Blade Runner becomes Blade Gunner **Mod Warning Read OP""

robinph

opinion guy wrote: »

Thats is still chicken feed for him though isn't it ?

Well he has 2million Rand mortgage on the house so he's not got that much cash lying about.

The Road Runner

surprise surprise they said he has to surrender his guns as part of the bail

nocoverart

Oh what a devastating story this has been from the get go, yet all I can take from all of this is... How the hell can a guy with no legs pull better looking chicks than I ever could? so unfair!

Mental Mickey

The Road Runner wrote: »

surprise surprise they said he has to surrender his guns as part of the bail

Maybe his prostethics too???













































































































































































































































just kidding

Rascasse

He needs to pay R100k in cash to get released, and the banks are shut. I bet he's hoping his Dad has some cash under the mattress.

wonderfullife

opinion guy wrote: »

Don't tell me what I know.

I want to know more details about it. I largely missed that section from the court proceedings - I hadn't discovered the live tweets from the court reporters at that point. I want to know what the stories and counter-stories on this were. Unlike you I'm not going to jsut assume. I want evidence, or at leat to know where the evidence is missing

What turnaround ? I said slightly shifted towards - I did not say I changed my mind. I believe in following the evidence - this hasn't changed. It may be hard for you to understand but following the evidence allows you to change your mind - having a predetermined opinion like you do does not allow you to change your mind

What we know from court is there is a large time window agreed by the prosecution and defence on when the shooting happened. This time window is 2am - 3am. If we are assume 3am, then it took 20 minutes for him to call an ambulance. However it is within the bounds of possibility (as agreed by both legal teams) that the shooting took place far earlier than 3am. In which case it took anything from 20 mins to 80 mins to call for help. Add to that the 1st call he placed was not for an ambulance or medical help but to the Complex Manager.

The investigative team seized 4 phones with no calls being placed on any of them. A 5th phone is claimed to have called the NetCare hospital at 320am. Now, a very simple check would be all calls made from that number and times of calls. It is known he placed calls to either/and his brother, father and lawyer. Whether to all 3 individually or to just one, is unknown. But the timeline of those calls is quite vital. If he called any of the above before 3am, say for example 245am it would narrow down the time of the shooting. And also raise questions as to why he waited so long for help.

Seachmall wrote: »

She may not of died immediately but she may have lost consciousness and he presumed her to be dead. I know the logical thing, regardless, is to call an ambulance but given the circumstances I wouldn't be surprised if he spent time crying and/or holding her.

I'd be interested to learn how long it took him to break the lock on the door with a cricket bat, especially without legs (force builds from the legs in everything from golf to boxing and you need a strong footing to develop it effectively).

But of course, it's impossible to suppose how we would react (because none of us know) and judge him by that (because we're not him).

Even if we take the latter end of the agreed time spectrum of 3am, he called paramedics at 320am (20 minutes later). There was blood splatters on walls indicating her heart was pumping as he carried her downstairs.

By all agreeable versions heard in court, it is to be assumed she was alive for at least 35 minutes post-shooting. If the 2am-3am window is narrowed by phone records, then it is possible she was alive for anything up to 90 minutes after the shooting.

viper006 wrote: »

Ya what a tool. i didnt find it pleasant hearing the shouts of joy from his family either. The guy has taken the life of a woman be it accidentially or on purpose and has ruined many lives either way. I guess the judge built it up so much it was an outburst of emotion

On this point, it's just human nature. If it was our brother or son in that courtroom facing a SA prison and we believe him innocent, we would let out a cheer at bail. It's almost involuntary. Yes, it's not very respectful to the Steenkamps but it's just human nature.

fishy fishy

SmokeyEyes wrote: »

I hope for the poor girl and her families sake that it was an accident which although devastating, is easier to take than knowing she was murdered.

My gut feeling is that something is off though, if he got the gun from under the bed on her side how did he not notice she wasn't there and would he not have whispered or shook her awake to warn her before he opened fire.

And if it was pitch black how was he able to fire so accurately? Or would he not have shouted a warning to the intruder first? Just thinking out loud...

agree - something is definitely amiss. So is the charge still pre-meditated murder then.

also I hope they keep their whoops of joy to themselves. they need to respect the fact that although this guy is allowed home, there is someone that will never get to go home again. bad taste.

Mental Mickey

fishy fishy wrote: »

agree - something is definitely amiss. So is the charge still pre-meditated murder then.

also I hope they keep their whoops of joy to themselves. they need to respect the fact that although this guy is allowed home, there is someone that will never get to go home again. bad taste.

Cameras

fishy fishy

The Road Runner wrote: »

surprise surprise they said he has to surrender his guns as part of the bail

so what happens if he hears a noise in his house now? poor thing. :rolleyes:

fishy fishy

anagram for oscar pistorius

"suitor is so crap"

Rascasse

Also banned from taking drugs and drinking alcohol and he'll be subject to random tests. A bit odd.

robinph

Sounds as if he may be stuck in the police cells for the rest of the weekend because the court clerk has left and so they can't hand over his passports to them.

opinion guy

robinph wrote: »

Sounds as if he may be stuck in the police cells for the rest of the weekend because the court clerk has left and so they can't hand over his passports to them.

so much for the special treatment idea then !

opinion guy

robinph wrote: »

Sounds as if he may be stuck in the police cells for the rest of the weekend because the court clerk has left and so they can't hand over his passports to them.

The court clerk probably retired at some point during the judgement. There was probably a party and everything :pac:

robinph

opinion guy wrote: »

The court clerk probably retired at some point during the judgement. There was probably a party and everything :pac:

Or they just fell asleep in a corner from boredom.

Wossack

Unless the rte have some ropey maths (wouldnt rule it out..) :: 1m rand = 850k euro

The judge set the bail amount at one million rand (€852,000) in cash and guarantees.

/edit which seems to contradict google currency converter alright (has it at 85k)

robinph

Wossack wrote: »

Unless the rte have some ropey maths (wouldnt rule it out..) :: 1m rand = 850k euro

Think they have the decimal point in the wrong place as BBC translate it to £73k

http://www.xe.com/ucc/convert/?Amount=1000000&From=ZAR&To=EUR

Wossack

Yea xe.com have it at 85k euro also.. hmm thanks rte

opinion guy

robinph wrote: »

Or they just fell asleep in a corner from boredom.

Or they just died in the corner from old age :pac:

kraggy

It's roughly 10 or 11 rand to the euro.

Seachmall

wonderfullife wrote: »

There was blood splatters on walls indicating her heart was pumping as he carried her downstairs.

I don't think whether or not her heart was beating would have much of an impact on the splatter on the walls.


There are reports that she was alive as he carried her down though, was there anything in the bail hearing on this?

Wossack

Seachmall wrote: »

I don't think whether or not her heart was beating would have much of an impact on the splatter on the walls.


There are reports that she was alive as he carried her down though, was there anything in the bail hearing on this?

I do remember it being mentioned as a demonstration of him wanting to save her life alight - pretty sure it was reported from the bail hearing

robinph

Seachmall wrote: »

There are reports that she was alive as he carried her down though, was there anything in the bail hearing on this?

Nobody queried Pistouris version of events at that point as far as I remember.

Wossack

Wossack wrote: »

I do remember it being mentioned as a demonstration of him wanting to save her life alight - pretty sure it was reported from the bail hearing

yea, heres quote:

The defence counsel said the fact that Mr Pistorius had carried Ms Steenkamp downstairs showed he was desperate to save her life.

link

Gosub

Wossack wrote: »

yea, heres quote:


link

Wouldn't he have been better off leaving her where she was and attempt to staunch the bloodflow? Isn't that accepted first aid practice?

fullstop

opinion guy wrote: »

Or they just died in the corner from old age :pac:

Maybe Oscar shot him :pac:

PAULWATSON

My take;

Oscar found out Hougie was tapping her and lost the head.

robinph

Gosub wrote: »

Wouldn't he have been better off leaving her where she was and attempt to staunch the bloodflow? Isn't that accepted first aid practice?

He was instructed to take her to the hospital himself, by either the paramedics/ ambulance call centre people or the complex security can't remember which.

robinph

https://twitter.com/barrybateman/status/304980387027886080

BarryBateman wrote:

#OscarPistorius is a free man - he's been seen leaving court in a Land Rover. BB

Tipsy McSwagger

His story is a load of bollocks but as P T Barnum said there's a sucker born every minute, so a lot of people will believe his story.

davet82

i know pictures can be decieving but the bed appears to be very low down, almost waist height if you were on your knees, i know it proves nothing but it seems to be his line of sight to see if his GF was in bed would quite clear. I'd love to see pictures of the lighting in the room at night also.

picture below*

No matter how much doubt has been brought up, I keep coming back to how the hell do you not notice your GF isn't in bed when you think you are being robbed!

Even if it this was one big horrible mistake, I feel the guy deserves the max sentence for manslaughter for being so reckless with a gun!

no surprises he got bail, i'm looking forward to the trail

robinph

What is that a picture of? He has no feet so what is with the running shoes lying lose on the floor?

davet82

robinph wrote: »

What is that a picture of? He has no feet so what is with the running shoes lying lose on the floor?

his bedside locker.

dont know what the story is with the shoes

Gosub

robinph wrote: »

He was instructed to take her to the hospital himself, by either the paramedics/ ambulance call centre people or the complex security can't remember which.

I'm not up on the state of SA medical services. I know this was a private health thing, but I would be very surprised if he was told by any medical people to move her anywhere, bearing in mind she was seriously injured.

If it was the security people who told him to move her, why wasn't it the medical call centre? Is this because it was before 03:19 and he hadn't called them yet? Don't forget that this time is anything from 20 minutes to an hour and a half after the shooting.

I guess this is just one of those dodgy things that will have to be aired at trial.

robinph

Gosub wrote: »

I'm not up on the state of SA medical services. I know this was a private health thing, but I would be very surprised if he was told by any medical people to move her anywhere, bearing in mind she was seriously injured.

If it was the security people who told him to move her, why wasn't it the medical call centre? Is this because it was before 03:19 and he hadn't called them yet? Don't forget that this time is anything from 20 minutes to an hour and a half after the shooting.

I guess this is just one of those dodgy things that will have to be aired at trial.

Here you go:
http://edition.cnn.com/2013/02/19/world/africa/south-africa-pistorius-affadavit/index.html

I battled to get her out of the toilet and pulled her into the bathroom. I phoned Johan Stander ("Stander") who was involved in the administration of the estate and asked him to phone the ambulance. I phoned Netcare and asked for help. I went downstairs to open the front door.
I returned to the bathroom and picked Reeva up as I had been told not to wait for the paramedics, but to take her to hospital. I carried her downstairs in order to take her to the hospital. On my way down Stander arrived. A doctor who lives in the complex also arrived. Downstairs, I tried to render the assistance to Reeva that I could, but she died in my arms.

Not clear from that who told him to do what, could have been Netcare or the complex manager.

Gosub

robinph wrote: »

Here you go:
http://edition.cnn.com/2013/02/19/world/africa/south-africa-pistorius-affadavit/index.html

Not clear from that who told him to do what, could have been Netcare or the complex manager.

Thanks for the link. But that's just his word. I find it hard to take it as gospel.

robinph

Gosub wrote: »

Thanks for the link. But that's just his word. I find it hard to take it as gospel.

Well that's all you've got as the police couldn't be bothered to check the phone records. Not like that is something he could make up though as there will be records of phone calls being made, and probably the Netcare calls recorded as a matter of course.

Very simple to disprove his statement at that point, but nobody has questioned it.

Rascasse

robinph wrote: »

What is that a picture of? He has no feet so what is with the running shoes lying lose on the floor?

It's a crop from a bigger picture from a magazine interview. Just because he has no feet doesn't mean he doesn't need shoes, trainers etc.

robinph wrote: »

Not clear from that who told him to do what, could have been Netcare or the complex manager.

Looking at Google Maps, its 12 minutes to the local emergency department (maybe 5mins if you floor it). I wouldn't be surprised if Netcare (private health insurance that has its own ambulances) told them to go themselves if their ETA was longer

robinph

Rascasse wrote: »

It's a crop from a bigger picture from a magazine interview. Just because he has no feet doesn't mean he doesn't need shoes, trainers etc.

I'd just expect his shoes to be left attached to the feet of his legs though. No point in him messing around putting on his legs, and then a pair of socks and then his shoes everyday. Just leave it pre-assembled and ready to go for the next morning.

Of course if it's for the likes of a Hello! photo shoot they'd not want to be showing unpleasant things like people with no feet in their pages.

opinion guy

Gosub wrote: »

Thanks for the link. But that's just his word. I find it hard to take it as gospel.

Easy to check that stuff however. Will come out in the trial I expect

Rascasse wrote: »

It's a crop from a bigger picture from a magazine interview. Just because he has no feet doesn't mean he doesn't need shoes, trainers etc.

Eh....a magazine interview....so its an old picture then - possibly of somewhere else.

davet82

opinion guy wrote: »

Eh....a magazine interview....so its an old picture then - possibly of somewhere else.

2 year old picture, same house/bedroom/locker & bed

Seachmall

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

P T Barnum said there's a sucker born every minute

P.T. Barnum never said that.

TwoBirds

robinph wrote: »

I'd just expect his shoes to be left attached to the feet of his legs though. No point in him messing around putting on his legs, and then a pair of socks and then his shoes everyday. Just leave it pre-assembled and ready to go for the next morning.

Of course if it's for the likes of a Hello! photo shoot they'd not want to be showing unpleasant things like people with no feet in their pages.

He's said in interviews that he has a pretty vast collection of shoes. It wouldn't make sense to have dozens of pairs of prosthetic legs with different shoes for various occasions - runners for every day, dress shoes (like he's been wearing in court), etc.

EDIT: Sorry, misread your post a bit. But no, think he reattaches shoes every/most mornings. I'm sure he changes shoes from day to day.

mbur

Seachmall wrote: »

P.T. Barnum never said that.

And this tale is getting more P.T. Barnum at every turn. Never mind the police man taken off the case because he is murder suspect, now we have have 'evidence' from the defense to the effect that yer man would never get thru airport security because:

'it would be impossible for Mr Pistorius to flee because his prosthetic legs would be noticed wherever he went.'

They must be desperate. Last time I checked S.A had plenty of land borders yer man Mr Pistorius could simply drive thru, and have they never heard of private aircraft.

If the above is an example of the quality of testimony that will get Oscar off the hook then I see little hope of Reeva's family getting some justice here.

robinph

TwoBirds wrote: »

He's said in interviews that he has a pretty vast collection of shoes. It wouldn't make sense to have dozens of pairs of prosthetic legs with different shoes for various occasions - runners for every day, dress shoes (like he's been wearing in court), etc.

EDIT: Sorry, misread your post a bit. But no, think he reattaches shoes every/most mornings. I'm sure he changes shoes from day to day.

Yeah, was more a comment on how posed the photo was, but as it's from a magazine shoot it all makes sense. I doubt he throws his shoes off in the same way as the rest of us might.

pH

So in the middle of the night she gets up, goes to the bathroom - locks the door for some sort of valentine "surprise" ... he wakes up - doesn't notice she's not in the bed with him, hears her making enough racket in the bathroom for him to locate and shoot her through a door (what exactly was she doing in there!) - but not enough/specific enough noise to realize it was her and with no communication he just shoots?

And there are people out there buying this?

And now we have an OJ-esque legal team throwing manure at everything including the detectives - are we going to have a "gotcha" moment where he tries on an artificial leg that doesn't fit?

mbur

pH wrote: »

So in the middle of the night she gets up, goes to the bathroom - locks the door for some sort of valentine "surprise" ... he wakes up - doesn't notice she's not in the bed with him, hears her making enough racket in the bathroom for him to locate and shoot her through a door (what exactly was she doing in there!) - but not enough/specific enough noise to realize it was her and with no communication he just shoots?

And there are people out there buying this?

And now we have an OJ-esque legal team throwing manure at everything including the detectives - are we going to have a "gotcha" moment where he tries on an artificial leg that doesn't fit?

Could be. Was the door even locked? That might just be an excuse to smash up the door and destroy some evidence. How badly was the door damaged? Was it still on its hinges? All important clues perhaps.

I can't say I'm too impressed with the 'detective' myself. He couldn't even manage a ballistics report on the door to back up his 'legs on' theory. He didn't seem to know much about the 'ear' witnesses. His day in court was not a good days work at all.

wonderfullife

pH wrote: »

So in the middle of the night she gets up, goes to the bathroom - locks the door for some sort of valentine "surprise" ... he wakes up - doesn't notice she's not in the bed with him, hears her making enough racket in the bathroom for him to locate and shoot her through a door (what exactly was she doing in there!) - but not enough/specific enough noise to realize it was her and with no communication he just shoots?

And there are people out there buying this?

And now we have an OJ-esque legal team throwing manure at everything including the detectives - are we going to have a "gotcha" moment where he tries on an artificial leg that doesn't fit?

What you have here 2 distinct camps - Those who see his story as implausible bullsh1t and believe he's guilty as sin AND Those who believe his story stands up enough to create reasonable doubt, thereby he should be found innocent of the charge of premeditated murder.

Everyone knows he shot her. Everyone probably agrees he's an absolute tool for the actions he took that night. I'm sure most people believe he deserves to see the inside of a prison for his actions.

But you're right this has OJ written all over it and the sinking feeling here is that he will be cleared and walk free, get mullered in a civil court for millions like OJ did but "get away with murder".

Remember, even the defence want the charge of Culpable Homicide but they gave no indication he would plead guilty to culpable homicide. I.e. they want a far lesser charge but their intent will be to fight all charges and get their man off scot free. His story is so conveniently crafted to the point even if they charge him with culpable homicide he can argue self defence, as he has a right to use force against an intruder.

It's an absolute p1ss-take, his whole story is riddled with holes, improbability, implausibility and stupidity. But at the end of the day all this will wind up ultimately as another example of a rich celebrity using money to get legal dream teams to get him off. Justice is not equal, enough money and influence and you can circumvent and pervert justice quite easily.

Seachmall

pH wrote: »

And now we have an OJ-esque legal team throwing manure at everything including the detectives

The legal team didn't throw any manure at the detectives.

The lead investigator drunkenly shot at a taxi carrying seven people while on duty. The charges were brought against him before this case ever started.

wonderfullife

Seachmall wrote: »

The legal team didn't throw any manure at the detectives.

The lead investigator drunkenly shot at a taxi carrying seven people while on duty. The charges were brought against him before this case ever started.

They were brought and dropped by the DPP in 2012 yet mysteriously re-surface days into the bail hearing and conveniently help discredit a key witness for the state.

If you are naive enough to presume it was a coincidence that the charges resurfaced, then that's fair enough.

Sometimes when you add 2 + 2 it does = 4.