It’s surprising how much of the case’s details has come out during a bail hearing.
If they grant bail then I hope he gets a monitoring bracelet. Not on the ankle either. 
I’m not sure where it could be worn. maybe around the waist or arm? It’s got to be someplace where it can’t be slid off and removed.
And the whole thing descends into farce.
Oscar Pistorius case: lead investigator is facing attempted murder charges
Well, in a real farce, the murder victim would stand up and take a bow at the end, so let’s hope so. As it stands, though, it looks like murder by Pistorius AND a separate case of attempted murder by someone else.
It still looks to me like somewhere behind the scenes it’s been decided to get him off. I cannot believe the family were allowed to cremate the body. What happens when the defense start picking holes in the trajectory of entry results? I cannot believe how pathetic the prosecution case as put forward was. They couldn’t blow it better if they tried.
I’m particularly suspicious about the sudden re-activation of the charges against Botha for an incident 4 years ago.
But then again I guess where you have a suspect you can’t just beat a confession out of in the back room and have to rely on police work then things are bound to get sloppy.
Prosecution case? People, this is a bail hearing, not a trial.
I find at least two things about this whole sordid affair hard to comprehend. One, if they’re not married and are fighting, just break up. There’s no reason whatsoever to murder someone because you absolutely know you’re going to be the worse for it, either in jail for life or a sterling reputation ruined. So why would he ever even contemplate premeditated murder? Two, he claims to have yelled out to the intruder in the bathroom before he started shooting. If it was mistaken identity and she was just in there going to the bathroom, she’d certainly respond to his challenge.
So I’m conflicted, these two things go against each other and both defy reason.
As part of which process the prosecution have to argue their case.
He was probably yelling out and firing at the same time. From what we’ve learned this guy is a total gun-nut. Machine gun by the window, going down to the compound firing range when he can’t sleep, unregistered firearms on the premises.
I doubt he was trying to murder the woman, he was either too scared to exercise due care or had too much of a hard-on with the chance to finally shoot something other than a target to bother checking.
The prosecution definition of pre-meditation is a legal stretch and not what we commonly understand as pre-meditation.
At least in the U.S., premeditated murder can be deliberated in a manner of seconds. It doesn’t mean that the murder was the result of extensive planning or days of contemplation. Just that the offender made a choice to kill another person.
If they were fighting and she locked herself in the bathroom, he could have decided that he was going to show her who is boss once and for all by killing her. It only seems irrational if you’re looking at things rationally, but someone who is in emotion-fueled fight is not going to be thinking rationally.
Even if he didn’t yell out before the shooting, you’d think he would have heard her yelling some time between bullet 1 and bullet 4. (Assuming bullet 1 didn’t instantly incapacitate her, that is).
This is why I don’t think his story is plausible. Later in the narrative he says it was too dark to see if Reeva was in bed, but there was at some point enough light for him to get to the balcony, move an object and retrieve his gun. I guess time will tell.
Since it’s IMHO, guilty. I believe he knowingly shot her through the door. His story is ridiculous.
They did the same thing in the OJ case, The defense found a novelist that had interviewed detective Mark Fuhrman for a book. Fuhrman gave her background on life as a cop, suspects he dealt with, street people etc. He used a few racial slurs during the taped interview.
The defense used it as part of their strategy to discredit the LAPD investigation.
Pistorius’ lawyers may attempt to discredit the cops in this case. I’m not sure why. Pistorius admits shooting. The legal question is whether it was an incredibly stupid accident or murder.
Botha off the case. Big shot taking over.
Another case of life imitating life. From the sound of it right now, the prosecution will never be able to impeach Pistorius’ credibility based on the crime scene details. I certainly hope he doesn’t take a walk on this, but it sounds less likely that he’ll be convicted of premeditated homicide based on the evidence they have, and Pistorius’ noteriety giving him some benefit of the doubt to start with.
Because they’re trying to impeach the evidence that (according to the prosecution) shows he shot her on purpose. If it sounds like the investigation was a sloppy mess, that can only help.
Here’s a graphic of what the bathroom is supposed to look like. If this is accurate, he was well inside the bathroom when he shot her and you can see the route he claims to have taken. And the toilet is indeed in front of the window that someone have theoretically broken in to. But it’s also hard to grasp how - after failing to notice his girlfriend wasn’t in bed while he was walking around and going back for his gun - he could have mistaken someone on the toilet for someone breaking in. Then there’s the whole idea of opening fire in the dark through a closed door without knowing who or what was on the other side. It’s not like an intruder would have been on top of him if they’d opened the door.
he’s using the Cotton Hill defense.
I do think the forensics ought to make it obvious if he was wearing his prosthetics when he shot her. The defense’s story is that he felt vulnerable because he wasn’t wearing them, but the prosecution suggested that putting the blades on was part of his deliberation before killing her, and at some point in the bail hearing I think the defense argued that the prosecution can’t prove when he did put them on. Why mention that if you’re sure the forensics will show he was not wearing the blades when he killed her?
Can’t they just give him that test about finding a turtle on its back?
:runs away:
He will challenge the prosecutors claims of guilt, but ultimately he will be de-feeted
Ok, that one made me chuckle. 