The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

Wow.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/15/sports/oscar-pistorius-shooting-south-africa.html?_r=0

This is deeply sad. Apparently they'd been together only a few months. How can someone (who you are not married to) make you so mad after only a few months that you murder them? I hope this situation turns out to be more tragic (he thought it was a burglar) than malevolent (he murdered her).

I don't even know where to start on this one. WTF does being married or not married have to do with this?

He is guilty, his defense doesn't have a leg to stand on.   

After a few months?

Shoot...I've met people who annoyed me so much, so quickly, that I've imagined blowing their head off with a rocket launcher during our first meeting, or drowned them in a bowl of punch at the party where we'd just met.

It was a reference to how married couples quarrel.


Yeah, but, you didn't do it, and because you didn't live w/ them, you had a place to retreat to so as to get away from what you perceived to be their annoying-ness.

What I'm saying is, given that they didn't live together (that's my understanding) and given that they'd only been around one another for a few months... how can you bring yourself to murder someone, even someone you find intensely annoying, in such a short period?

I know there is such a thing as "heat of passion" murders, but it just seems to foreign to me.

It sounds like a combination of irresponsible gun ownership and living in a high crime area.  I've read several reports that these things are common down there as break-ins are so common and people who do not know how to use guns are on edge.

I have to admit that recently I attend a CWP class at a gun show and was pleasantly surprised. The instructor was former Marine, police, security and bodyguard so he had a tremendous background on guns and self defense over the last 30 years. His house and life  is well stocked with guns.  He started out by asking the class if anyone knew what he would do if an intruder broke into his house in the middle of the night. His answer might surprise you but he said he would get out of the house and call the police. He said that they, including his kids, have escape plans. He then went on to explain the many reasons why killing someone is the very, very, very last resort and even then, you better be sure you can handle the aftermath. In short he explained that regardless of any law you only have milliseconds in a confused state to decide if it is justifiable homicide but 12 others will have all the time they need to slow it down and look at it ten ways to Sunday to decide if you acted in good faith.  Outside of teaching the laws the class was awesome for explaining safety and reasonable good sense. He put a lot of things in perspective that I guarantee you most in that room had ever thought of.  According to the instructor as soon as you pull that trigger you either become the poster child for one side or the other.

The instructor also begged that people continue gun classes and reguarly shoot and train with their weapons to stay familiar.

Sounds like this guy didn't have much training.  Shooting through a door is just crazy.

There's a whole lot of stuff that doesn't quite add up in Pistorius' story.  I can see why the authorities are wanting to try him for murder and not some sort of accidental manslaughter type thing.

It sounds like a case of a violent, abusive asshole that shot his girlfriend.


http://deadspin.com/5984511/reports-police-were-called-to-oscar-pistoriuss-house-hours-before-the-shooting-reeva-steenkamp-was-shot-through-the-bathroom-door?utm_source=jezebel.com&utm_medium=recirculation&utm_campaign=recirculation

Fuck this guy!

^^^^^^^

Just be careful. Violent and abusive, even if true, does not necessarily a murderer make. This is why character evidence is not allowed for prosecutors...

http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_404

I'll be sure to keep that in mind when I'm prosecuting him.   ???

...... in the U. S. of A.  

Not sure if that is true in SA.  

And even if in the US a lot of character evidence can get in the backdoor. 

It is most certainly admissible in the "court of public opinion"

Of all the rules of evidence this one I find the most questionable.  Yes, a past history spousal abuse doesn't mean you would murder your spouse, but it does make it more likely you would. 

Well, but keeping these rules in mind helps you from flying off the handle. You always have to be very careful and not just just to conclusions about these things. That's why the "court of public opinion" can't send someone to jail.

Consider this: a man who is known to be exceptionally cold to his spouse, who calls her a bitch casually, and who (subsequent to her violent, unexplained death) immediately weed-eats her marigolds in the yard, because he didn't like them... is that enough evidence to convict him as a murderer?

Let's just say, it was, and it was horribly, horribly wrong.

http://www.texasmonthly.com/story/innocent-man-part-one?file=feature2.php&issue=2012-11-01



You are impressive in your ability to take things incorrectly. I'm just saying, be careful before you fly off the handle and call him a murderer. That's a pretty intense charge.


*Sigh* SA's system also stems from British jurisprudence, so it is quite plausible that the rule exists there.

...and after a 2 minute Google search, I'm right!
http://www.legalcity.net/Index.cfm?fuseaction=RIGHTS.article&ArticleID=6290631

And what we post in this forum will have no bearing on if he goes to jail.  This forum is very much "the court of public opinion" thus character evidence and hearsay evidence is fully admissiable.


I have called OJ a murderer.  He was aquitted. 



Hey from that document....

Exceptions may be made if:  The facts in a previous case are so similar to those in the case before the court that it is unlikely to be mere coincidence that the accused was involved in both.   (not in the FRE)

I haven't read the South African case law (and I bet you haven't either) but I could make the arguement that if a person has a history of violent attacks on this girlfriend and then subsequently shoots her, that it is not a mere coincidence and is relevent to determine if the shooting was intentional or accidental.  (I don't know if the South African Supreme Court agrees or not.)   

Maybe if guys weren't violent, abusive asshole gun nuts they wouldn't be accused in the "court of public opinion" of being a murderer when their girlfriend winds up dead after being shot 4 times through a bathroom door after an argument.

You've heard all the evidence in OJ's matter, though. We've heard next to nothing here. Much of what we hear now may be contradicted later...


Does he have a history of violent attacks? The report I've read says he got into a domestic dispute on the night of the murder. But that's it. Online, this is what I've found: http://hollywoodlife.com/2013/02/14/oscar-pistorious-murder-domestic-violence-history-girlfriend-shot/    (Is there more than this that's out there yet?)

It indicates that he got charged w/ some kind of assault charge because he asked a female to leave a party, she wouldn't and he had to push her out and shut the door on her, and it caught her leg leading to bruises.

Now, your next point is totally off base. Remember, we are talking about character evidence, like bringing a neighbor up there and saying "Hey, this guy's the kindest guy in the world - he fixed my kid's bike, wouldn't harm a fly, blah blah blah."

You're talking about prior bad conduct of a nature similar to the crime, which is 404(b):

(b) Crimes, Wrongs, or Other Acts.

(1) Prohibited Uses. Evidence of a crime, wrong, or other act is not admissible to prove a person’s character in order to show that on a particular occasion the person acted in accordance with the character.

(2) Permitted Uses; Notice in a Criminal Case. This evidence may be admissible for another purpose, such as proving motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, absence of mistake, or lack of accident. On request by a defendant in a criminal case, the prosecutor must:

(A) provide reasonable notice of the general nature of any such evidence that the prosecutor intends to offer at trial; and

(B) do so before trial — or during trial if the court, for good cause, excuses lack of pretrial notice.

So, if the guy's committed the same crime before, and his defense is gonna be that "oh, yeah, it was an accident" as here, then, yes, you can prove that this guy knew what he was doing, and that it was no mistake.

But, in this case, it doesn't appear, yet, anyway, that he has a previous conviction or anything like that for domestic violence. Apparently, he may not be the nicest guy to women, but, I don't know that he's a woman-beater or anything.


Look, as a person who's *prosecuted* criminal domestic violence cases, I feel you. Trust me, I'm actually more sympathetic w/ your position than I'm letting on. Just saying, please be careful. It is always dangerous to assume someone is a murderer just because they are a jerk, because they've beaten someone up, because they own guns, or because they are controlling. Look at Michael Morton's case. It's a good cautionary tale.

I'm still in the camp of FUCK THIS GUY.

I hear ya. Were you like that for Michael Jackson the whole way through?

Wow, seriously?

Would you be if it ever gets out that he fired because he thought it was a burglar?

I'm taking a wait and see approach with this one

She's on record defending him, dude. Wondering why him and not this guy.

^^^ Maybe because Michael Jackson never killed anybody?

He was alleged to molest children. That's a pretty serious charge.

I read a report last night that he tried to revive her after he shot her.  This makes me think that the shooting was accidental.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/16/oscar-pistorius-revive-reeva-steenkamp-shooting_n_2702344.html

Or that he felt regret, once the trigger was pulled...

LOL...MJ didn't kill anyone.

Landshark, he was likely trying to revive her because he felt remorse after he killed her. That happens a lot with abusers. THey usually don't mean to kill their spouse/partner.