The Oscar Pistorius Trial: Guilty of Murder or a Tragic Case of Mistaken Identity?

[Jagger69]

I'm conflicted about this. Did he kill Reeva Steenkamp with malice aforethought or was it truly a case of mistaken identity? I really can't decide. Compelling evidence points both ways. It will be interesting to see how this thing pans out. What was his motive if indeed he murdered her in the first degree? Strange case beyond question. Such a beautiful girl....:crying:

Oscar Pistorius' emotional -- sometimes even theatrical -- reactions to grisly witness testimony show a man who appears to be deeply disturbed about the night he claims to have accidentally shot and killed his girlfriend.

As his premeditated murder trial has gotten underway this week in Pretoria, South Africa this week, the Paralympic Blade Runner has sobbed, covered his ears and hung his head as witness after witness has testified about the night Reeva Steenkamp died.

More here:

http://abcnews.go.com/International...ight-reeva-steenkamp-killed/story?id=22799956

 

[Ace Boobtoucher]

I can't believe you of all people are questioning this guy's guilt. Wait, you're a bleeding heart liberal wine sipping tree hugger, so yes. I can believe you're questioning this. Commie.

 

[Jagger69]

I can't believe you of all people are questioning this guy's guilt. Wait, you're a bleeding heart liberal wine sipping tree hugger, so yes. I can believe you're questioning this. Commie.

What else would I expect from a fascist pig like you, Johnny? And I mean that in the most sincere sense, you selfish, dispassionate autocrat. I can't believe your mind is so closed! Nazi.

Anyone have any other thoughts on this??

By the way, I'm a beer drinker. Wine gives me a headache.

 

[lurkingdirk]

Sorry, Jag. I can't believe this is a case of mistaken identity. I think this guy is just plain guilty.

Too bad. His could have been an inspirational story.

 

[Jagger69]

Sorry, Jag. I can't believe this is a case of mistaken identity. I think this guy is just plain guilty.

Too bad. His could have been an inspirational story.

Ok fair enough. Still, the guy deserves due process, no?

Besides, the talk section of the forum is starting to atrophy so I am just hoping to create come chatter. This case should provide some controversy I would hope. If not....well, we can always talk about who has the best looking asshole I guess. :dunno:

 

[STDiva]

Which evidence points to him being not guilty?

He wakes up, thinks he's being robbed, hears someone in the bathroom so he shoots through the door and kills them.

He doesn't realize his gf isnt in bed beside him? Doesn't look for her in the middle of a "robbery"? Doesn't make sure the person he is shooting is actually a criminal and not his gf?

And isn't there witnesses saying they heard screaming and fighting?

Kinda hard to be open minded about it.

 

[lurkingdirk]

This Pistorius guy is quite an athlete, so I'm guessing his ass looks pretty good. Can't speak to his ass hole, thought.

But, yeah. He certainly deserves due process. No matter what he has done, he is due the same rights as everyone else. Think he'll get it?

 

[Jagger69]

Which evidence points to him being not guilty?

Not sure about laws in SA, but, here in the USA, if one feels that their home is being occupied by an intruder, they can use deadly force even if the threat turns out to be unjustified. So, the fact that there is a presumption of innocence for the accused unless or until the prosecution proves its case beyond the preponderance of a reasonable doubt, that points to him being not guilty. I'm not saying he didn't do it.....I'm just saying it has yet to be proven. Anyone reaching a prejudicial conclusion concerning his guilt without total and undeniable proof is just plain wrong. Remember, the burden of proof is on the prosecution, not the defense, The defense does not need to prove innocence....only to create a reasonable doubt to qualify for acquittal. Sorry....that's the law. At least it is is the USA.

Let me turn the tables on you. What evidence points to him being guilty beyond a reasonable doubt?

He certainly deserves due process. No matter what he has done, he is due the same rights as everyone else. Think he'll get it?

Not if the prejudicial conclusions being so quickly drawn by those who have commented in this thread so far are indicative of how the judge will rule in this case. Again, I am approaching this from an American judicial viewpoint and those same tenets may not apply to South Africa. If not, they should. He must be proven guilty beyond any reasonable doubt. Otherwise, he is considered to be not guilty.

 

[RASQ]

Which evidence points to him being not guilty?

He wakes up, thinks he's being robbed, hears someone in the bathroom so he shoots through the door and kills them.

He doesn't realize his gf isnt in bed beside him? Doesn't look for her in the middle of a "robbery"? Doesn't make sure the person he is shooting is actually a criminal and not his gf?

And isn't there witnesses saying they heard screaming and fighting?

Kinda hard to be open minded about it.

totally agree

I don't live in South Africa so I don't give a shit how they do things over there, and I'm not going to compare our legal system (USA) either since the crime didn't happen here. He's an insecure disabled man that got heated. The only thing that makes him feel powerful is his weapons.

But still, lets say she got up to take a piss, he wakes up hearing noise in the restroom, so he gets up and grabs a gun and shoots? Couldn't that handicap asshole yell out "whos in the bathroom? I have a gun!" lol, I'm sure she would have responded with a quickness. Dude has guilty written all over his legs..... er, I mean face.

 

[Motor.boater]

Even if he suspected there was an intruder in the bathroom, he should be gone for being such a stupid fuck.

 

[Ace Boobtoucher]

You resorted to calling me a Nazi so I am invoking Godwin's Law and claiming victory.

 

[Philbert]

(Oscar wakes up}
" what's that I hear? A thief has broken silently into my home, and is now in my bathroom with the door closed! He must be taking a shit before coming out and murdering me!
I'll look for Reeva later, she's obviously in another part of the house at this early hour of the morning...I'd better hurry up and shoot several rounds through the bathroom door!
BANG! BANG! BANG!
Whew! That was a close call...now I'd better see if I can find Reeva and assure her I'm all right!"

Absolutely no doubt that a burglar might enter quietly, close the bathroom door, and poop noisily away, before sneaking back out of the bedroom (where the only other people in the house are) and continue to silently burgle. Or murder everyone after wiping his ass and flushing...
Yeah...that's possible.
I always took a moment to use the homeowner's shitter before continuing my stealthy early morning robberies...and of course I always closed the door as a courtesy to the owner...the flushing was tricky, but it had to be done.

 

[Vanilla Bear]

How can anyone think he's not guilty?! He's a fucking selfish asshole and deserves to be grilled. Of course he's guilty. She was in the bathroom wanting to call for help. It's just ridiculous to say he thought there was a burglar in there.

 

[Harpsman]

Agree ^^^^

 

[sean miguel]

Either South Africa has much lower standards regarding courtroom decorum, or this case is headed for mistrial due to gross prosecutorial misconduct. I'm quite frankly appalled.

Gerri Nel, the South African prosecutor assigned to Oscar Pistorius' murder case, caused the courtroom to erupt into guffaws this morning when he stood up, cleared his throat and said: "Ladies and gentlemen, Oscar Pistorius' case simply doesn't have a leg to stand on."

Nel then stood with his arms out and palms raised and accepted high-five after high-five from those gathered in the cramped courtroom.

http://www.sportspickle.com/2013/02...-pistorius-case-doesnt-have-a-leg-to-stand-on

 

[STDiva]

I want to rephrase my original question. Which evidence points to this being a case of mistaken identity? You said there is compelling evidence going both ways. To me, as has been stated by a few people in here, the story doesn't quite add up for me buy into a mistaken identity defense.

 

[Bonezstorm]

When was the last time you've seen a famous athlete in a prison?
He will get his "celeb bonus" and that's that

 

[Jagger69]

I want to rephrase my original question. Which evidence points to this being a case of mistaken identity? You said there is compelling evidence going both ways. To me, as has been stated by a few people in here, the story doesn't quite add up for me buy into a mistaken identity defense.

.

Because that's what he is claiming. Let me reiterate....I am not espousing that he is innocent of the charges. I'm saying that they have yet to be proven. The trial has only begun and so far and damn-near everyone here is ready to proclaim him guilty. Again, I am not sure how the laws in SA work but, here in America, you cannot speculate as to the events that transpired. There is a burden of proof that lies with the prosecution. The defense need not prove anything.

When was the last time you've seen a famous athlete in a prison?

O.J. Simpson? Rae Carruth? :dunno:

 

[lurkingdirk]

Hey Jagger, just for interest, this is the criminal liability clause from South African law.

Probably the most important principle of criminal liability is captured in the dictum actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea, or "an act is not unlawful unless there is a guilty mind." To establish criminal liability, the State must prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the accused has committed

voluntary conduct which is unlawful (actus reus); accompanied by
criminal capacity; and
fault (mens rea, in the form of intention or negligence).

So, yes, just like here, the onus is on the state to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused has done bad things. If they can not prove such, the accused is free to go.

The tricky part will be to find an impartial jury. Though I think that will likely be easier there than it would be here.

 

[Big Poppa Pump]