Bitcoin Forum

I think he shot her after an argument and he is trying to lie his way out of this. What you guys think?

R.I.P. Reeva

Wouldn't feel okay judging without facts

Only he would know the truth

What facts do you need? He shot and killed his girlfriend. That's the fact. The excuses he gave are moronic.

i don't think his case has any legs. get it?

He shot and killed her that is for sure, reasons at this point remain shrouded last I followed.

Well I don't think it's for the reasons he gave. A burglar? Yeah right.

My view is as follows;

I wake up in the night, hear a noise in the bathroom. I look over and see my partner is not in bed beside me, I roll over and go back to sleep I dont grab a gun and blast holes through the bathroom door to find out if it's my partner or not.

logic dictates he is lying or mentally unstable and should not own guns

I have no doubt that Oscar Pistorius is lying. And this case reminds me of the OJ Simpson incident (OJ murdering Nicole Brown and Ronald Goldman). Everyone knows that he did the crime, but no one actually believes that he will go to jail.

that bastard is guilty.

No shit.

Does anyone thing he will actually get away with a jail sentance though? I cant see it.

Yeah, but the question is of what. Murder? Manslaughter? etc.


I doubt it, but he probably wont get much. He'll probably get a few years for manslaughter or something.

The question is whether the Judge can prove murder, instead of the fact that he killed her.

Sure, he will receive sentance for killing here. But I don't think they can prove murder.. unfortunately. It's sad to see such nice lady leaving this world.

I think that is exactly what is going to happen. He is filthy rich, with net worth valued at tens of millions of USD. Even if he is found guilty, he will avoid the prison using his political connections and money power.

Why did he kill her? He is screwed in his head? Maybe his lawyers will make some sort of excuse like temporary insanity or something. He will avoid jail for sure.

Well only he will probably know that, but why do other men usually kill their partners? Rage, jealousy, anger, insecurity etc.

Indeed, I guess we will never know why he exactly did what he did.  If I would shot my girlfriend through the bathroomdoor, I will be sent to jail for sure.  I'm not sure whether it's that easy to act like you were in temporary insanity or something.. I don't think so. Otherwise most people inside a jail wouldn't be there.

:p few People might get offended to this post..! but the sin he committed i don't think many will post any sympathy towards him..! 

I don't care about some guy who might or might not have shot someone.

what you mean by might not have shot ..? even he confessed he did the crime..! but now just trying to explain so  many other things..!

I didn't follow the trial. I was just telling my opinion on it.

Ohh so now you know a little ..! does it make any difference ..? I don't think so, and I can understand even I didn't knew about it till I read an article  last week on same subject.

I don't get it. I mean the guy has money, he was famous before the murder/accident, so why would he kill her? If they had an argument ,he should just break up  with her

lol :P didn't you heard this line before " When you get success its hard to handle it " not everyone can handle it...! and who knows what exactly made him so angry that he shoot her.

True, if someone is a criminal or if he killed her in a fight (she was screaming, he slap her, she kicked him, he took a gun and shoot her).
But from what I heard it looked like he planned to kill her, so at that time he wasn't angry (at least not furious)

I carry a gun everyday and keep one ready every night. If I killed someone, as described in his defense, then I should go to jail because it was my fault they died. I don't know know the law there, but here if you blindly shoot through a door then you are going to prison. 

Yeah, but he's rich and white so that tips the justice scales significantly.

So, being white and rich means you can kill someone over there without being sent to jail? I don't think that's true..     If that's true, I'm sure many other countries will tell that country how to use justice.

Actually, police corruption in Africa is kind of common. I wouldn't be surprised if he DIDN'T go to jail.
And being wealthy in some countries even give you a good path, including some of the most powerful ones.

You can get away with a lot when you're rich or just white. Why do poor black people go to jail for the same crimes whilst white people don't (or get far lesser sentences?) I'm sure we'll soon see when Pistorious gets a lean sentence and not the sentence a usual murderer gets.

Normally I agree, but not with this case. They have way too much world media focused on them to let him off with a lite sentence in a clear cut brutal murder.

It's a double-edged sword and only time will tell, but you might be right. The media spotlight on this case is huge, but I still don't think he will get the full sentance that murders usually do.

We will find out. I think Tins has a good point, due to the big media spotlight on this case I don't think they can give him a lower sentence just because he's white (/ and rich). But even if that does happen, we will never know how the Judge would have acted if Oscar was black and poor, as all trials are different.

Interesting thoughts guys. Sadly I think being a rich white guy does play a role. If he were poor and black he might already be in jail. And if his girl friend was white, he might already be executed.  :-\

It does play a part but he wouldntve been executed already. Does South Africa even have the death penalty?

I don't know? And I was exaggerating.

Race has nothing to do with this. If it was so, then OJ Simpson would have been jailed for murdering two white people. Being rich helps, but being white doesn't matter much nowadays.

Of course race has a lot to do with it. Just because some rich black people with the best lawyers in the world get away with it doesn't change anything.

I think that the reverse is true. A white person who has committed the same crime as a black guy is usually given more harsher sentence, while the black guy is some times let off just because of his race.

Maybe in Australia but not in the US: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYORruzVefQ

I think he will get away with involuntary manslaughter, get 5 years and come out after 2 for good behavior. It's not about his money here, although it does play a small part, it's about him being famous in SA and amount of social work he put in. He helped a lot of kids and thats why they still love him over there. My opinion is Oscar Pistorius is guilty of first-degree murder and should be sentenced to death by lethal injection. An eye for an eye a tooth for a tooth! He took Reeva's life intentionally with cold blood in the state of anger. It's a shame SA abolished death penalty in 95.

I agree with the first part on sentencing but not the last. "An eye for an eye leaves everybody blind" comes to mind.

Instead of speculating, why don;'t we just wait for the court's verdict?

Because this is a discussion on the case. Why not speculate on the potential outcome or the political ramifications of it?

We are a society that enjoys to discuss current events.

I'm not following this case on the news. Does anyone has an update about this? When will the Judge state his sentence?

Or did he already?

Then read the news or check wikipedia. Is bitcointalk really your go-to place for current events?

No. The sentence hasn't yet been stated. The trial has been extended until 16th May, 2014. They might extend the date yet again, if either the prosecution or the defense asks for it.

Alright. Thanks for your update.


I do follow a couple discussions about news items / events on this forum, yes. For example also the problems in Ukraine. This forum with all its members with different backgrounds really bring in really interesting opinions.

Seriously, this trial is a joke! A neighbour of Oscar Pistorius, Carice Viljoen (long time legal adviser and a good friend of Oscar!?) comes out of nowhere and testifies she was the first person on the scene when official police report stated that it was the security guard and then police arrived. She stated calmly:
"He was begging me to put her in the car. I told him to put her down. I told him we just need to see what's going on. I just saw blood everywhere."
..right, okay. either she is lying and covering for him or she must be dealing with dying people covered in blood on a daily basis. No shock, no emotions, she just calmly saying let's put her on the floor and see what's going on...really?
Furthermore, she lives 300m from Oscar's house and never mentioned she heard any arguments, shouting or shots fired, when others heard it from 500/600m and Oscar's balcony window was open all night as he stated. I can't wait when Gerrie 'the bulldog' Nel gets to her.

How exactly is she covering for him there? I don't see anything that would suggest that.

the fact that she was/is Oscar's legal adviser and a good friend since when he moved in to the estate should be enough to suggest she might be covering for him. just read some of her testimony, her statement of facts is just too good to be true. like i said, we will find out how calm she really is when 'the bulldog' gets to her.   

btw, this is the actual bathroom window Oscar Pistorius thought intruded could have broke in through. i think he also thought the intruder was a midget on fly-jumpers or something.

https://i.imgur.com/EVoEwiL.jpg

Yeah, his defense doesn't really make much sense. I guess the intruder excuse was the best thing he came up with at the time. I think it's probable that they just got into a fight/argument, she locked herself in the toilet, and he just repeatedly shot through the door in a rage.

Exactly mate! you got it spot on and that is what i and more than a half of followers think happened.

Latest news..

https://i.imgur.com/wxfGA16.jpg

I feel like the trial is going to go on for a very very long time, even though most of us are sure that he is guilty lol

The only thing which is certain at this point of time is that he is not going to jail. Even if the jury finds him guilty and sentences him to prison, the South African president will immediately issue a pardon for him. There is nothing in the world that money can buy.  ;D

Most trials do, especially ones like this.


I very much doubt that. What makes you think this will happen?

Oooh can't believe I missed this thread. This case has captivated me since I heard about it last year. It is really really weird. I do think it was on accident, but he should still go to jail at least for a couple of years. This reminds of that Fruitvale station shooting, where the cop killed a man by shooting him - he obviously did not intend to kill him (he said he thought he was taking out his taser) but that still doesn't excuse such gross incompetence. So I think the correct solution for the Pistorious case is the middle ground - make him do some time in prison for involuntary manslaughter, but not as much as for actual premeditated murder.

Having said that though, I'm looking forward to seeing more details come about the case. But my personal opinion is that it was just a very, very bad mistake on Pistorius' part, because it doesn't make any sense for him to do this out of malice.

Under what circumstances could it have possibly been an accident? How does it not make sense out of malice? Men can easily get pretty murderous over women for various reasons.

I wouldnt expect the trial to finish any time soon. He's clearly guilty of shooting someone through a closed door without ascertaining who it was, bearing in mind his gf was no longer lying next to him. If it was anyone else they would be in jail by now. I will wait to see what the court says before passing a final judgment but his arguments are moronic.

Looks like a history of abuse, and there's a girlfriend in a locked bathroom, and a guy explaining that his logic was, "Hey, who's in the bathroom? Better fire off a few shots." Not looking good for the guy.

The dates have been already extended once, to May 16th. Yes.... since he is quite influential, the defence team will get it further extended a number of times. Still... it can't go on like that indefinitely.

Not to mention he seems to be a gun nut with an itchy trigger finger who just loves any excuse to use it. I can't comprehend or understand how anyone could buy his bullshit story. I mean, even if there was an intruder (or a suspected one), you'd wait till he at least attempts to open the door and not just blindly firing through it.

Exacly!And it makes no sense :why would a girlfriend who you are intimate with lock herself into a bathroom to use the toilet. Why would you lock it! Most mature couples would even sit on the toilet with the door open. Too much variance on his testimony and too emotional for it to be real.

The defence has a few arguments but his actions defy the standard logic when he fired without knowing who was behind the door

Lawyers are always going to come up with a defence no matter how illogical, but they have to work with what little they've got. I'm not sure the judge or jury will buy into it anyway, but obviously he needs to be allowed time to put forward his side of the story and everyone involved be cross-examined. As much as I think he's guilty everyone deserves a fair trial.

Yes everyone deserves a fair trial. However, do you think that the case would have been allowed to drag on for this long if he wasnt a high profile person?

I don't know. That depends on a number of factors. He can afford good lawyers for a start so they're obviously going to do whatever they can to try wrangle him out of it which will obviously elongate the whole process.

Yup I agree with that, I'm just interested to see if anyone thinks that it would have been as long if he wasnt famous. Personally I think even with money and good lawyers for the average Joe this case would have been laughed out some time ago.

I don't know because it would still be a murder trial so they would want to do it right; on the other hand I don't know enough about South Africa to answer precisely

He could have argue he "wasn't himself" when he shot because of drugs or because he was sleeping

More tricks from the defence team:

Oscar Pistorius: 'heartbroken' athlete took up art therapy

http://www.theweek.co.uk/world-news/oscar-pistorius/53387/oscar-pistorius-denies-sinister-remark-reeva-s-friend

All that may or may not be true, or maybe now he's not in the heat of the moment he is constantly aware and overcome with the guilt of what his temper and anger and reckless actions have caused; to commit a regrettable murder of someone he did love and care about. This would weigh on the majority of sane people like a tonne of bricks regardless of his genuine intent.

Only he knows , someone should give him an Academy Award for best actor though  ::)

I think he probably genuinely is upset or distressed about what he has done, but that doesn't excuse his behavior or change the fact that he murdered a women for no reason.

It's probably damage limitation at this point. He's doing what he can to survive or limit his punishment. If he sits there emotionless and without remorse, when it comes to sentencing the judge will usually bring this up to justify a harsher sentence.

I see a lot of people with this attitude, but is there any actual evidence that he shot her on purpose? It is really impossible that it may have been a horrible, horrible mistake? People are not perfect. Like the example I gave with the Fruitvale shooting where a cop shot a man without meaning to kill him because he thought he was pulling out his tazer. Not saying he should be completely let go, but involuntary manslaughter is very different from premeditated murder.

Of course it's possible, but unlikely. What scenario would shooting through a locked door be realistical, because the one he has given certainly isnt. I'm not aware of the fruitvale station case but I relaise theres a movie about it.

This guy is a classic sociopath....its everybody's fault but his....all the witnesses must be lying or mistaken (including the security guard who spoke to him after the shooting and was told 'everything is fine')....or his Lawyer has not advised him properly or the Police have tampered with evidence.....and if none of the above work lets resort to bursting into tears......I just hope the Judge see's through it all..

this is interesting..

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/oscar-pistorius/10820268/Oscar-Pistorius-sells-house-where-he-shot-Reeva-dead.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/oscar-pistorius/10820268/Oscar-Pistorius-sells-house-where-he-shot-Reeva-dead.html)


how come he is even allowed to sell his house during trial and get rid of the crime scene, i don;t know.

Well it's not really a crimescene anymore (but still the scene of a crime). I wonder if he needs the money? It's not like he's going to be able to use the house anymore anyway where he's very likely going.

You would think he wouldn't have to sell his house to pay for legal fees considering he made a lot of money but he probably doesn't want to keep the house anymore

The OJ Simpson Lawyer's Verdict On Pistorius :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e1DfpuTHGYg

Jeeze, nearly an hour long. I'm interested in his thoughts, but care to summarise for those that can't be arsed watching it all?  :D

That is a very interesting comparison. The Pistorius case is basically the OJ Simpson case of the 21st century. In my opinion though OJ was much more obviously guilty than Pistorius, and it seems like the general consensus is that he DID get away with premeditated murder. The lawyer himself is a very smart guy, but I think he knew OJ was guilty. I didn't watch the entire video, but he doesn't really say whether he thinks OP is guilty though; he just seems to talk about all the circumstances and factors that will play out and affect the case.

I don't think it's entirely the same situation though.

I did not know that it is possible to get rid of something like that house. But I guess they are done with gathering evidence from that place. From the other hand who wants to have a house where someone was murdered :|

Yeah cant imagine many people would want to live there now.

Maybe a bargain hunter. Houses of previous murders tend to go for a lot less than market value for that same reason. I wouldn't mind living in one though especially if I got it for cheap  :D. As long as you don't believe in ghosts it's just a house really.

Officially, the evidence gathering has finished but there was a part of a bullet found just recently in the toilet bowl that  changed facts and suggested Reeva was not covering herself when she was shot at, like she was taken by surprise so clearly evidence gathering wasn't done properly and more might be found yet the house is allowed to be sold. 

OJ is so eloquent and know his case so well :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJtqYyhxhJA

When is the verdict for Pistorius?

Yeah, I wouldn't mind living in his house either, it's a nice house, and probably will go for peanuts, last I heard it was 230k of the Great British Pounds, which is a bargain.

Last witnesses will be called in a week or so and judge should pass the verdict at the end of the month. I am quite convinced he will get away with culpable homicide and the sentence will be left at the judge discretion so 2 years maybe 5 max, or he will be ordered to do community work for the rest of his life which he is involved with anyways.

Really? What makes you think that he will just get that?

Hearing this lawyer talk openly makes it crystal clear to anybody with even half a brain that  these court hearings are but a game to be won by whoever has the smartest lawyer who knows best how to manipulate the legal system , where is the justice in that ?

Rich people don't go to the jail. That is the reality. Even if they go to jail (in extremely rare circumstances), they will bribe out the prison wardens and other penitentiary staff. They will enjoy their jail term with booze and drugs.

it's legal justice not moral justice

turns out he might have other problems too..

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-27371430 (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-27371430)


State prosecutor Gerrie Nel asked Ms Vorster whether someone with anxiety disorder plus guns would be "a danger to society".

"Yes," she replied.

I guess that defense has backfired on him then.

With that don't you think that will allow him to get a nice chilled place to spend whatever time he serves and then be re-assesed jsut before his times up?

How do you work that out? They're not saying hes crazy nor is that his defense.

No, but a danger to society and anxiety problems can often get you out of the worst places to spend time.

"On 12 May, forensic psychiatrist Dr. Merryl Vorster testified that Pistorius has a generalised anxiety disorder (GAD) and is a "distrusting and guarded" person hyper-vigilant about security, and also that in a fight or flight situation he is more likely to stand up to threatening situations than to flee, due to his disability.[101] The prosecution said they would bring an application for Pistorius' mental condition to be independently assessed under article 78 of the South African Criminal Procedure Act.[102]

On 13 May, the court heard concluding testimony from Dr. Vorster. Judge Masipa said she would rule the following day on the prosecution application to have Pistorius' mental condition evaluated.[103]

On 14 May, Judge Masipa granted the prosecution's application for Pistorius to be referred for mental evaluation.[104]

On 20 May, despite expert speculation that the evaluation should be on an in-patient basis,[105] Judge Masipa ordered evaluation to take place as an out-patient at Weskoppies Psychiatric Hospital in Pretoria weekdays between 9am and 4pm, starting 26 May and lasting up to thirty days. The trial will resume 30 June.[106][107]" from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trial_of_Oscar_Pistorius

It is reasonable to think  he has a mental disorder

Funny how it only comes to light after he's murderd someone. Didn't seem to hinder his life that much before.

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/oscar-pistorius-trial-verdict-%E2%80%93-live-coverage-084519642.html#uaSTnBf

I don't understand how the judge can declare that Pistorius had no intention to kill
and is completely absolved of murder charges.

Without words. Only money can make miracles, where God can not, money can, that's absurd the judge's sentences.

The judge has already started reading her verdict; but it's not just a simple guilty/not guilty. She will summarize all the evidence, discuss credibility and explain the applicable law. So the actual result may only be known tomorrow.

One thing I am absolutely certain of, we are not getting the truth from him and we will probably never know for sure exactly what happened or why.

Yes, full verdict will arrive tomorrow, but we already know what the veridct will say. Just gets to show how corrupted SA is, money does miracles there as we can clearly see. For me and many other Pisstorius is guilty of premidated murder and should be sentenced to life in prison!


The potential verdicts:

Not guilty on all charges

Should the athlete be found not guilty, he would leave court a free man. Pistorius would then have his 1m rand bail returned to him and would reserve the right to institute a civil case against the minister of police and justice for damages he felt he might have incurred during his prosecution.

Guilty on all charges

Premeditated murder in South Africa carries a minimum sentence of life imprisonment, which constitutes 25 years. Coupled with anything from two to five years in prison or a fine for the firearm and ammunition charges could see the athlete spend three decades in prison. South African law does afford him a parole hearing after 25 years and, if released, will still be on parole for the rest of his life.

Guilty on firearm and ammunition charges, not guilty of premeditated murder but guilty of culpable homicide

In this scenario, Pistorius could face a fine or up to five years in prison for the firearm charges but Judge Masipa could find that the prosecution had not proved premeditated murder beyond reasonable doubt. She could then still find Pistorius guilty of culpable homicide (manslaughter) which is a lesser charge than premeditated murder and focuses on negligence rather than intent. There is no prescribed sentence for culpable homicide in South African law and the sentence can be decided at the discretion of the judge based on the weight of evidence and circumstances surrounding the incident.

Not guilty on firearm and ammunition charges but guilty on premeditated murder charge

In this case, Pistorius will face a life sentence (25 years) or more depending on whether Judge Masipa feels that there are aggravating circumstances.

Sentencing and appeal

Should scenarios one to three occur then the following process will unfold.

After Masipa delivers her verdict the court will adjourn and reconvene at another date for sentencing. When court reconvenes both the prosecution and defence will present mitigating and aggravating circumstances to be considered by Judge Masipa during her sentencing. After considering both arguments, she will deliver her sentence.

After the sentence is delivered, Pistorius will have a chance to appeal both conviction and sentence. He can also be granted bail at the judge's discretion. However, these bail conditions will come with heavy conditions such as house arrest or reporting to a police station once a week
 

I honestly feel his guilty... can't believe the judge gave that ruling in favor of Oscar :-\

Bastard sentenced to 5 years in jail.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2014/oct/21/oscar-pistorius-sentencing-prison-live 

Can't believe he only got 5 years! The worst part is that he won't eve stay in jail for 5 years :-\

Well helps if your famous. 5 years for killing his GF ? I wonder if i get such a lenient sentence.

What I've heard on the Dutch television, is that that 5 years will be about 10 months in jail probably, and for the rest of the years 'home arrest' (although I'm not sure whether that's the right term for it). Or was it 12 month? Anyway, that ain't much for taking someones life..

However, this doesn't have to be the final judgment, as an appeal can still be made.

He probably deserved a life sentence but it's hard to prove beyond all reasonable doubt his intention was murder so 5 years for manslaughter would probably be apt under the current laws, but his defense seem to think he'll spend less than a year in jail and the rest on house arrest whatever that means, which would be a joke.

Either way the judge made a joke out of SA justice system and also herself. She said she cannot support the theory of important people getting less sentence than normal people, yet she only gave him 5 years. If this was a regular John, he would get 20 years easy. And yeah, on top of all that he can file an appeal after only 10 months of serving his sentence. Another joke. I can only hope whenever he is going and whoever is in charge there, would give him warm welcome, prison style.

this blows.

he needs death setence. stupid fuckcer

Money buys freedom guys. That's the sad reality of it. Oscar is as guilty as sin, but cops tamper with evidence so now they cant use the evidence to prove it. I have lost all faith in our judicial system.

Life's so cheap in South Africa. 5 years is not enough to sort out this killer.