Do you think Oscar Pistorius is guilty of premeditated murder?

Scroll to see replies

It's some womens, myself included, worst nightmare to have their bf walk in on them whilst they are on the toilet. I think a lot of girls would lock the door, they hadn't been together that long.

I agree with this, I'm surprised by how many people wouldn't be bothered by this. I would hate it and it would make me feel so self conscious.

Reply 101

Seaton

Original post by redferry

Thankyou!!!! So many people are like who the hell locks the door, I just wee in front of everyone! I could never do that!

I'm under the impression we have different interpretations of what it means to have a locked door, an unlocked door and a wide open door :K:

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 102

redferry

I think personally he is ****ed if he put his legs on - that takes time and even if he did think it was an intruder he obviously intended to shoot them. With a weapon like that you know there's a good chance you will kill them.

Reply 103

zaliack

Just wanted to point out that it wasn't an unlicensed gun he used (his one is fully licensed), what the police found was an unlicensed bullet (A .38 iirc, whereas he is only licensed for .9mm).

Original post by AchingGrapes

There seem to be more and more flaws in his story - at first I was too surprised to believe he had murdered Reeva but now I am beginning to turn. I'm very disappointed after following him all through the Olympics! :frown:

Hate to break it to you, but he did murder her. The question which will be in front of the court is whether or not he had a valid defence (Most likely self-defence, but I'm not an expert on South African law)

Original post by Seaton

I'm under the impression we have different interpretations of what it means to have a locked door, an unlocked door and a wide open door :K:

Why would you ever want someone walking in on you unexpectedly?

Reply 106

Seaton

Original post by redferry

Why would you ever want someone walking in on you unexpectedly?

You wouldn't. :redface:

Reply 107

the bear

How the hell are we supposed to decide ?

Reply 108

mrjackherer

Sorry to be boring, but it's impossible to say from the information we have, and it's credibility/truth.

Reply 109

redferry

Original post by Seaton

You wouldn't. :redface:

so lock the door!!
I can't wee if I think someone might come in =/

Reply 110

kaamie

reeva was hawt! tis a shame really

Reply 111

Seaton

Original post by redferry

so lock the door!!
I can't wee if I think someone might come in =/

Does no-one knock any more?!? :confused:

Reply 112

RedBug

The intruder story is a very poor excuse. It's obvious to any sane person that he had an argument with his wife, threatend her, then she ran into the bathroom for protection so he shot her through the door.
The neighbours even aknowledged to hearing screaming and shouting before the incident.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 113

Seaton

Original post by kaamie

reeva was hawt! tis a shame really

Indeed it is a shame, it is a pity though that some only seem to think so because she was a model.

The pictures some of the tabloids have been using for her. :angry:

Reply 114

catoswyn

Original post by Mourinho<3

Surely he would have heard a toilet flush or known she was there or whatever in that case?

He says he was on the balcony and then there is a passage between the bedroom and the bathroom so maybe not. Also the new evidence today confirms that her bladder was empty, which would not have been the case at 3am if she had not gone to the toilet.

The evidence today does undermine the police case somewhat ie. there were no steroids in the house, the neighbour who heard an argument was half a mile away etc. I wait to see.

Reply 115

catoswyn

Original post by RedBug

Ah, but new evidence in court today says the neighbour was half a mile away and could not confirm it was Oscar and Reeva she heard or that the noise came from their house.

In addition new medical evidence confirms Reeva's bladder was empty which at 3am would only have occurred if she had been to the toilet as Oscar suggested.

Finally the rumours in the papers seem to be unravelling. For example there were no steroids or testerone meds in the house and he did call for an ambulance on his mobile phone. Neither was her skull fractured by the cricket bat as first suggested and the police confirmed she had no bruises or any signs of a struggle or fight taking place.

Of course he could still be guilty and certainly firing into a locked toilet is bound to kill the person inside. However as the police admitted today there is no evidence that contradicts his story either so I am not sure that he did intend to kill Reeva. He certainly was trigger happy though and stupid at the very least!!! The poor woman is still dead whether he meant to kill her or not.

:smile:

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 116

redferry

Original post by Seaton

Does no-one knock any more?!? :confused:

Everyone in mine/my bfs house expects it to be locked if someone is in there!

Reply 117

Systemic

Original post by firebolt

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.

it depends on the person's character, that is your reasoning but an overly-confident person that thinks they are clever enough to get way with murder...can probably execute this crime- why involve other people when you are more likely to get caught i.e in the Dewani case. Calling the ambulance is just a premeditated cover up

Personally, i find it hard to believe the cinematic burglar story. If he did wear his prosthetic limbs and if the only route to the bathroom is through the bedroom then in my opinion he should go down for murder, which is such a shame because I slightyly pitty the man ( if he felt the need to kill his girlfriend - something wrong there) and admire the athlete.

Reply 118

bennies4life

Hate the ****ing soap opera surrounding this affair.

Reply 119

username1042689

-The police have been incompetent with this case. They didn't check all the phones, or recover all the bullets, for instance, and the police have been spreading media lies. This 'testosterone' was a legal herbal remedy. And on the accounts that the police were called to several domestic abuse incidents - that was one charge, not involving Reeva; there was no evidence to support charging Pistorius; and he's now suing the woman for malicious defamation.

-If he was shooting her, premeditated, as the result of an argument, why oh why would he shoot her through a locked door? More shots, more screaming, more chance he'd miss and she'd somehow be able to get out and fight him.

-The witness who said they heard screaming beforehand lives 600m away.

-She had an empty bladder, consistent with going to the toilet at that time.

-It was 3am, in South Africa (where you have every right to be paranoid of burglars), and the guy has no legs. It's perfectly plausible that he wouldn't have been thinking entirely clearly. It's also plausible that he thought there was an intruder; Reeva heard him, thought there was a burglar and hid, so didn't respond to her name being called because she thought that would give away her location; and then was shot.

-Policeman has admitted to being biased against Pistorius.

-If the argument was that fierce, why would Pistorius go to bed, then shoot her when she went to the toilet? Seems fishy to me.

I don't know if he's guilty. But his story is holding up. And the police have been unbelievably unprofessional and bungling in this case so far.