Oscar Pistorius

[Jingus]

The judge found him guilty of culpable homicide, which is basically South Africa's version of manslaughter; and also one of the three gun charges.  No sentence announced yet. 

 

Playing devil's advocate for a second: what hard evidence is there that he actually meant to shoot his girlfriend?  Everything mentioned so far seems pretty circumstantial.  "His story sounds fishy and might not be true" isn't the same as "his story was definitively disproved and here's why".  Yeah, it would be dumb to fire at a random unseen target, but it's equally dumb (if not even dumber) to shoot your girlfriend through a closed door and assume that you'll hit her, kill her, and get away with it.  Yeah, he totally might've intended to murder her, but I haven't heard anything that actually proved that was the case beyond a shadow of a doubt. 

 

 

Also: no offense, JT, but LMFAO at the idea that all of the physical evidence against Simpson was fabricated by the cops.  The idea that "OJ didn't do it, there's a real killer who was never even remotely identified, and Mark Fuhrman planted all the clues" is somehow a more plausible explanation than "OJ totally fucking did it" is just ridiculous. 

[J.T.]

Also: no offense, JT, but LMFAO at the idea that all of the physical evidence against Simpson was fabricated by the cops.  The idea that "OJ didn't do it, there's a real killer who was never even remotely identified, and Mark Fuhrman planted all the clues" is somehow a more plausible explanation than "OJ totally fucking did it" is just ridiculous. 

 

No offense taken, Jingus.  I value your opinion.

 

However, IMO it is also ridiculous that an arthritic man with bad knees and wearing dress shoes could kill two people almost simultaneously and litter the area with his own blood.  A pre-meditated murder that converts into a crime of passion that coats the landscape in physical evidence.  

[supremebve]

The judge found him guilty of culpable homicide, which is basically South Africa's version of manslaughter; and also one of the three gun charges.  No sentence announced yet. 

 

Playing devil's advocate for a second: what hard evidence is there that he actually meant to shoot his girlfriend?  Everything mentioned so far seems pretty circumstantial.  "His story sounds fishy and might not be true" isn't the same as "his story was definitively disproved and here's why".  Yeah, it would be dumb to fire at a random unseen target, but it's equally dumb (if not even dumber) to shoot your girlfriend through a closed door and assume that you'll hit her, kill her, and get away with it.  Yeah, he totally might've intended to murder her, but I haven't heard anything that actually proved that was the case beyond a shadow of a doubt. 

 

 

Also: no offense, JT, but LMFAO at the idea that all of the physical evidence against Simpson was fabricated by the cops.  The idea that "OJ didn't do it, there's a real killer who was never even remotely identified, and Mark Fuhrman planted all the clues" is somehow a more plausible explanation than "OJ totally fucking did it" is just ridiculous. 

The OJ trail was less cut and dry than this Pistorius trail to me.  Pistorius killed someone he knew was in his house, without checking if it was her.  OJ allegedly killed someone in a place that no one could prove he was, and the police mishandled the investigation the entire way.  So not only was there no proof that OJ was actually at the crime scene, you couldn't trust the people who were supposed to prove that he was.  Both of these people are most likely guilty, but Pistorius' story has more holes than a bum's sock.  Then again OJ, just basically said, "I didn't do it," but we all know that Pistorius shot her.

[Reed]

The judge found him guilty of culpable homicide, which is basically South Africa's version of manslaughter; and also one of the three gun charges.  No sentence announced yet. 

 

Playing devil's advocate for a second: what hard evidence is there that he actually meant to shoot his girlfriend?  Everything mentioned so far seems pretty circumstantial.  "His story sounds fishy and might not be true" isn't the same as "his story was definitively disproved and here's why".  Yeah, it would be dumb to fire at a random unseen target, but it's equally dumb (if not even dumber) to shoot your girlfriend through a closed door and assume that you'll hit her, kill her, and get away with it.  Yeah, he totally might've intended to murder her, but I haven't heard anything that actually proved that was the case beyond a shadow of a doubt. 

 

 

If you go through his actual (and sometimes inconsistent) testimony, it just reeks of one implausible thing after another. Like, it goes beyond merely being suspicious to being utterly absurd. He never hears her get up, get her phone and walk to the bathroom, he searches for his gun under the bed without ever bothering to check if she's in the bed, he screams "Get out of my house!" at her through the door and she somehow remains amazingly quiet and doesn't say "Hey, Oscar, it's me!"

 

And that's the one thing absolutely no one can explain. Why didn't she anything while he was screaming at what he thought was a burglar? Especially when she knew he had a gun and could be on the verge of shooting an intruder. It's preposterous.

 

As for motive. I assume he killed her in a rage after an arguement. It doesn't have to make sense. It's like wondering why Ray Rice risked everything to beat up his wife. Some men are just nuts.