Do you think Oscar Pistorius is guilty of premeditated murder?

Of course his story is convincing, he's a professional athlete, he's used to being under immense pressure, he won't have a problem keeping his cool under this kind of scrutiny. He also had a long time to think up a story after he shot her, before the police arrived.

I would do it out of habit, but that's due to having younger brothers/sisters that don't care about etiquette or aren't intelligent to recognise what a closed bathroom door signifies.

In a supposedly loving relationship...

There hasn't been anything said at the court about blood. The media may have made that part up.

Of course his story is convincing, he's a professional athlete, he's used to being under immense pressure, he won't have a problem keeping his cool under this kind of scrutiny. He also had a long time to think up a story after he shot her, before the police arrived.

Personally I think that there is one major detail which will be a big point in this case, and that is whether or not he had his legs on.

His story was that he didn't put his legs on after getting out of bed, while the prosecution say he did.

If he didn't then he is at least 18 inches shorter, and that kind of height difference will have a huge effect on the trajectory of the bullets, and it should be possible to tell what height they were fired from, which will show whether or not he was telling the truth about that detail. If it turns out he wasn't then it casts immense doubt on everything he has said, as a fairly major detail like that isn't something that you would ever expect to slip somebodies mind.

I always thought people peed when they died anyway Loss of voluntary sphincter control and all that.

Why would she have locked the door when going to the bathroom?

I don't think it was premeditated because I think if it was premeditated you wouldn't do it in your own house and ring the ambulance because well he is rich and could probably pay someone to do it, unless he wanted to get caught but then he would just plead guilty. I don't know what premeditated means in South Africa, this is just my assumption.
If it was murder in a fit of anger or manslaughter is another matter. I think his argument is plausible even though his actions weren't very logical.

If I was on the jury (well, if South Africa had a jury system) and I had to give a verdict right now, it'd be not guilty. I've got a reasonable doubt about the prosecutions version of events due to the strong defence that has been raised. There has been nothing to suggest a relationship breakdown; it is plausible that Oscar was afraid of burglars; when your fear starts acting up you don't really have time to think, so I believe a "shoot first, ask questions later" approach would be a common reaction.

In all honesty, the prosecution should drop the premeditated charge and go for something like manslaughter (or it's counterpart in SA), at least that way it'll be a question of law, rather than facts & law.

Technically it does count as pre meditated. If he had the gun on him,heard a noise and just shot without thinking. Fair enough, but he heard the noise, called out, then went to his bed, then got his gun and shot the door, which kinda counts as pre meditated as he had time to think and plan. Did he plan to kill his girlfriend? I don't know, but he did plan to kill whoever was behind the door.


Posted from TSR Mobile

If I was on the jury (well, if South Africa had a jury system) and I had to give a verdict right now, it'd be not guilty. I've got a reasonable doubt about the prosecutions version of events due to the strong defence that has been raised. There has been nothing to suggest a relationship breakdown; it is plausible that Oscar was afraid of burglars; when your fear starts acting up you don't really have time to think, so I believe a "shoot first, ask questions later" approach would be a common reaction.

In all honesty, the prosecution should drop the premeditated charge and go for something like manslaughter (or it's counterpart in SA), at least that way it'll be a question of law, rather than facts & law.

We don't know all the facts, so we've got literally no idea. Also I personally don't know any SA law, it could be quite different to English law and it may be quite different; so there should have been a no idea option!

I'd say premeditation requires a substantial degree of planning, rather than just grabbing a gun and shooting. If premeditation is the same as intention, then why bother saying it's premeditated murder if murder requires the intention to kill?

I was following the BBC reporter's twitter feed today. By the sounds of it, the defence did well today and the prosecution's argument was weakened quite significantly. Evidence from the post mortem was that her bladder was empty, consistent with her going to the toilet, so it's unlikely that she locked herself in there as a result of an argument. And from what reporters have said, his story was very convincing. Of course, he could just be a good liar, but from what I've heard so far, it sounds like the murder wasn't premeditated, even if it wasn't a complete mistake either.

If he knew his girlfriend was in the house somewhere, why was he just shooting everything in sight? surely he would of considered that it may of been her behind the door before shooting the door down. That's what i don't get...i'm on andrew harding's twitter and reading the posts, it's quite good.

If he knew his girlfriend was in the house somewhere, why was he just shooting everything in sight? surely he would of considered that it may of been her behind the door before shooting the door down. That's what i don't get...i'm on andrew harding's twitter and reading the posts, it's quite good.

I'd say premeditation requires a substantial degree of planning, rather than just grabbing a gun and shooting. If premeditation is the same as intention, then why bother saying it's premeditated murder if murder requires the intention to kill?