Social Anxiety Support Forum banner

1 - 4 of 4 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,019 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I have just been reading his (long and rambling) affidavit on CNN (BBC is crap) that is basically begging to be granted bail and not to be held on remand (detained in custody) whilst awaiting trial. He isn't obliged to discuss the case and/or enter a plea in this document, only to reassure the judge and to demonstrate to the judge that he can be trusted to be granted bail during his trial, but he does so voluntarily.

Anyway, his version of events reeks of desperation and fantasy.

Consider this extract:

"I felt a sense of terror rushing over me [on hearing a noise in the bathroom]. There are no burglar bars across the bathroom window and I knew that contractors who worked at my house had left the ladders outside. Although I did not have my prosthetic legs on I have mobility on my stumps.
I believed that someone had entered my house. I was too scared to switch a light on.
I grabbed my 9mm pistol from underneath my bed. On my way to the bathroom I screamed words to the effect for him/them to get out of my house and for Reeva to phone the police. It was pitch dark in the bedroom and I thought Reeva was in bed.
I noticed that the bathroom window was open. I realised that the intruder/s was/were in the toilet because the toilet door was closed and I did not see anyone in the bathroom. I heard movement inside the toilet. The toilet is inside the bathroom and has a separate door.
It filled me with horror and fear of an intruder or intruders being inside the toilet. I thought he or they must have entered through the unprotected window. As I did not have my prosthetic legs on and felt extremely vulnerable, I knew I had to protect Reeva and myself. I believed that when the intruder/s came out of the toilet we would be in grave danger. I felt trapped as my bedroom door was locked and I have limited mobility on my stumps.
I fired shots at the toilet door and shouted to Reeva to phone the police. She did not respond and I moved backwards out of the bathroom, keeping my eyes on the bathroom entrance. Everything was pitch dark in the bedroom and I was still too scared to switch on a light. Reeva was not responding.
When I reached the bed, I realised that Reeva was not in bed. That is when it dawned on me that it could have been Reeva who was in the toilet."

The first bold highlight: if he is as insecure, anxious and hyper-vigilant as his hired psychiatrist retrospectively claims he is, why did he allow this? And why didn't a multi-millionaire who was "scared", anxious, vulnerable and obsessed with his personal safety (and Reeva's) have "burglar bars" fitted to ALL his windows?

The second bold bit: why didn't Reeva wake up when Oscar "screamed" instructions (to Reeva) and commands (to the 'intruder') if she were in bed, or answer him if in the toilet cubicle/stall? Also, why didn't Oscar wake up Reeva when he knew there was an intruder? He didn't think there might be, he knew there was. Wake her up, put index finger to lips and Shhh! Also, Pistorius had no history of any anxiety disorders prior to this incident, had a well-known fascination with firearms and was a very physically fit, young and strong person. He also made a career out of denying his disability was a handicap and that he could do whatever an able-bodied person could do. Now suddenly he is (acting?) the vulnerable cripple? And if justice is impartial, why (a) was this trial fast-tracked when ordinary (poor) South Africans have to wait on remand for years in the worst conditions imaginable and (b) only the WEALTHY can secure bail? In that excerpt I quoted, in the second half of it, Pistorius goes to great lengths to show that he tried to save her life by calling for the emergency services immediately, not fleeing the scene, and carrying Reeva's body to the street and a waiting local doctor, so as to perhaps save her or keep her alive until an ambulance arrived. But this proves nothing. How many of us have snapped at a loved one, yelled abuse at them and worse, and then immediately regretted it. We meant it in those few seconds, but we immediately regretted it and apologised. Oscar could have snapped, shot at her repeatedly and then regretted it. Not because she was dead, necessarily, but because he had potentially just ended his life as he knew and enjoyed it. Also, he denies fleeing, like that is some sort of indication of innocence when (a) fleeing would be impossible for the biggest celebrity in the country and would strongly imply guilt and (b) he may have had an ulterior motive for keeping Reeva alive - to avoid facing murder charges. He also cites death threats he has received in the past as some sort of lame mitigation. Every celebrity gets hate-mail and/or death threats and how much more likely is this in SA where there are 45 murders each day (reportedly) and where there is a particular racial tension?

Third bold highlight: but he didn't "realise" this before he got up? He seems overly eager to persuade the court that he was protecting Reeva before himself - "I knew I had to protect Reeva and myself" - but his deposition and actions indicate quite the opposite. He forgot about her entirely... if he didn't murder her. So which is it, Mr Pistorius?

From what I have read, he's basically screwed...

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/02/19/w...ca-pistorius-affadavit/index.html?hpt=bosread
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,659 Posts
I actually am leaning towards his version of events. The lack of motive and the lack of prior domestic violence are pretty strong points. Even though most of us can get angry and snap at people around us, it is quite extreme and would grave provocation to get most people to shoot their own loved ones.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
352 Posts
if pistorius lived in turkey, he would be guilty.
killing an intruder in your own house is a crime in turkey.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,019 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
I actually am leaning towards his version of events. The lack of motive and the lack of prior domestic violence are pretty strong points. Even though most of us can get angry and snap at people around us, it is quite extreme and would grave provocation to get most people to shoot their own loved ones.
Yes, lack of prior mental health problems is "a pretty strong point" too.

Suddenly, when it is in his interests, he has anxiety disorders. Note also that the psychiatrist who Pistorius HIRED gave this diagnosis. ALL other psychiatrists not being paid by Pistorius - including no less a person than the lead psychiatrist at the hospital where Pistorius was evaluated and observed for a month - have denied he has, or had at the time, a mental illness.

Is that a little bit suspicious?

Also, suddenly his disability makes him vulnerable while his whole career and reputation has been built around his trying to show he had overcome his disability and saying that it wasn't a handicap. But now, conveniently, it is. He cried and retched in court, but perhaps his tears were for himself?

He also has a reputation for shooting at things (in a restaurant and out a car window) for no reason. I think "most people" would not do that.

As to motive - ever heard about arguments? People disagree with each other about things. People are sometime grumpy and short-tempered. I have known and seen, as I bet every other person my age has, the most petty and trivial disagreements escalate quickly into heated rows. But no one involved had access to firearms. In the heat of the moment people's emotions rule their rational thoughts. No one knows about their relationship behind closed doors.

As to "loved one" - he had only known her 3 months. Perhaps "sexual partner" or simply lover might be a more accurate description. He hadn't even met her parents.

Most people don't shoot their loved ones because they don't have firearms. Pistorius didn't even keep his locked up. He kept it under his bed - loaded and ready to use. Pistorius seems to be a coward who shot a defenceless woman to death after an argument (overheard by neighbours before the shots were heard) and then immediately regretted it... because it ruined his evening... Then cried for himself in court.

This is all immaterial, anyway, since Pistorius has already admitted murder. He has admitted that he knew a person was behind the door in the bathroom and he shot through the door three times. At no time did this 'mystery person' threaten Pistorius. Which is a convenient time for his anxiety disorder to 'be discovered' and to make him paranoid and scared...
 
1 - 4 of 4 Posts
Top