the judge in the case (this is not a jury trial) has gone on record by saying the case will be used to show equality of the justice system in South Africa. I understand this has caused some pause for concern at the defense table
Oscar Pistorious...does he have the perfect excuse?
- Thread starter DaveyF
- Start date
the judge in the case (this is not a jury trial) has gone on record by saying the case will be used to show equality of the justice system in South Africa. I understand this has caused some pause for concern at the defense table
Oscar's trial is heating up....http://sports.yahoo.com/news/oscar-...r-first-time-on-night-she-died-154200834.html
Last night while at a friend's home, it was suggested once again that perhaps Oscar had a bad case of 'roid' rage the night he shot and killed his girlfriend. A Little odd IMO that this does NOT seem to have been brought up
by the Prosecutor ( so far).
Last night while at a friend's home, it was suggested once again that perhaps Oscar had a bad case of 'roid' rage the night he shot and killed his girlfriend. A Little odd IMO that this does NOT seem to have been brought up
by the Prosecutor ( so far).
Last edited:
By GERALD IMRAY and CHRISTOPHER TORCHIA,AP
PRETORIA, South Africa (AP) — Oscar Pistorius came under intense pressure Monday at his murder trial from the chief prosecutor, who dismissed his account of how he killed girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp as a flimsy web of lies and accused the Olympian of staging emotional outbursts to mask difficulty in answering a barrage of probing questions.
His voice quavering at times, Pistorius struggled to explain alleged inconsistencies in his testimony and broke down sobbing on two occasions, forcing Judge Thokozile Masipa to temporarily halt proceedings.
Prosecutor Gerrie Nel was sometimes quick to acknowledge Pistorius' distress — possibly to allow him time to recover and avoid any defense argument that he is not getting a fair trial — but also said the athlete was frantically trying to shore up a fabricated story.
"You're getting frustrated because your version is improbable," Nel said, standing at a lectern and gesturing with his spectacles in his right hand. "You're not using your emotional state as an escape, are you?"
Pistorius said he wasn't in a "rational frame of mind" at the time of the shooting in his home in the early hours of Feb. 14, 2013, suggesting he was therefore unable to remember some things about that night or explain some of his actions, such as rushing around with a cocked gun after he killed Steenkamp.
The cross-examination, which resumes for a fifth day Tuesday, is at a pivotal stage in a trial watched on television around the world by viewers who had admired the double-amputee runner for his track achievements. Once a role model with lucrative sponsorship deals, Pistorius is now a suspect in a witness box, challenged by an accuser in a black robe.
Pistorius faces 25 years to life in prison if convicted of premeditated murder, and Nel's challenge is to prove the state's case beyond a reasonable doubt. Meticulously, he has sought to pick apart the runner's account, exposing what he describes as a pattern of improbabilities that, taken as a whole, prove Pistorius is lying when he says he mistakenly shot Steenkamp through the closed door of a toilet cubicle because he feared an intruder was inside.
Nel, who alleges that Pistorius killed his lover after an argument, noted that the athlete earlier said he whispered to Steenkamp to call police about an intruder, contradicting later testimony that he warned her in a "low tone." The prosecutor also said blood spatter evidence indicated that the athlete's statement about a duvet in the bedroom was false.
Pistorius has said the duvet was on the bed, and that police photographs of the bed cover on the floor suggest that police moved it there after the shooting. Nel said a pattern of blood drops on the duvet and on a nearby carpet show that it was on the floor before police arrived, and that its location amounts to evidence that the couple were arguing.
Nel also challenged Pistorius about his version of events after the shooting, asking why he didn't check outside a bathroom window to see if there might be a ladder used by a perceived intruder to gain entry, and why he didn't check to see if Steenkamp might have fled through the bedroom to another part of the house before concluding — in a "huge leap" of logic — that he had mistakenly shot her.
"It didn't even cross my mind to check the bedroom door," Pistorius replied, saying he was entirely focused on the possibility that Steenkamp was in the toilet cubicle.
Pistorius testified he fired four shots through the toilet door after hearing a "wood" sound that he mistook for the door being opened by a possible assailant. Pistorius said that, in retrospect, he probably heard a magazine holder being moved by his girlfriend.
He denied Nel's allegation that he heard Steenkamp fall against the magazine rack after being hit by the first shot, and used the noise to adjust his aim to make sure he hit her again. Steenkamp was hit by three shots.
The prosecutor tried to pin down Pistorius on whether he intended to shoot at the perceived intruder.
"I didn't have time to think about what I wanted to do," Pistorius replied, prompting Nel to question whether Pistorius was changing his legal strategy from "self-defense" to "involuntary action."
Pistorius said he shouted for any intruder or intruders to get out of his house and that he had no idea who was behind the toilet door when he fired. Nel remarked that, according to Pistorius' account, he didn't know whether a child, an unarmed burglar or more than one person could have been in the toilet stall.
"You never gave them a chance, in your version," Nel said, noting that he never fired a warning shot. The truth, the prosecutor argued, is that Pistorius shot to kill — and that his target was Steenkamp.
PRETORIA, South Africa (AP) — Oscar Pistorius came under intense pressure Monday at his murder trial from the chief prosecutor, who dismissed his account of how he killed girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp as a flimsy web of lies and accused the Olympian of staging emotional outbursts to mask difficulty in answering a barrage of probing questions.
His voice quavering at times, Pistorius struggled to explain alleged inconsistencies in his testimony and broke down sobbing on two occasions, forcing Judge Thokozile Masipa to temporarily halt proceedings.
Prosecutor Gerrie Nel was sometimes quick to acknowledge Pistorius' distress — possibly to allow him time to recover and avoid any defense argument that he is not getting a fair trial — but also said the athlete was frantically trying to shore up a fabricated story.
"You're getting frustrated because your version is improbable," Nel said, standing at a lectern and gesturing with his spectacles in his right hand. "You're not using your emotional state as an escape, are you?"
Pistorius said he wasn't in a "rational frame of mind" at the time of the shooting in his home in the early hours of Feb. 14, 2013, suggesting he was therefore unable to remember some things about that night or explain some of his actions, such as rushing around with a cocked gun after he killed Steenkamp.
The cross-examination, which resumes for a fifth day Tuesday, is at a pivotal stage in a trial watched on television around the world by viewers who had admired the double-amputee runner for his track achievements. Once a role model with lucrative sponsorship deals, Pistorius is now a suspect in a witness box, challenged by an accuser in a black robe.
Pistorius faces 25 years to life in prison if convicted of premeditated murder, and Nel's challenge is to prove the state's case beyond a reasonable doubt. Meticulously, he has sought to pick apart the runner's account, exposing what he describes as a pattern of improbabilities that, taken as a whole, prove Pistorius is lying when he says he mistakenly shot Steenkamp through the closed door of a toilet cubicle because he feared an intruder was inside.
Nel, who alleges that Pistorius killed his lover after an argument, noted that the athlete earlier said he whispered to Steenkamp to call police about an intruder, contradicting later testimony that he warned her in a "low tone." The prosecutor also said blood spatter evidence indicated that the athlete's statement about a duvet in the bedroom was false.
Pistorius has said the duvet was on the bed, and that police photographs of the bed cover on the floor suggest that police moved it there after the shooting. Nel said a pattern of blood drops on the duvet and on a nearby carpet show that it was on the floor before police arrived, and that its location amounts to evidence that the couple were arguing.
Nel also challenged Pistorius about his version of events after the shooting, asking why he didn't check outside a bathroom window to see if there might be a ladder used by a perceived intruder to gain entry, and why he didn't check to see if Steenkamp might have fled through the bedroom to another part of the house before concluding — in a "huge leap" of logic — that he had mistakenly shot her.
"It didn't even cross my mind to check the bedroom door," Pistorius replied, saying he was entirely focused on the possibility that Steenkamp was in the toilet cubicle.
Pistorius testified he fired four shots through the toilet door after hearing a "wood" sound that he mistook for the door being opened by a possible assailant. Pistorius said that, in retrospect, he probably heard a magazine holder being moved by his girlfriend.
He denied Nel's allegation that he heard Steenkamp fall against the magazine rack after being hit by the first shot, and used the noise to adjust his aim to make sure he hit her again. Steenkamp was hit by three shots.
The prosecutor tried to pin down Pistorius on whether he intended to shoot at the perceived intruder.
"I didn't have time to think about what I wanted to do," Pistorius replied, prompting Nel to question whether Pistorius was changing his legal strategy from "self-defense" to "involuntary action."
Pistorius said he shouted for any intruder or intruders to get out of his house and that he had no idea who was behind the toilet door when he fired. Nel remarked that, according to Pistorius' account, he didn't know whether a child, an unarmed burglar or more than one person could have been in the toilet stall.
"You never gave them a chance, in your version," Nel said, noting that he never fired a warning shot. The truth, the prosecutor argued, is that Pistorius shot to kill — and that his target was Steenkamp.
Pistorius did himself no favours in the dock: lawyers
By Stephanie Findlay, AFP
Pretoria (AFP) - Oscar Pistorius did himself more harm than good when he took the witness stand, say South African lawyers.
Throughout five gruelling days on the witness stand, the Paralympic gold medallist contradicted himself, a nail in the coffin for his defence, said lawyers watching the case.
Initially, Pistorius had said he believed he was under attack by an intruder when he fired four shots at the toilet door. That strategy sought protection for the use of deadly force under the principle of self-defence.
But in his cross-examination, the 27-year-old athlete changed his testimony to say he fired the shots at the door accidentally. An accident is an entirely different defence, suggesting involuntariness.
Pistorius has also suggested he was not thinking rationally when he fired his 9mm pistol at a toilet door begind which was his girlfriend, 29-year-old model and law graduate Reeva Steenkamp. He said he "didn't have time to think".
His testimony went downhill the moment he took the stand, said Martin Hood, a Johannesburg-based criminal lawyer.
"He went into a dangerous situation with his firearm, safety disengaged, and he proceeded down the passage in what he described as a tactical manner," said Hood. "So all of his decisions were conscious, intentional decisions."
Pistorius has pleaded not guilty to intentionally killing Steenkamp, as well as to three other charges related to the reckless discharge of a firearm in a separate incident and the unlawful possession of ammunition.
Hood says it did not reflect well on Pistorius that he did not accept responsibility for firing a gunshot in an upmarket Johannesburg restaurant.
"The fact that he refused to accept responsibility for the gun discharging in Tasha's, though he had it in his possession and in his control," said Hood, "that's a watershed in the case."
State prosecutor Gerrie Nel -- nicknamed "the bulldog" for his tenacious courtroom performances -- has picked at inconsistencies between Pistorius's evidence in court and his lengthy bail application.
"You are thinking of a version constantly and not dealing with the question," Nel accused Pistorius. "It's getting more and more improbable and you're tailoring more and more as we go on."
Pistorius blamed his legal team for inconsistencies between his accounts and claimed police moved key pieces of evidence that appeared to incriminate him, a sign, observers said, that he had abandoned his legal team's strategy.
"He suddenly went on his own, he now got angry with Nel and he now is going to take him on," said William Booth, a criminal lawyer. "I think it's a desperate man."
The star sprinter made textbook mistakes in the witness stand, said Booth, saying Pistorius was evasive, did not answer questions, and was argumentative.
"His lawyer tried in reexamination very briefly to resurrect things, but I think he was probably sensible to leave alone," said Booth, speaking from Cape Town.
"The more questions you ask somebody like Oscar, it could actually get worse," he said.
"I think in retrospect they're probably regretting calling him as a witness," said Booth, "but the point is that he had to testify in his defence -- he was the only witness to the incident."
By Stephanie Findlay, AFP
Pretoria (AFP) - Oscar Pistorius did himself more harm than good when he took the witness stand, say South African lawyers.
Throughout five gruelling days on the witness stand, the Paralympic gold medallist contradicted himself, a nail in the coffin for his defence, said lawyers watching the case.
Initially, Pistorius had said he believed he was under attack by an intruder when he fired four shots at the toilet door. That strategy sought protection for the use of deadly force under the principle of self-defence.
But in his cross-examination, the 27-year-old athlete changed his testimony to say he fired the shots at the door accidentally. An accident is an entirely different defence, suggesting involuntariness.
Pistorius has also suggested he was not thinking rationally when he fired his 9mm pistol at a toilet door begind which was his girlfriend, 29-year-old model and law graduate Reeva Steenkamp. He said he "didn't have time to think".
His testimony went downhill the moment he took the stand, said Martin Hood, a Johannesburg-based criminal lawyer.
"He went into a dangerous situation with his firearm, safety disengaged, and he proceeded down the passage in what he described as a tactical manner," said Hood. "So all of his decisions were conscious, intentional decisions."
Pistorius has pleaded not guilty to intentionally killing Steenkamp, as well as to three other charges related to the reckless discharge of a firearm in a separate incident and the unlawful possession of ammunition.
Hood says it did not reflect well on Pistorius that he did not accept responsibility for firing a gunshot in an upmarket Johannesburg restaurant.
"The fact that he refused to accept responsibility for the gun discharging in Tasha's, though he had it in his possession and in his control," said Hood, "that's a watershed in the case."
State prosecutor Gerrie Nel -- nicknamed "the bulldog" for his tenacious courtroom performances -- has picked at inconsistencies between Pistorius's evidence in court and his lengthy bail application.
"You are thinking of a version constantly and not dealing with the question," Nel accused Pistorius. "It's getting more and more improbable and you're tailoring more and more as we go on."
Pistorius blamed his legal team for inconsistencies between his accounts and claimed police moved key pieces of evidence that appeared to incriminate him, a sign, observers said, that he had abandoned his legal team's strategy.
"He suddenly went on his own, he now got angry with Nel and he now is going to take him on," said William Booth, a criminal lawyer. "I think it's a desperate man."
The star sprinter made textbook mistakes in the witness stand, said Booth, saying Pistorius was evasive, did not answer questions, and was argumentative.
"His lawyer tried in reexamination very briefly to resurrect things, but I think he was probably sensible to leave alone," said Booth, speaking from Cape Town.
"The more questions you ask somebody like Oscar, it could actually get worse," he said.
"I think in retrospect they're probably regretting calling him as a witness," said Booth, "but the point is that he had to testify in his defence -- he was the only witness to the incident."
I know; this thread is over two years old, but this the latest news on this case: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-07-...uld-be-out-of-jail-within-three-years/7575774
Sweet judge. Are the laws over there equal for all men and women? What if the deceased was the judge's own daughter?
Oscar 'Victorius' vulnerability off track gave him an advantage, compounded by the judge's own emotional vulnerability?
He'll be free in thirty-six months, just like a short nightmare. But hers is eternal.
Sweet judge. Are the laws over there equal for all men and women? What if the deceased was the judge's own daughter?
Oscar 'Victorius' vulnerability off track gave him an advantage, compounded by the judge's own emotional vulnerability?
He'll be free in thirty-six months, just like a short nightmare. But hers is eternal.
Indeed, the latest news is pretty surprising! Otoh, the fact that the same judge was allowed to decide the penalty was...shall we say.. Highly fortuitous for Oscar!
What surprises me a little is the fact that the prosecutors didn't press hard for an alternative judge??
However, having visited SA on numerous occasions, I do comprehend some of what is going on.
Indeed, the latest news is pretty surprising! Otoh, the fact that the same judge was allowed to decide the penalty was...shall we say.. Highly fortuitous for Oscar!
What surprises me a little is the fact that the prosecutors didn't press hard for an alternative judge??
However, having visited SA on numerous occasions, I do comprehend some of what is going on.
Justice was definitely blind in this episode ....
Fresh news, and 'it seems' to be related to the Rio summer Olympic games: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/aug/07/oscar-pistorius-taken-to-hospital-with-wrist-injuries
"The report of injuries to Pistorius, who denied he had attempted suicide, came as athletes compete at the Olympic Games in Rio de Janeiro. Pistorius and his coach said before Steenkamp's 2013 killing that they wanted to retire together at the Rio games."
"The report of injuries to Pistorius, who denied he had attempted suicide, came as athletes compete at the Olympic Games in Rio de Janeiro. Pistorius and his coach said before Steenkamp's 2013 killing that they wanted to retire together at the Rio games."
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |