General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsPistorius: "I shot her by mistake." Excuse me, four shots through a bathroom door is not a mistake
but murder. I have this dog awful feeling he's going to get a slap on the wrist for this because of his popularity, his amputations as a child and his "stardom"... Some of the defense I'm reading about this actually sickens me. I hope I'm wrong but as we all know, justice is different for the rich, the white and the very popular. They also found steroids in his house and "roid rage" has been mentioned. His father appears to be delusional on his guilt (understandably, I guess) but one wonders how this is going to play out in the end. At the very least he should spend life in jail..
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)He could have theoretically had a small chance if his GF was just a "regular" person, but she was a celebrity and a public figure as well...Her family will want blood for this....
monmouth3
(3,871 posts)redqueen
(115,103 posts)Nothing about the details. Which if what I've heard is correct include:
- he first shot her in the hip, in their bedroom
- his first call was to a lawyer
- after he shot her in the hip, she locked herself in the bathroom, after which strapped on his legs, followed her, and shot her through the door in the hand and face
This was no accident. He is a murderer.
Are_grits_groceries
(17,111 posts)many sympathizers around he world.
He is a very real threat to flee.
cali
(114,904 posts)but evidently the court is having none of it.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)All I saw of the case this morning was the defense's pleas, apparently.
I hope you're right and the court refuses bail.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,320 posts)What we have is:
The prosecution gave a different version of events. Prosecutor Gerrie Nel said there was an argument before the shooting, and laterPistorius got up from bed, put on his prosthetic legs, armed himself, walked seven metres to the toilet door and shot Steenkamp four times; three of the shots killed her. Even if he thought she was a burglar, it was still premeditated murder, Nel said. But he asked why a burglar would lock himself in the toilet.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2013/feb/19/oscar-pistorius-bail-hearing-live-coverage#block-51237c07b5796129ac9ed116
redqueen
(115,103 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)fled to the bathroom and then was shot 3 more times through the door.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,320 posts)Who are the "they" saying it? The important person to listen to is a prosecutor in court. If there was evidence of shooting in the bedroom, don't you think the prosecutor would have mentioned it, seeing as it would destroy the claim that he thought she was still in the bed, and it was someone else in the toilet?
Xipe Totec
(43,890 posts)Through the door means he did not see the target; he was guessing.
I'll wait for the jury's verdict.
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)Xipe Totec
(43,890 posts)I had imagined him inside the bathroom and her outside, struggling to open the door. Fear panic, confusion...
Now I find that she was inside the bathroom with the door locked and he stood outside and fired in...
That's a whole different kettle of fish.
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/olympics--lawyers-square-off-in-oscar-pistorius--bail-hearing-095441840.html
And there will be no jury; trial by jury was abolished in South Africa in 1969.
Response to monmouth3 (Original post)
G_j This message was self-deleted by its author.
monmouth3
(3,871 posts)a mental giant to conclude trouble.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)The whole violence against women / men murdering their female partners or exes thing.
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)redqueen
(115,103 posts)Seems to me that speculations about guilt is usually not controversial.
monmouth3
(3,871 posts)not will have no affect whatsoever.
Response to monmouth3 (Reply #10)
G_j This message was self-deleted by its author.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)G_j
(40,367 posts)just deciding guilt or innocence from afar.
As I said, that's my own thing. I don't expect or want anyone to censor themselves.
human nature to try and make sense out of something so senseless.
Speculation is going to happen, whether it's just in someone's mind, or out in the open on a discussion board.
And that's all this is. A discussion board. Not a jury. People are free to speculate and discuss, even if it means they think someone is guilty.
madinmaryland
(64,933 posts)Helen Reddy
(998 posts)his major sponsors haven't pulled the plug.
Let's see now, Martina Navratilova lost ALL of her major endorsements. Her crime? being a lesbian.
cali
(114,904 posts)That was posted 21 hours ago.
cali
(114,904 posts)Nike and Oakley have both issued statements. Hmmm. Who to believe?
News of the athletes lost endorsements came just hours after his agent told media that the companies would stand by Pistorius as details of the still-mysterious shooting continue to emerge.
This from NBC news.
Bottom line, he has lost his major endorsements.
hlthe2b
(102,282 posts)denial of bail. Everything I have seen to date, suggests he is not about to "skate" if the facts are as it appears. In the US, the rich and celebrities frequently buy their freedom. I think we need to remember that not ALL countries are so worshipful, at the expense of justice.
HappyMe
(20,277 posts)get away with this. I'm sure they realize he is a flight risk, so I don't think he will make bail.
SA has a judge and 2 magistrates presiding over trials. That eliminates the popularity contest from the trial.
elfin
(6,262 posts)Turn in all his medals ala Lance. Thought he could get away with it due to fame. Now, not gonna happen.
Dpm12
(512 posts)serve the rich. Remember the OJ Simpson trial. The fucker got away because he had a good lawyer, and frankly, was one of the biggest stars in the world
catbyte
(34,393 posts)That could make a difference. The prosecutors were pretty adamant that even if he thought he was shooting an "intruder", he still had no business shooting somebody trapped in a bathroom. Not credible. He's a much better athlete than a storyteller.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,320 posts)A judge sitting alongside two assessors typically magistrates or retired magistrates.
Why no jury?
South Africa abolished the jury system in the 1930s because of racial politics. Only white people were allowed to sit on juries and there was no hope of black defendants being given a fair trial. There was debate about reviving juries after the transition to democracy in 1994 but, given South Africa's 11 official languages, it would have been prohibitively expensive to hire interpreters.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/feb/18/oscar-pistorius-legal-q-and-a