Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
 

...... and at this point proving that beyond reasonable doubt is not happening.

I wonder what Nel has up his sleeve.

Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
 

My guess........an arm?

Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
 

Well, nothing concrete except the fact that OP doesn't dispute he shot her 4 times.
When did I say beyond a reasonable doubt? What I said was that the prosecution has to show the judge that Pistorius shot with the intention to do harm.

I personally think Nel is doing a fine job of showing the holes in OP's story.

Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
 

All four of them.

Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
 

Boom boom boom boom

Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
 

When was that debated? I think everyone agrees, include Oscar, he shot her 4 times.

Never to the best of my knowledge. Why are you asking me that question?

Correct and at present I cannot see at any point, the prosecutor has done that. If there was a jury, and if I was on it, and if I was doing my job objectively and properly, at no point could I put my hand on my heart, with the evidence that's been presented and say, I am truly convinced, beyond reasonable doubt that OP intentionally killed his girlfriend.

You have to remember, OP goes into that court as an innocent man. His story is the only story. Its the job of the prosecutor to prove otherwise. The prosecutor has not done that to date. You can only work with what you've got. Not "maybes" and speculation.

He might be, but the only way he has managed to crack OP is with his emotions.

Today is another day. Nel might be able to crack him and bring a complete admission of guilt.

Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
 

I agree. There is no dispute he shot her, and the process he took after the shooting showed he wanted to make sure the people called after his "incident" were there before the rest of the authorities arrived. Strange pattern of behaviour for a man in shock. One thing I do not understand, is that Oscar claims he did not hear a scream and yet neighbours did that prompted security to call his home to find out if everything was alright. He claimed there was no problem. I want to know how he simply could not hear that the person behind the door was a woman based on her screams. Doesn't anyone find it strange that she had told him in an earlier text message she was scared of him at times. You don't fear a person unless they show behaviours that have a potential to do harm. Her instincts then were spot on, pity she did not heed them in time.

I understand the security issues in Joburg, but I also know he was living in a well secured development. If he was so fearful why on earth would he step out on his balcony in the middle of the night. He would be completely exposed to an attack out there, and a golden opportunity for someone to get in. He obviously felt secure enough to open the door to go out to the balcony, and that is something you do not do in Joburg without good security.

According to testimony from different sources, one heard shouting and then screams with gunfire. Others heard screams and gunfire. Forensics finds that not only was the bathroom window shut, but the trajectory of the bullet indicates the Oscar shot into the door at an upward motion which hit her in the hip. It is suggested that she must have been standing on the toilet when the first bullet hit her in the hip which is a strange behaviour for someone just wanting to go to the bathroom. I do wonder if she was looking to see if she could get out of the home through the bathroom window because she was so scared. He surely must have heard her fall and kept on firing. It is simply incredible that someone has bullets flying at them and would make no sound. I think Oscar is being shown to be a trigger happy violent man and he needs to go away for life.

Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
 

I think you mean Pretoria...;)

Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
 

he's a cutie, but i'm sorrie i think he is guiltie.

http://wallpaperzoo.com/wp-content/u...wallpapers.jpg

Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
 

Oops! :p Joeys and Pretoria are equally as bad. The place is so big any more that it has become one moerse dorpie.

Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
 

You are aware South Africa doesn't have a jury system, RIGHT?

Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
 

Correct but money can buy you lots of chances in the new and improved South Africa.

Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
 

Sure, but the person's 'celebrity' will have no bearing on the verdict like (arguably) the one did in the OJ Simpson case.

Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
 

You are arguing about a sound legal system which is toast in the new and improved South Africa. Only thing against Pistorius is his celebrity as the judge is fully aware the world is watching. They can't screw this up any more than the investigative team contaminating the murder site already have. But just to add to poor Oscar's state of mind dealing with the horrible and tragic loss of his girlfriend, he does manage to find himself another squeeze to comfort him. http://southafricanews34.wordpress.c...ent-paramedic/ :demon:

This girl must be nuts for even going there with this guy, but maybe this is her way to fame and fortune if they put him in the slammer. He won't be allowed to profit from the saga but she can milk it for all it is worth if she chooses. Who says bad publicity is bad anyway?

Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
 

Firstly, agree with your comment re SA police. My experience of Saffer cops is they are incredibly corrupt and most should be in prison (most make the MPS look competent and not racist!).

Second, I still stand by my comment that Oscar's 'celebrity' will have no bearing on the Judge's decision in this case. He's a professional, not a lay person who is easily influenced by such an issue.

Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
 

Well, here's hoping but I will not hold my breath.

Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
 

Sorry, maybe I have missed something? You believe Oscar is not guilty?

Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
 

I am impressed with the prosecutor though and hope he scores on this one as he did with Selebi. Selebi did some damage to one of my family members in SA, and it was a good day when that ***** got caught. Really, at the end of the day, I hope there is justice for Reeva. Her family deserves that much.

Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
 

I think he is GUILTY! That however does not mean much in a lawless society.

Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
 

South Africa is lawless, you will find no argument from me there. I think you under estimate the prosecution and judge in this trial though.

Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
 

I know all about Gerrie Nel and his days with the Scorpions. I mentioned earlier that it was his expertise that was instrumental in getting Selebi in spite of all the SA government had thrown at him to try quash Selebi's activities. Long story short (with very minimal details) a family member owned and operated an armed security company that was hired to protect Selebi and some of his comrades. When they knew what was going on, they wanted out of the contract and the government would not let them off. It is because of this gentleman they were finally able to walk away - alive. This case is a walk in the park by comparison. I wait to see how the judge deals with this. Gerrie does have a problem with the contaminated crime site but I repeat, this case is light weight by comparison to what he had to deal with. Shall be interesting to read the transcripts after the judge's ruling to see if the law was enforced correctly.

Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
 

That's why Gerrie is focusing more on Pistorius's story than on the crime scene - and he did an excellent job of that yesterday.

More about Gerry and the Scorpions here.

Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
 

So Nel has worked it from accidental to negligent. This guy is good.

Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
 

Nel has helped Pistorius to ensnare himself with his own lies. There were moments yesterday where Pistorius clearly couldn't remember what story he'd spun.

Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
 

I got the feeling Pistorious was trying to second guess everything Nel was throwing at him and ended up getting himself confused. The detail of the incidents didnt change that much, but enough for Nel to accuse him of lying. Half the time I couldn't understand Nels questions. They weren't phrased very well, but then again that's his job .... Confuse the accused.

Riveting TV this.

Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
 

:lol: It beats the ABC hands down (or straight in front of you).

Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
 

I thought he was a she: Judge Thokozile Masipa.

Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
 

And he's a she!

Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
 

I can't tell by the name, but the judge looks very much like a lady.

Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
 

Did anyone read that book where the murderer shoved his wife off a fire watch forest platform then acted so cut up, vomiting and crying that he got away with it

I'm having flashbacks to that book watching Pistorius,
do you think he reads the same books :rofl:

Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
 

Dude looks like a lady.

Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
 

No I didn't. Any detail, or just your opinion?

Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
 

You can only wail and produce drama for so long before it loses it's effect. Wonder how new squeeze feels watching his dramatically "broken" heart.:sneaky:

Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
 

Every time I see the bold bit I read Gerry and the Pacemakers. :lol:

Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
 

I don't knnoooow if he's innocent or not! he sounds sorry but before you shot bullets surely you would think about where your partner was and get them out of the way before you shot bullets!! guess no-one knows the story apart from him, same as that balcony man!!!

Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
 

He received acting lessons - so says Jani Allan :unsure:

http://janiallan.com/2014/04/14/letter-oscar/

Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
 

Who?

Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
 

She was very well known over there back in the 80s. Apparently the most admired person in SA in 1987. :blink:

Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
 

The problem with cross -examination is that it's possible for anyone good to confuse someone's story. A witness or defendant can cause the lawyer to stumble themselves - the problem is that the more a witness or a defendant does this (with no good reason) the more they appear evasive - why?

A lot of it is picking over detail - and detail even in truthful stories it is easy for anyone to contradict themselves depending on the question. There was at least one example in the last few days where the prosecution latched on to a minor detail and twisted it to their advantage - in cross-examination it is as much about causing issues with credibility than it is about establishing facts. It may not prove anything but it does have an effect.

On balance I think the weight is with the lawyer - they are good at it - so you have to be innocent to maintain your composure.. the difference is if you are guilty you are more likely to stumble...

Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
 

Experts say murder is unlikely. Just the negligence degree of the accident. Which can mean the difference of 5-15 years.