either a liar or was under the influence of some serious mind altering drugs. *Anyone who knows that they have someone else living with them or a visiting guest is going to have enough common sense before shooting someone without 1)identifying the target, and 2)being sure it's not someone that's supposed to be there...which is 1000 times more likely than an intruder!*


Some folks have apparently totally missed this concept, instead they try to argue all the about the "what if" scenarios. This is exactly what a defense team would try to do, just like the OJ case.

I remember one time I was in college, in the middle of a night, some fool was pounding on my bedroom windows. The first I went for was my gun (had one at the time), knife, and went to check on my mom immediately in the next room... all the while the fool was pounding on my window. My mom was scared sh*tless! I told her to calm down. The fool was still pounding on the windows at this point. Then I called 911, told them somebody was pounding on my windows. 911 operator told me to stay inside and keep the door locked and do not try to take on the potential intruder. But I was young then, hot blooded, and I was trained in hand combats,,. so I went out the back patio door and loop around to the dam guy. I turned on my flashlight at him, point my gun at him,, asked him what the f** is he doing!! All this time my senses was heightened, my head turning constantly as I thought there might be another accomplice. Turned out the kid (my age) thought my window was his gf's windows. He got the WRONG house. He raised his hands and said sorry sorry sir.. I lowered my gun. Cops came, everything was explained, back to normal.

And this happened AFTER the previous night where some guy (a different guy) was snooping into my window. I spotted him, yelled out hey, he just ran away. Probably some small time opportunistic buglar. 

So my senses were heightened when the 2nd event happened on the 2nd night. I thought it was actually the previous guy who came back!!

Point is that, first thing you check is your loved one. We have yet to see blade runner saying he checked on his gf, until he unloaded 4 shots of course. What? He didn't stop at maybe shot #1 or #2 to reassess the situation before further shooting??? Not buying this fool's story at all.


----------



## bigbill (Feb 15, 2005)

moskowe said:


> Also doesn't change the fact that he was most likely doping, like the majority of world-class runners.
> 
> But yeah that was a really weak testimony, to say the least.


"The fact that he was most likely doping" That's classic. Most likely facts, awesome.


----------



## moskowe (Mar 14, 2011)

He doesn't live with his girlfriend, she's visiting. It's entirely possible that he could have forgotten she was there. Although unlikely, it's possible. 

The issue of how he reacted is irrelevant to your personal experience. No matter how someone is trained for a home invasion situation, unless they've actually experienced it they're not going to know just how they'll be able to handle it.

By the way, you admit that in your case you were hot-blooded enough to go and ask the guy what he was doing at gun-point instead of waiting for the police (which, by the way, is stupid enough for me to insert an unrelated comment about the beauty of the US's gun and violence culture), so who's to say someone equally hot-blooded but unable to cope with the situation as well as you did wouldn't just unload a couple of shots at someone who's ALREADY broken into their house.

The defense will not go OJ mode, because there is no race issue in this trial. It's white vs. white, which as someone explains increases his chances of walking significantly. The reason they'll go for what could have possibly happened is because that's all they have to show. There's a standard of proof for someone to be guilty, that's how the system works. 

He's still probably going to be f*** when the ballistics report comes out.


----------



## Robert1 (Mar 27, 2012)

moskowe said:


> No matter how someone is trained for a home invasion situation, unless they've actually experienced it they're not going to know just how they'll be able to handle it.


There was no home invasion! Just his girlfriend getting up to take a leak...supposedly.
Even if if it were a drunken one night stand, most guys would have enough sense to realize the noise from the bathroom is probably the girl before blasting away blindly. I don't know what the trial process in SA is, but in the U.S. no jury would buy this story.



moskowe said:


> By the way, you admit that in your case you were hot-blooded enough to go and ask the guy what he was doing at gun-point instead of waiting for the police (which, by the way, is stupid enough for me to insert an unrelated comment about the beauty of the US's gun and violence culture), so who's to say someone equally hot-blooded but unable to cope with the situation as well as you did wouldn't just unload a couple of shots at someone who's ALREADY broken into their house.


You're not seriously comparing confronting your intruder with a cool head to going apesh1t and unloading on an unidentified target are you? Anyone that's as good with a gun as he was knows some of the most basic rules which are 1)Keep your finger out of the trigger guard until you've identified your target and are ready to shoot, and 2)You do not shoot until you've identified your target, assessed the threat, and identified what's beyond your target. No way I can buy this guy's story as is. There's more to this.


----------



## moskowe (Mar 14, 2011)

aclinjury at least has provided an example of how HE reacted in a somewhat similar situation. His reaction wasn't cool-headed, a cool-headed reaction would have been to wait for the police inside, with the gun, not to go out to confront a potentially armed intruder. But obviously he didn't panick either, so you could infer that he wouldn't panick in a home intruder situation. Would you ? Can the prosecution show Pistorius wouldn't ?
You just have to ask people who give training programs for home defense scenarios. You can train people all you want, but once you put them in a panic situation, a lot of them will react badly. It's not a matter of being bad with a gun or remembering the basic rules, it's a matter of fear taking over common sense. There's actually plenty of stories in the US of people shooting down family members coming home late because they thought they were intruders. 
In the case of Pistorius, this would be accentuated by the vulnerability he would feel missing half his legs, and not being able to run. (panic room ? you have to reach it first). Plus he lives in SA, not the US. 

In the end the prosecution has to show that there is NO DOUBT he killed her intentionally. I agree that it most likely was a case of crime of passion, but if the defense is able to instill just a bit of doubt in the jurors' heads, then he'll walk. 

The real problem with his story isn't that he shot multiple times without checking, or that he didn't go to the panic room. (Obviously), it's that he didn't check where she was first. That's going to be a lot harder to sway the jury over for the defense.


----------



## zero85ZEN (Oct 11, 2002)

Couple of things: someone in this thread stated this took place in Johannesburg, Pistorius lives in Pretoria. Second, as far as I know there is no trial by jury in SA as some have been discussing. 

The whole situation is a tragic mess. Sad. I think he probably shot her on purpose in a fit of rage, and probably he has now convinced himself that he mistook her for an intruder. But what do I really know about it? Nothing more than I've read on the interwebs. 

I wonder if Oscar is a true narcissist? Sociopathic tendencies? Or if he is just one of the stupidest humans on the planet to shoot his girlfriend in the bathroom through a closed door assuming without visual ID that she was an intruder.


----------



## moskowe (Mar 14, 2011)

Point taken, he does live in Pretoria, though they're not exactly super far from each other. Further point taken about the justice system in South Africa. Maybe I ought to lay off the armchair quarterbacking and give myself a time-out for a while.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

Robert1 said:


> There was no home invasion! Just his girlfriend getting up to take a leak...supposedly.
> Even if if it were a drunken one night stand, most guys would have enough sense to realize the noise from the bathroom is probably the girl before blasting away blindly. I don't know what the trial process in SA is, but in the U.S. no jury would buy this story.
> 
> 
> ...



Again, I think Robert is right here. I was "hot blooded" in the sense that "I'm no wuss if you think you can mess with me". But I did not mean to imply that I will mow down anyone's arse by unloading my clip. 

To make a fair comparison to Oscar, I would have to have shot 4 rounds thru my windows at the guy who was clearly banging on it. This would be a fair comparison.

Instead, I did not shoot thru the windows. I woke up at the sound of the banging. Assessed the situation (ie, asked myself, what is this banging?). Then went for my weapons and flashlight. At this point, I never once thought about the potential intruder like "I'm going to shoot you mofo". First thing was to go check on my mom. (And remember, my senses was already piqued up from the previous night incident; yet I had the sense to not just shoot the guy thru the window). After seeing that my mom was ok, then I went to deal with the threat myself instead of waiting for the cops to arrive (not waiting for the cops is what is "hot headed or hot blooded"). But I did not go apesh*t by unloading rounds on the guy without assessing what/who he is first. In other words, I had everything under control and did not go apesh*t.

And I did not point my gun at him point blank. I was a distance probably 15 - 20 yards away from him. I actually gave him a fair loud vocal warning as I raised my gun at 15 - 20 away, and my thinking was that at that distance, he might just took off (like the previous night's guy) and I'd just fine if he ran away. I'd have done my job with the gun-deterent. But as it turned out, he was just some kid my age looking for his gf who lived in the house next door.

Oscar is 26. A healthy 26 year old male in the prime of his life. He is not feeble old man who is slow in his mind and confuse thing. The mind at 26 years of age is capable of fast information processing. Even if he never had any sort of tactical training, there is always someting called common sense. But seeing how he can unload 4 shots in the dark like that, I'll bet he has had training with guns. Seeing how he lives in a society full of burglaries, he must have heard of stories of home invasions, home burglaries.. and thru association, must have at least rehearsed in his mind what he would do in case he encounters such scenario. He must have rehearsed such scenario if he is keeping a gun under his bed! Otherwise, why would he keep a gun under his bed if his intention is not to use it in such burglary scenario?? But keeping a gun means he must have at least rehearsed the situation.

I makes absolutely no sense to me to think that he shot the girl because he paniced.

And it's true gun accidents do happen in the house hold. But this usually involve children shooting other children, and it doesn't happen in the night, and it doesn't involve unloading 4 shots,.. thru a barrier.

You (mskowe) are raising a lot of "what if" scenario. And honestly, if you raise enough "what if", you will instill doubt in anyone's mind. Defense tactic in OJ's case (beside the race card). You will even take down a religion if you raise enough "what if" questions. However, I'm not buying into all these what-ifs questions.

Unloading 4 shots thru the door is enough to convince me that this was no accident. If he is not convicted, then can you imagine what a guy will do to get rid of his gf/wife in the future? Well just unload 4 and claim "oh I thought he was an intruder". 

the other factor is that he is a world-class athlete. There is a lot of strong evidence that highly trained athlete have a high level of testosterone in them, and these guys are constantly raging. We see many cases of where an athlete would abuse his gf. This is actually has been testitied in court cases. So I have no doubt that Oscar was raging with his gf. No doubt about it. This would play into the fact that he unloaded 4 rounds. it's rage.

I'm sorry but I can't have sympathy for this guy.


----------



## love4himies (Jun 12, 2012)

Here is a great summary of his story (with graphics of his bedroom and his movements)

In his own words – How Oscar Pistorius says He Killed Reeva Steenkamp | Graphics | News | National Post


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

love4himies said:


> Here is a great summary of his story (with graphics of his bedroom and his movements)
> 
> In his own words – How Oscar Pistorius says He Killed Reeva Steenkamp | Graphics | News | National Post


Step 1: he woke up, crawl to the bacony to drag in a fan. Close the doors, and curtains.

(Can we say that at this point, he is fully alert, and aware of his surrounding? including the awareness of his gf? There is no way he can honestly say that he was half-asleep and not aware of the gf)

step 2:
he heard a noise, and went for his 9mm under his bed.

(Hold on here. So he is alert, the gun is under the bed, the gf is right on the bed... how can he grab his gun without for one moment waking up the gf and asking if she is ok???.. Yet he said he was terrified at the "intruder".. but he never once bother to check on his loved one (the gf).. but yet the terrified Oscar went to check on the intruder himself... all the while disregarding his gf.

END OF STORY. GUILTY.

The rest of the story is hogwash. Usually, when people are terrified, they don't go after the intruder. You only go after the intruder is you're confident about your ability and you're not terrified at the intruder.


----------



## Bluenote (Oct 28, 2012)

aclinjury said:


> Step 1: he woke up, crawl to the bacony to drag in a fan. Close the doors, and curtains.
> 
> (Can we say that at this point, he is fully alert, and aware of his surrounding? including the awareness of his gf? There is no way he can honestly say that he was half-asleep and not aware of the gf)
> 
> ...


You forgot that he crawled around two blind corners to confront an intruder - who would have been trapped in a dead end space (the master bath suite). 

Instead of waking his gf to call '911' and / or the communities' security. And then hunkering down in the best tactical position possible. 

I find his story very difficult to believe. Even if he is acquitted, his reputation and ability to get sponsorship money are likely badly damaged.


----------



## love4himies (Jun 12, 2012)

If he was so afraid, why didn't he just wake up his girlfriend and leave the house? They had access to the bedroom door, but the intruder didn't. AND if he was so scared, why would he drag himself which would force him to turn his back on the intruder, and his arms would be occupied by using them to push him along, rather than be ready to shoot should the intruder come into the bedroom.

Bluenote: Nike resigned with Michael Vick after he abused, tortured and killed numerous dogs that he had for a dog fighting ring.

Another thing I thought of: Would a girlfriend lock a bathroom door when her boyfriend was fast asleep or would she just close the door (if even that)?


----------



## Bluenote (Oct 28, 2012)

Yes, Nike resigned Vick.

No one will touch OJ. 

Public perception isn't logical, or consistent. companies have different tolerance for controversies.

If acquitted, Pistorius may still get some endorsements, speaking fees, etc... But he likely won't have the same broad marketing appeal (and therefore earning power).


----------



## mpre53 (Oct 25, 2011)

love4himies said:


> Another thing I thought of: Would a girlfriend lock a bathroom door when her boyfriend was fast asleep or would she just close the door (if even that)?


Normally, I'd say no. She wouldn't even close the door, in all likelihood. Unless their cultural values are different than ours in that regard. 

She might do it out of habit, especially half-asleep in the middle of the night, if she doesn't live with a guy full-time, and her normal living arrangements involve a need for bathroom privacy. I don't know enough about this case to really make that kind of judgment.

Or, she might run into the bathroom and lock the door to keep her boyfriend out during a domestic dispute that she thinks might turn violent.


----------



## Robert1 (Mar 27, 2012)

Most likely the scenario right there. Closing the door to use the toilet, sure I can see that. But locking it, probably not.




mpre53 said:


> Or, she might run into the bathroom and lock the door to keep her boyfriend out during a domestic dispute that she thinks might turn violent.


----------



## formulion (Feb 24, 2013)

will he run away


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

formulion said:


> will he run away


well they better put Lojack in his carbon blades.


----------

