Pistorius Trial

easysurfer

easysurfer

Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
Joined
Jun 11, 2008
Messages
13,151
What's that saying? Something like "If you represent yourself in court then you have a fool for a client?"

The Pistorius Trial surely seems that way with the bulldog prosecutor looking like Perry Mason.

Actually, I do kinda believe that Pistorious may have actually thought there was an intruder. But the trial doesn't seem to help him any.
 
But he isn't representing himself is he?

I'm skeptical of his claims only in that I grew up with firearms (hunting in my case) and the cardinal rule is to make damn sure of your target and background before shooting. Allegedly, he was familiar with firearms and should have known better.

I can't for the life of me picture a situation where it would be acceptable to shoot through a door without absolutely positively knowing there was a clear and present danger to me or others behind the door. At the time he shot, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt that he perhaps he was scared thinking there might be danger behind the door, but he didn't know there was danger and he wasn't in danger based on the accounts I have heard.

If an intruder opened the door and threatened him then by all means, protect yourself but that wasn't the situation.

So to me, at worst, he knew she was behind there, killed her and is lying to save his skin. At best, he really did think there was an intruder but shot without being in imminent danger and unjustifiably took a life as a result. Both deserve jail time, life if the former and many years if the latter.
 
Yeah, if nothing else, he was irresponsible with the firearm and thus guilty of manslaughter. Personally, I think he killed her in cold blood. Too much stuff doesn't add up about his story.
 
His crying is deplorable. It is a probably a defense ruse, which the prosecutor isn't buying. And yes, never shoot at a person you cannot see. My guess, in a rage he killed her. But even if unintentional, he should do lots of time.

Sent from my AT100 using Early Retirement Forum mobile app
 
The prosecutor is cutting him off at the knees.

Sent from my AT100 using Early Retirement Forum mobile app
 
pb4uski said:
But he isn't representing himself is he?...
Click to expand...

He sure is representing himself.

The laws are different than in the US. I'm not following all the drama but watch the mentions during the morning and nightly news.

In that court system, are defendants allowed to have attorney representation? If I was a defense attorney, no way would I have him try and defend himself.

The judge had to ask him to be careful and if he was too tired to tell her as his distance and confusion wasn't helping him. All the while when the prosecutor is calling him a liar and practically saying "Who's your Daddy?... Tell the court!" :LOL:
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
Katsmeow said:
I haven't followed the trial closely, but I've read several accounts that refer to things that his attorney has said. And, this article describes his high-powered legal team:

Meet Oscar Pistorius' High Powered Legal Team - ABC News
Click to expand...

Thats what I thought, he has legal representation. Not sure how his attorneys help in the protocol for trials in South Africa.

Sometimes news gets lost in translation. I recall being in S.A. when the original O.J trial took place. The local S.A. news had a view of what had happened. When we called home, a much different view.

MRG
 
He's got a tough job trying to convince anyone it was an accident. I was in Capetown when it happened, and the public wasn't buying his story then. Over the last year, as the story has gotten less believable and less consistent, people are buying it less and less.

But the overwhelming sentiment is that - somehow -he will get away with it. Not a lot of trust in the legal system there as far as I can tell.
 
pb4uski said:
Citation for this questionable assertion?
Click to expand...

I stand corrected. :)

That said, looks like his representation isn't much of a dream team. Of course, I could be totally wrong and he'll walk.

I can say though, that the trial is not a jury trial :cool:
 
I've only 'followed' this incident/trial peripherally, but my first reaction, (which nothing I've read has altered), is that he shot her, (or at least at her), through the door deliberately.

The first thing I, and probably the vast majority of people, would do if there was a noise in the middle of the night, would be to check on the person next to me in bed.

So...I'm disinclined to believe anything he says, and his theatrics solidify that position.
 
A lot of leg jokes .... I can't stand them :D.

+1 on his crying being deplorable. DW, normally a very sympathetic person, was quite put off by it. ( Men should only cry if his golf score is higher than his bowling score.) At least, OJ didn't cry as much and he was found not guilty. Pisstorious' defense team should huddle on this and tell his client to reduce crying to acceptable level.


- crying his hearts out in CA
 
I wonder how much of that crying is staged, to emphasize that he is a victim. Let's not forget who shot whom…..and since he had the gun, and shot her, he must bear responsibility.
 
Here is what I don't get... why would a woman lock the bathroom door between her and her sweetheart? Close the door, yes. Lock the door tells me she wanted security.

I think they had an argument, she got out of bed, went to the bathroom and locked the door. He got angry and shot intending to kill her. The locked door destroys his claim that they had a loving relationship.
 
Brat said:
Here is what I don't get... why would a woman lock the bathroom door between her and her sweetheart? Close the door, yes. Lock the door tells me she wanted security.

I think they had an argument, she got out of bed, went to the bathroom and locked the door. He got angry and shot intending to kill her. The locked door destroys his claim that they had a loving relationship.
Click to expand...

My sentiments exactly......I'm thinking he threw a hissy fit/temper tantrum and started blasting.
 
Pistorious is represented by Barry Roux who is said the be the best defence counsel in South Africa (others may disagree).

Remember the trial is before a judge and 2 assessors (the civil system), not a jury, although the cross examination seems to be conducted as if it was a jury trial.
 
Brat said:
....I think they had an argument, she got out of bed, went to the bathroom and locked the door. He got angry and shot intending to kill her. The locked door destroys his claim that they had a loving relationship.
Click to expand...

Too bad she didn't run out the front door instead. She had her whole life in front of her, and he stole it in a fit of rage.
 
Brat said:
Here is what I don't get... why would a woman lock the bathroom door between her and her sweetheart? Close the door, yes. Lock the door tells me she wanted security.

I think they had an argument, she got out of bed, went to the bathroom and locked the door. He got angry and shot intending to kill her. The locked door destroys his claim that they had a loving relationship.
Click to expand...

Yes, I just learned of that locked door detail today when I clicked through some interactive graphic (otherwise, I have not really followed this, just the bits & pieces you can't help but hear).

Did this come up in any of the cross examination? It sure seems odd to lock the bathroom door, unless as you say, she was afraid.

-ERD50
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

The Cosmic Avenger
  • Poll
Poll:Crisp new bills
2 3
Replies
58
Views
2K
TheWizard
T
sengsational
Meditation Resolution
2 3 4
Replies
81
Views
4K
ERD50
E
E
For Musicans - Music Notation
Replies
9
Views
365
razztazz
R
S
  • Locked
How dangerous are our streets
Replies
13
Views
457
MichaelB
MichaelB
street
What has been your act of Kindness Lately
2 3
Replies
63
Views
2K
TickTock
T

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom