Oscar Pistorius allegedly shoots girlfriend

Average Reds

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 24, 2007
35,419
Southwestern CT
Yeah, I've been following these hearings, and there are a few points that should be made.
 
First, the evidence against Pistorius at this point is literally nothing more than the hunches of the prosecutor and lead investigator.  I mean, the detective - Hilton Botha - admitted under oath that they have found no evidence to contradict the claim of Pistorius that he thought he was shooting at a burglar.  The detective also tried to sell a story of neighbors hearing a screaming argument coming from the Pistorius house prior to the shooting, but when pushed, he admitted that the neighbor was actually someone who lived 650 yards - four full city blocks - away.  Then the prosecutor had Detective Botha testify that he found syringes and testosterone in the residence, only to have defense counsel force the investigator to admit that the he had no idea what a steroid was and he didn't look closely at the medication.  (Apparently it was not testosterone.)  Then there was the matter of the call made to the home by a security company immediately after the shooting, where a dazed Pistorius answered the phone, responded to a question by saying that he was OK, but then put the phone down and just sobbed uncontrollably at the apparent discovery of the body of his girlfriend. Going to be hard to sell that tape as the acts of a man who just committed premeditated murder. And now we learn that the lead detective on the case is facing attempted murder charges himself for a shooting that is believed to be unjustified.
 
I have no idea whether this is a tragic accident or if Pistorius is a cold-blooded killer. But if they can't come up with more than this, I can't see how the charges are upheld.
 

jk333

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 26, 2009
4,328
Boston
Average Reds said:
Yeah, I've been following these hearings, and there are a few points that should be made.
 
First, the evidence against Pistorius at this point is literally nothing more than the hunches of the prosecutor and lead investigator. Then there was the matter of the call made to the home by a security company immediately after the shooting, where a dazed Pistorius answered the phone, responded to a question by saying that he was OK, but then put the phone down and just sobbed uncontrollably at the apparent discovery of the body of his girlfriend. Going to be hard to sell that tape as the acts of a man who just committed premeditated murder. And now we learn that the lead detective on the case is facing attempted murder charges himself for a shooting that is believed to be unjustified.
 
I have no idea whether this is a tragic accident or if Pistorius is a cold-blooded killer. But if they can't come up with more than this, I can't see how the charges are upheld.
 
The evidence the prosecution has shown thus far looks weak. But has there been any explanation on why Pistorius started shooting into the bathroom? 
 
Pistorius has talked about a burglar. So, his current explanation is that he started shooting into the bathroom [at the burglar?] without looking in first? And then only realized it was his girlfriend after calling 911 and opening the bathroom door. Really? - seems criminally stupid. There must be an explanation as to why he thought it was a burglar.  
 
The investigation/prosecution has performed poorly. In addition to the mistakes upthread, the judge asked about phone records.

 On the stand Thursday, Botha was asked by magistrate Desmond Nair whether he thought it was important Reeva Steenkamp could have used her phone to contact people in the hours leading up to her death, and whether phone records had been requested. Botha answered "yes" to both questions, adding that he had not received Steenkamp's phone records. The judge then remarked that there seemed to be a lack of urgency from the police in obtaining the records.
 

Average Reds

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 24, 2007
35,419
Southwestern CT
jk333 said:
The evidence the prosecution has shown thus far looks weak. But has there been any explanation on why Pistorius started shooting into the bathroom? 
 
Pistorius has talked about a burglar. So, his current explanation is that he started shooting into the bathroom [at the burglar?] without looking in first? And then only realized it was his girlfriend after calling 911 and opening the bathroom door. Really? - seems criminally stupid. There must be an explanation as to why he thought it was a burglar.  
 
The investigation/prosecution has performed poorly. In addition to the mistakes upthread, the judge asked about phone records.
 
What I have seen reported is very thin, but something about him getting up and going to a different part of the house, coming back, hearing sounds in the bathroom and flipping out thinking that someone had broken into the bathroom through the window.
 
Yeah, it sounds implausible, which is why I'm not making any judgments about Pistorius.  But the case appears to be based on nothing more than the fact that they also think his story is fishy, so they're charging him with premeditated murder and they'll sort it out later, which is a little odd.  Or maybe not, since I don't know how things usually work in South Africa.
 

Koufax

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
5,946
Negligent homicide might be a theory here.  It really doesn't look premeditated,  it looks criminally stupid.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,799
Bail conditions here:  http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/blog/2013/feb/22/oscar-pistorius-bail-decision-live-coverage#block-5127807fb5791e976a3e6a21.
 
Average Reds said:
I have no idea whether this is a tragic accident or if Pistorius is a cold-blooded killer. But if they can't come up with more than this, I can't see how the charges are upheld.
 
Here's his full statement:  http://www.3news.co.nz/FULL-TRANSCRIPT-Oscar-Pistorius-full-statement/tabid/417/articleID/287516/Default.aspx.  Basically, he is saying that he went to the balcony, heard something, went over to the bed, screamed at the intruder and Reeva, walked several metres to the bathroom/toilet without his prothetics; did not hear anything from the intruder or Reeva during this time, heard more movement, and then without any further ado, fired four shots into the closed door....
 
It is also interesting to ask - if everything was okay - why Reeva would have taken the key into the bathroom and locked herself in during the early morning hours?  I'm sure he'll say that something she did normally, but it's strange behavior for a loving couple.
 
At any rate, in the US, that is some sort of crime unless he pleads insanity.  Would think that would be true in SA but don't know for sure.
 
Layout:
 
 

DukeSox

absence hasn't made the heart grow fonder
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2005
11,755
Because he's related to Oscar and Laura is not.
 
M

MentalDisabldLst

Guest
So can we assume that there was more evidence that came out in support of the prosecution, but nothing that spoke to premeditation or whatever?  I mean, even depraved-indifference would seem hard to prove in a country where kidnappings, burglaries and murders are 100x more common than in the US.  After the murder acquittal, I expected him to walk.
 

vintage'67

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
328
MentalDisabldLst said:
So can we assume that there was more evidence that came out in support of the prosecution, but nothing that spoke to premeditation or whatever?  I mean, even depraved-indifference would seem hard to prove in a country where kidnappings, burglaries and murders are 100x more common than in the US.  After the murder acquittal, I expected him to walk.
Per cnn "A judge has found Oscar Pistorius guilty of culpable homicide, the South African term for unintentionally, but unlawfully, killing a person. It's akin to negligent killing."  I believe the basic case for the prosecution on this charge was that his own story showed he was negligent.  As summarized by W.B.C.D. above "he is saying that he went to the balcony, heard something, went over to the bed, screamed at the intruder and Reeva, walked several metres to the bathroom/toilet without his prothetics; did not hear anything from the intruder or Reeva during this time, heard more movement, and then without any further ado, fired four shots into the closed door...."  If you believe firing a gun into the bathroom door without knowing where Reva was, but knowing she had been in bed with him before he thought he heard an intruder, is negligent, even if he was panicked and/or felt helpless with out his prosthetic, you convict.  I'm not saying I believe that is what happened, just that that is, more or less his story, and the most benign one I have seen, so I'm not surprised at all.  
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,799
So can we assume that there was more evidence that came out in support of the prosecution, but nothing that spoke to premeditation or whatever?  I mean, even depraved-indifference would seem hard to prove in a country where kidnappings, burglaries and murders are 100x more common than in the US.  After the murder acquittal, I expected him to walk.
Apparently, there are two murder charges in SA - one is premeditated and one has to do with "dolus eventualis".

There are legal experts who think the court incorrectly applied the "dolus eventualis" standard. I believe Pistorius had testified that he was trying to kill whoever was in the bathroom; so it could be argued that there was evidence to prove that he should have reasonably foreseen that his actions resulted in a death.

If he walks, I'm sure the State will appeal.
 

Average Reds

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 24, 2007
35,419
Southwestern CT
MentalDisabldLst said:
So can we assume that there was more evidence that came out in support of the prosecution, but nothing that spoke to premeditation or whatever?  I mean, even depraved-indifference would seem hard to prove in a country where kidnappings, burglaries and murders are 100x more common than in the US.  After the murder acquittal, I expected him to walk.
 
I know it was a long time ago, but the testimony given by Pistorius destroyed his hopes of a straight acquittal.
 
Premeditation was not happening because there was (literally) no evidence introduced by the prosecution to support it.  But he wasn't going to walk.  Or hop, as the case may be.
 

Average Reds

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 24, 2007
35,419
Southwestern CT
wade boggs chicken dinner said:
Apparently, there are two murder charges in SA - one is premeditated and one has to do with "dolus eventualis".

There are legal experts who think the court incorrectly applied the "dolus eventualis" standard. I believe Pistorius had testified that he was trying to kill whoever was in the bathroom; so it could be argued that there was evidence to prove that he should have reasonably foreseen that his actions resulted in a death.

If he walks, I'm sure the State will appeal.
 
He has been convicted already.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,799
He has been convicted already.
Yes I know but there is a possibility (some commentators say probability) that he gets no jail time (i.e., "walk); at that point, I understand the State has a right to appeal the decision - in particular that the judge misinterpreted the law.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,757
Average Reds said:
 
He has been convicted already.
not of Murder. If he gets a light sentence on the homicide expect them to appeal.
It seems like most people familiar with the South African law were very surprised he didn't get convicted on the murder charge (without premeditation).
 

Average Reds

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 24, 2007
35,419
Southwestern CT
I thought he was facing a mim of 5 years to a maximum of 15. At least that's what I heard this morning. The point being that he's not walking away a free man.

I would also say that anyone who expected him to be convicted of murder didn't pay attention to the testimony of the lead detective, who was shredded on the stand.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,799
Five years.  Prosecution wanted 10; defense wanted 0.  Split the difference.
 
Average Reds said:
I thought he was facing a mim of 5 years to a maximum of 15. At least that's what I heard this morning. The point being that he's not walking away a free man.
 
As I understand it, there was (is) no minimum sentence for culpable homicide.  Good thing that isn't an issue anymore.
 

Average Reds

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 24, 2007
35,419
Southwestern CT
wade boggs chicken dinner said:
 
As I understand it, there was (is) no minimum sentence for culpable homicide.  Good thing that isn't an issue anymore.
 
That's how it was reported today, which was different than how it was reported (or at least how I saw it reported) right after his conviction.
 
My guess is that the range I quoted was a recommendation but not a mandate, because you are correct that there does not appear to be any mandatory minimum for culpable homicide.
 

JohntheBaptist

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 13, 2005
11,404
Yoknapatawpha County
Here's what I don't entirely get about the stated series of events, and it is very likely because I've missed something in the coverage I've read.
 
So, Oscar wakes, brings the fans in from the balcony outside. In so doing he hears a noise from the bathroom, becomes frightened. He then moves from the bedroom, after getting his gun, to the bathroom, which ends with four shots being fired and Steenkamp dead. So--from the moment he's frightened to the moment he pulls the trigger, he makes no noise? Doesn't call out for anyone to identify themselves, doesn't say "I have a gun get the fuck out of here!" or anything close? He just quietly moved into the bathroom and fired away with no pause? Oscar claims at one point he yells back to Steenkamp, who he thought was in the bedroom, to call the cops. I ask because naturally at some point you'd expect Steenkamp to make some sort of noise that would identify herself. It's the middle of the night, you're in the bathroom--you know if your partner suddenly comes in, it's too quiet not to notice--she doesn't even give an "...Oscar?" I guess it's possible, just seemed like the biggest strain on credibility in the story and wondered if there was some piece I've missed that would at least make it more plausible.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,799
JohntheBaptist said:
Here's what I don't entirely get about the stated series of events, and it is very likely because I've missed something in the coverage I've read.
 
So, Oscar wakes, brings the fans in from the balcony outside. In so doing he hears a noise from the bathroom, becomes frightened. He then moves from the bedroom, after getting his gun, to the bathroom, which ends with four shots being fired and Steenkamp dead. So--from the moment he's frightened to the moment he pulls the trigger, he makes no noise? Doesn't call out for anyone to identify themselves, doesn't say "I have a gun get the fuck out of here!" or anything close? He just quietly moved into the bathroom and fired away with no pause? Oscar claims at one point he yells back to Steenkamp, who he thought was in the bedroom, to call the cops. I ask because naturally at some point you'd expect Steenkamp to make some sort of noise that would identify herself. It's the middle of the night, you're in the bathroom--you know if your partner suddenly comes in, it's too quiet not to notice--she doesn't even give an "...Oscar?" I guess it's possible, just seemed like the biggest strain on credibility in the story and wondered if there was some piece I've missed that would at least make it more plausible.
 
here is a summary of the defense:  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/oscar-pistorius/10943877/Pistorius-murder-trial-the-case-for-the-defence.html.
 
But to save you the time, the prosecutor said that it was "improbable" that Reeva would not have responded to Pistorius's screams.  Pistorius responded that perhaps she was too scared to respond.
 
Personally, I'm pretty certain that Pistorius killed her in a fit of rage.  However, to convict Pistorius on the more serious charge - premeditated murder - the State had to prove that beyond a reasonable doubt, and based on what I know, it's hard to argue with the outcome.
 

JohntheBaptist

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 13, 2005
11,404
Yoknapatawpha County
wade boggs chicken dinner said:
 
here is a summary of the defense:  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/oscar-pistorius/10943877/Pistorius-murder-trial-the-case-for-the-defence.html.
 
But to save you the time, the prosecutor said that it was "improbable" that Reeva would not have responded to Pistorius's screams.  Pistorius responded that perhaps she was too scared to respond.
 
Personally, I'm pretty certain that Pistorius killed her in a fit of rage.  However, to convict Pistorius on the more serious charge - premeditated murder - the State had to prove that beyond a reasonable doubt, and based on what I know, it's hard to argue with the outcome.
 
Totally agreed, and thanks for clearing that up. That's a really good summary, fills in a few holes I had.
 

mauidano

Mai Tais for everyone!
SoSH Member
Aug 21, 2006
35,982
Maui
So in reality he probably does the 10 months in prison. He'll be away from the general population. He'll live.  The next 4 years plus he's under "house arrest". Kicking it by the pool at some nice mansion. It could definitely be worse.
 

fletcherpost

sosh's feckin' poet laureate
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,187
Glasgow, Scotland
I read that he was broke. Mind you he was sending the in-laws money, but they said they were going to send it back, so, yea, could be worse.
 

Average Reds

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 24, 2007
35,419
Southwestern CT
Yup. Regardless of whether this is a just outcome or not, it's unsettling to observe a system where prosecutors continue to pursue charges after an acquittal until they get what they want out of a judge or jury.
 

WayBackVazquez

white knight against high school nookie
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2006
8,294
Los Angeles
Eh, I don't really have a problem with the state being able to appeal acquittals on the basis of error of law. Spend any significant time before state law judges and you'll learn that many of them hit below the Mendoza line.

I do find lack of jury trials a bit odd, though.