Oscar Pistorius: pay your dues!

First topic message reminder :

Finally, law and order comes to the lawless land of South Africa. An appeals court has termed the 6-year sentence for murder as "disgraceful". Oscar Pistorius brutally shot his beautiful, and beloved girlfriend, Reeva Steenkamp, after an argument. He was originally sentenced to 5-years. But:

People wrote:...In its decision, the five-judge Supreme Court of Appeal ordered Pistorius — originally sentenced to six years in prison for murdering Reeva Steenkamp — to spend 13 years and five months behind bars, according to the Associated Press, the BBC and The New York Times.

The new ruling reportedly bring Pistroius’ sentence in line with the recommended minimum of 15 years for murder in South Africa, minus the time he has already served either in prison or under house arrest.

According to the AP, the appellate court’s decision is likely the final development in Pistorius’ case. It began not long after he fatally fired four times on Steenkamp, a law grad and model, on Valentine’s Day 2013, shooting her through a closed bathroom door in his Pretoria, South Africa, home.

Pistorius, 31, has always maintained he believed there was an intruder that night, but prosecutors said they suspected he was motivated by an earlier argument with his 29-year-old girlfriend of less than a year. At his first trial, they argued that he was gun-crazy and temperamental.

The shooting came months after the 2012 Summer Olympics at which Pistorius — an amputee runner nicknamed the “Blade Runner,” for the prosthetic legs he used to compete — was an international star. After several successful Paralympic Games, he competed at the Olympics, a first for a double-amputee.

His arrest and trial made months of headlines around the world. Though he was initially convicted of culpable homicide and served one year in prison, prosecutors appealed and he was found guilty of murder in 2015.

Likewise, with Friday’s decision, prosecutors have successfully appealed his initial sentence, which the trial judge reportedly attributed, in part, to Pistorius’ attempts at a personal apology to Steenkamp’s family.

Shoulda gotten a bullet to the temple, but this is a little bit better.

Syl wrote:

HoratioTarr wrote:


I was gutted when David Bowie died.   

Point proven.

I didn't feel bereaved though.  That's the difference.

I had no feelings on this either way as I didn’t follow it too closely beyond the original arrest. To be honest, I always thought he killed her accidentally.

Did the prosecution ever give an alleged reason for him killing her?

I also think he did it accidentally.

I think he was scared shitless and just opened fire regardless.

nicko wrote:I think he was scared shitless and just opened fire regardless.

That's what I think.

I think he wanted to kill whoever was behind that door but I don't think he knew it was her

nicko wrote:I think he was scared shitless and just opened fire regardless.

The first thing you'd do if you were lying in bed with your girlfriend, and you thought intruders had broken in, would be to wake her, tell her to phone the police.  Why would a burglar lock himself in the bathroom?  Why would the victim be shot through her clothes if she was using the toilet in the middle of the night?  Why would she have her mobile phone with her at 3am?   Why would Pistorius go to an area he believed a an intruder was hiding in instead of grabbing his girlfriend and getting her to safety first?  Why would you do all that in the pitch dark?  None if it makes sense.

No it doesn't HT.

I reckon they had a row, and he went for his gun, by his bed, or threatened her with it. She ran into the bathroom, then into the toilet when he entered. All his shots were low, so that says she was kneeling, taking cover.

He blew her head off. He knew it was her. Horrible, nasty being.

HoratioTarr wrote:

nicko wrote:I think he was scared shitless and just opened fire regardless.

The first thing you'd do if you were lying in bed with your girlfriend, and you thought intruders had broken in, would be to wake her, tell her to phone the police.  Why would a burglar lock himself in the bathroom?  Why would the victim be shot through her clothes if she was using the toilet in the middle of the night?  Why would she have her mobile phone with her at 3am?   Why would Pistorius go to an area he believed a an intruder was hiding in instead of grabbing his girlfriend and getting her to safety first?  Why would you do all that in the pitch dark?  None if it makes sense.

How do you know what should be done or what you would do??

You onky knows these things with the benefit of hindsight from the saftey of your armchair.

Every person calling for his head has 3 things in common, none of them have lived in South Africa, none of them have ever encounter an intruder in their own homes in the middle of the night and yet all of them seem to be experts on what should be done in such circumstances.

smelly-bandit wrote:

HoratioTarr wrote:


The first thing you'd do if you were lying in bed with your girlfriend, and you thought intruders had broken in, would be to wake her, tell her to phone the police.  Why would a burglar lock himself in the bathroom?  Why would the victim be shot through her clothes if she was using the toilet in the middle of the night?  Why would she have her mobile phone with her at 3am?   Why would Pistorius go to an area he believed a an intruder was hiding in instead of grabbing his girlfriend and getting her to safety first?  Why would you do all that in the pitch dark?  None if it makes sense.

How do you know what should be done or what you would do??

You onky knows these things with the benefit of hindsight from the saftey of your armchair.

Every person calling for his head has 3 things in common, none of them have  lived in South Africa, none of them have ever encounter an intruder in their own homes in the middle of the night and yet all of them seem to be experts on what should be done in such circumstances.

I saw this today and thought of you....in that every time I read one of your posts and how you even attempt to excuse murder here. Not on the actual crime, but on events that happen in South Africa, shows emphatically how racist you are.

I mean if this killer was not white and black, would you be making your same pathetic arguments?

The fact you buy the bullshit on the intruder argument says everything about how ridiculous you are.

I mean she was in the bathroom, he never called out to the person in there and blazed away four times with his gun. I mean most rational people who live with someone or have someone stay over would check first whether the movements they have heard, was the person they live with. That is why the story he gave, does not add up at all. I mean what if this had been a child they had together? Would he make excuses then? If you live or have people stay over, your first thought would be on that movement being them, espically, if its your girlfriend/boyfriend and you wake up and they are not next to you in bed. Its complete horseshit the intruder claim. It simple has no validity.


Anyway, this is what its like reading your poor views

I don't think the judges could decide either, and that's why they said it didn't matter if he knew it was her in there or not. He shot through the door knowing that the person in there would probably die.

Didge wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

How do you know what should be done or what you would do??

You onky knows these things with the benefit of hindsight from the saftey of your armchair.

Every person calling for his head has 3 things in common, none of them have  lived in South Africa, none of them have ever encounter an intruder in their own homes in the middle of the night and yet all of them seem to be experts on what should be done in such circumstances.

I saw this today and thought of you....in that every time I read one of your posts and how you even attempt to excuse murder here. Not on the actual crime, but on events that happen in South Africa, shows emphatically how racist you are.

I mean if this killer was not white and black, would you be making your same pathetic arguments?

The fact you buy the bullshit on the intruder argument says everything about how ridiculous you are.

I mean she was in the bathroom, he never called out to the person in there and blazed away four times with his gun. I mean most rational people who live with someone or have someone stay over would check first whether the movements they have heard, was the person they live with. That is why the story he gave, does not add up at all. I mean what if this had been a child they had together? Would he make excuses then? If you live or have people stay over, your first thought would be on that movement being them, espically, if its your girlfriend/boyfriend and you wake up and they are not next to you in bed. Its complete horseshit the intruder claim. It simple has no validity.


Anyway, this is what its like reading your poor views

If Pistorius was black, no one in that court room would have had any doubt he was a murderer.

It's certainly a bizarre case. I remember when I first read about it, Reeva had made a post on Twitter asking people what they had up their sleeve for Valentine's Day. I wondered if she'd turned up at Pistorius's house and surprised him, and he thought she was a burglar. When the facts became clearer, it got even more bizarre.

That tweet did make me feel sad because she was obviously excited, and she ended up dead.

Raggamuffin wrote:I don't think the judges could decide either, and that's why they said it didn't matter if he knew it was her in there or not. He shot through the door knowing that the person in there would probably die.

It made for fascinating TV viewing.

It should have made a difference to the sentence whether he knew it was Reeva or not.
If he knew it was her he obviously intended to kill her and shot deliberately because he was in a rage ....if he thought someone had broken in fear and the intention to defend himself, his girlfriend and his property would have been his defence.

The outcome would have been the same (a dead person) but the motive would have been different.

Syl wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:I don't think the judges could decide either, and that's why they said it didn't matter if he knew it was her in there or not. He shot through the door knowing that the person in there would probably die.

It made for fascinating TV viewing.

It should have made a difference to the sentence whether he knew it was Reeva or not.
If he knew it was her he obviously intended to kill her and shot deliberately because he was in a rage ....if he thought someone had broken in fear and the intention to defend himself, his girlfriend and his property would have been his defence.

The outcome would have been the same (a dead person) but the motive would have been different.

Even if he had thought it was a burglar, he knew that shooting through the door would kill them though. Such a burglar was not a direct threat to him, and he could have taken steps to warn them that he had a gun or something.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Syl wrote:

It made for fascinating TV viewing.

It should have made a difference to the sentence whether he knew it was Reeva or not.
If he knew it was her he obviously intended to kill her and shot deliberately because he was in a rage ....if he thought someone had broken in fear and the intention to defend himself, his girlfriend and his property would have been his defence.

The outcome would have been the same (a dead person) but the motive would have been different.

Even if he had thought it was a burglar, he knew that shooting through the door would kill them though. Such a burglar was not a direct threat to him, and he could have taken steps to warn them that he had a gun or something.

I don't for one minute believe he thought it was a burglar.....and yes, that would have been the right thing to do IF that's what he thought.
He also claimed he thought Reeva was still in bed, odd that he would just leave her and say nothing if he thought she may be in danger.

But deliberately killing someone in rage and deliberately killing someone through fear....if that was the dilemma the court faced, should still have a bearing on the sentence don't you think?

Syl wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Even if he had thought it was a burglar, he knew that shooting through the door would kill them though. Such a burglar was not a direct threat to him, and he could have taken steps to warn them that he had a gun or something.

I don't for one minute believe he thought it was a burglar.....and yes, that would have been the right thing to do IF that's what he thought.
He also claimed he thought Reeva was still in bed, odd that he would just leave her and say nothing  if he thought she may be in danger.

But deliberately killing someone in rage and deliberately killing someone through fear....if that was the dilemma the court faced, should still have a bearing on the sentence don't you think?

I don't think they could decide which it was though, so they just said that it was murder and that it wasn't relevant who was in the bathroom.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Syl wrote:

I don't for one minute believe he thought it was a burglar.....and yes, that would have been the right thing to do IF that's what he thought.
He also claimed he thought Reeva was still in bed, odd that he would just leave her and say nothing  if he thought she may be in danger.

But deliberately killing someone in rage and deliberately killing someone through fear....if that was the dilemma the court faced, should still have a bearing on the sentence don't you think?

I don't think they could decide which it was though, so they just said that it was murder and that it wasn't relevant who was in the bathroom.

I think it would have been relevant if it had been a British trial.
I'm sure it would make a huge difference in America.

It was a farce of a trial imo....there was no need to have him take his legs off and wobble across the courtroom floor. It was easy to establish where the bullet holes would have been in the door without that spectacle.

Syl wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I don't think they could decide which it was though, so they just said that it was murder and that it wasn't relevant who was in the bathroom.

I think it would have been relevant if it had been  a British trial.
I'm sure it would make a huge difference in America.

It was a farce of a trial imo....there was no need to have him take his legs off and wobble across the courtroom floor. It was easy to establish where the bullet holes would have been in the door without that spectacle.

If a jury had been asked to decide if he knew he was killing Reeva, he may well have been acquitted. Trying him for murder generally, regardless of who he thought he was shooting, at least resulted in a conviction.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Syl wrote:

I think it would have been relevant if it had been  a British trial.
I'm sure it would make a huge difference in America.

It was a farce of a trial imo....there was no need to have him take his legs off and wobble across the courtroom floor. It was easy to establish where the bullet holes would have been in the door without that spectacle.

If a jury had been asked to decide if he knew he was killing Reeva, he may well have been acquitted. Trying him for murder generally, regardless of who he thought he was shooting, at least resulted in a conviction.

The prosecution lawyer was too busy playing to the cameras I recall.
That trial was a sham from start to finish imo.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Syl wrote:

I think it would have been relevant if it had been  a British trial.
I'm sure it would make a huge difference in America.

It was a farce of a trial imo....there was no need to have him take his legs off and wobble across the courtroom floor. It was easy to establish where the bullet holes would have been in the door without that spectacle.

If a jury had been asked to decide if he knew he was killing Reeva, he may well have been acquitted. Trying him for murder generally, regardless of who he thought he was shooting, at least resulted in a conviction.

There are two questions, not one;

1. Did he know he was killing Re'eva?

2. Did he know his actions would kill someone, anyone?

He claims he did not know it was Re'eva. But he also admits that he knew he was shooting at someone. (Of course, shooting someone holds the strong risk of killing him or her.) So, he was ultimately convicted of culpable homicide.

That was clearly a just conviction, because even under Oscar's theory he intended to murder someone.

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

If a jury had been asked to decide if he knew he was killing Reeva, he may well have been acquitted. Trying him for murder generally, regardless of who he thought he was shooting, at least resulted in a conviction.

There are two questions, not one;

1.  Did he know he was killing Re'eva?

2.  Did he know his actions would kill someone, anyone?

He claims he did not know it was Re'eva.  But he also admits that he knew he was shooting at someone.  (Of course, shooting someone holds the strong risk of killing him or her.)  So, he was ultimately convicted of culpable homicide.

That was clearly a just conviction, because even under Oscar's theory he intended to murder someone.

Not murder

A Preemptive self defence strike which is covered under every law in every land, its a basic human right.

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

If a jury had been asked to decide if he knew he was killing Reeva, he may well have been acquitted. Trying him for murder generally, regardless of who he thought he was shooting, at least resulted in a conviction.

There are two questions, not one;

1.  Did he know he was killing Re'eva?

2.  Did he know his actions would kill someone, anyone?

He claims he did not know it was Re'eva.  But he also admits that he knew he was shooting at someone.  (Of course, shooting someone holds the strong risk of killing him or her.)  So, he was ultimately convicted of culpable homicide.

That was clearly a just conviction, because even under Oscar's theory he intended to murder someone.

Exactly, but I don't think the judge(s) could decide if he knew he was killing Reeva.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

There are two questions, not one;

1.  Did he know he was killing Re'eva?

2.  Did he know his actions would kill someone, anyone?

He claims he did not know it was Re'eva.  But he also admits that he knew he was shooting at someone.  (Of course, shooting someone holds the strong risk of killing him or her.)  So, he was ultimately convicted of culpable homicide.

That was clearly a just conviction, because even under Oscar's theory he intended to murder someone.

Exactly, but I don't think the judge(s) could decide if he knew he was killing Reeva.

No, they could only determine that he intended to kill someone. That's the reason why he wasn't given a first degree murder conviction.

Personally, I believe he knew he was killing Re'eva, and intended it, but there was insufficient evidence to prove it.

If you wake up in the middle of the night hearing someone moving about in the house, the first thing you do is reach across the bed to your partner, firstly to establish if they are there in bed with you or not, as it would most likely be them making noise if they were not there with you... secondly, if you did feel them there next to you, then you would wake them up to alert them of the strange sounds and the possibility of intruder/burglar etc...


Did he reach across to confirm she was there... or try to wake her up to warn her of noises...?


Obviously not, as he would have known she was not there, and would then have known that it was her making noises elsewhere in house...


So if he hadn't established that she was in bed next to him or not, to confirm whether it was her he could hear or not... then it is impossible for him to have thought the noises were being made by anyone else other than Reeva...!


I think he knew full well that she was in there... and I think she had locked herself in there to get away from him having a violent outburst against her...


The 'intruder' story was all bollocks... and it doesn't matter anyway because that would still be him deliberately shooting and killing someone through the locked door with intent... and same charges would apply...!

Well said Tommy, that's what I've always said. It was murder, pure and simple.

Tommy Monk wrote:If you wake up in the middle of the night hearing someone moving about in the house, the first thing you do is reach across the bed to your partner, firstly to establish if they are there in bed with you or not, as it would most likely be them making noise if they were not there with you... secondly, if you did feel them there next to you, then you would wake them up to alert them of the strange sounds and the possibility of intruder/burglar etc...

Did he reach across to confirm she was there... or try to wake her up to warn her of noises...?

Obviously not, as he would have known she was not there, and would then have known that it was her making noises elsewhere in house...

So if he hadn't established that she was in bed next to him or not, to confirm whether it was her he could hear or not... then it is impossible for him to have thought the noises were being made by anyone else other than Reeva...!

I think he knew full well that she was in there... and I think she had locked herself in there to get away from him having a violent outburst against her...

The 'intruder' story was all bollocks... and it doesn't matter anyway because that would still be him deliberately shooting and killing someone through the locked door with intent... and same charges would apply...!

Precisely the reasoning leading me to conclude he knew it was Re'eva. There is also the fact that he was a momma's boy, who learned early that violence against those closest to him was a strategy. There was also the fact that he thought he was somehow privileged because of his disability. His frequent violent behavior. His carelessness with guns. His reckless driving. All tend to indicate a person out of control, and not within the limits of normalcy.

Unfortunately, there's no tangible evidence to prove it. If only the neighbors, who heard the two arguing, could have heard specifically what was said.

Original Quill wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:If you wake up in the middle of the night hearing someone moving about in the house, the first thing you do is reach across the bed to your partner, firstly to establish if they are there in bed with you or not, as it would most likely be them making noise if they were not there with you... secondly, if you did feel them there next to you, then you would wake them up to alert them of the strange sounds and the possibility of intruder/burglar etc...

Did he reach across to confirm she was there... or try to wake her up to warn her of noises...?

Obviously not, as he would have known she was not there, and would then have known that it was her making noises elsewhere in house...

So if he hadn't established that she was in bed next to him or not, to confirm whether it was her he could hear or not... then it is impossible for him to have thought the noises were being made by anyone else other than Reeva...!

I think he knew full well that she was in there... and I think she had locked herself in there to get away from him having a violent outburst against her...

The 'intruder' story was all bollocks... and it doesn't matter anyway because that would still be him deliberately shooting and killing someone through the locked door with intent... and same charges would apply...!

Precisely the reasoning leading me to conclude he knew it was Re'eva.  There is also the fact that he was a momma's boy, who learned early that violence against those closest to him was a strategy.  There was also the fact that he thought he was somehow privileged because of his disability.  His frequent violent behavior.  His carelessness with guns.  His reckless driving.  All tend to indicate a person out of control, and not within the limits of normalcy.

Unfortunately, there's no tangible evidence to prove it.  If only the neighbors, who heard the two arguing, could have heard specifically what was said.

Yes, I've known about that stuff (first bit of your post) for a long time, and have mentioned most of it before...


But regarding second bit... neighbours hearing the two arguing IS tangible evidence...!


Knowing times/dates/frequency/history/duration of arguments and how angry/destructive they sounded would be highly important and informative in an investigation!

Tommy Monk wrote:If you wake up in the middle of the night hearing someone moving about in the house, the first thing you do is reach across the bed to your partner, firstly to establish if they are there in bed with you or not, as it would most likely be them making noise if they were not there with you... secondly, if you did feel them there next to you, then you would wake them up to alert them of the strange sounds and the possibility of intruder/burglar etc...


Did he reach across to confirm she was there... or try to wake her up to warn her of noises...?


Obviously not, as he would have known she was not there, and would then have known that it was her making noises elsewhere in house...


So if he hadn't established that she was in bed next to him or not, to confirm whether it was her he could hear or not... then it is impossible for him to have thought the noises were being made by anyone else other than Reeva...!


I think he knew full well that she was in there... and I think she had locked herself in there to get away from him having a violent outburst against her...


The 'intruder' story was all bollocks... and it doesn't matter anyway because that would still be him deliberately shooting and killing someone through the locked door with intent... and same charges would apply...!

You're making a lot of assumptions there.

You're assuming Oscar and everyone else are some kind of battle hardened combat soldiers used to dealing with stress situations where intruders are outside the door coming to kill you.

I don't think many people can appreciate the paralysing arse clenching terror they would experience in that situation.

Does anyone know how they would react to being woken from sleep by the sounds of footsteps outside their bedroom door in close proximity to the one room in the house where every person is asleep and at their most vulnerable??

In the dark with your heart beating out of your chest and terror stealing your breath, what tricks could your mind play??

What mistakes could a person under such stress make??

Now what if that person had no legs and was even more vulnerable and less able?? How much further could their terror be heightened??

It's easy to judge in hindsight using ideas of what we think he should have done, youre also using standards that we use in the UK

South Africa is not the green and pleasant land that the UK is, its a fucking war zone in many places , when robbers break into your house in South Africa your wife and daughter WILL be raped before you and they are murdered no ifs ands or buts about it, and most times they will be armed.

The police in South Africa WILL Not turn up to save you

I'm reminded of the BLM activist who called for police involved in shooting unarmed black men to lose their jobs and go to jail.

He was invited to attend a police training session, in one of the scenarios he immediately shot and "killed" an unarmed black man.

No one can truly know if he knew reeva was behind the door.

What I do know is that if he goes to a max security prison he will be raped every day of his life by dozens of different men, probably until he dies in there, if he survived he will most certainly be infected with every STD known to man.

Is that really a fair punishment for a man who may have just been an idiot who accidentally killed his missus??

smelly-bandit wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:If you wake up in the middle of the night hearing someone moving about in the house, the first thing you do is reach across the bed to your partner, firstly to establish if they are there in bed with you or not, as it would most likely be them making noise if they were not there with you... secondly, if you did feel them there next to you, then you would wake them up to alert them of the strange sounds and the possibility of intruder/burglar etc...


Did he reach across to confirm she was there... or try to wake her up to warn her of noises...?


Obviously not, as he would have known she was not there, and would then have known that it was her making noises elsewhere in house...


So if he hadn't established that she was in bed next to him or not, to confirm whether it was her he could hear or not... then it is impossible for him to have thought the noises were being made by anyone else other than Reeva...!


I think he knew full well that she was in there... and I think she had locked herself in there to get away from him having a violent outburst against her...


The 'intruder' story was all bollocks... and it doesn't matter anyway because that would still be him deliberately shooting and killing someone through the locked door with intent... and same charges would apply...!

You're making a lot of assumptions there.

You're assuming Oscar and everyone else are some kind of battle hardened combat soldiers used to dealing with stress situations where intruders are outside the door coming to kill you.

I don't think many people can appreciate the paralysing arse clenching terror they would experience in that situation.

Does anyone know how they would react to being woken from sleep by the sounds of footsteps outside their bedroom door in close proximity to the one room in the house where every person is asleep and at their most vulnerable??

In the dark with your heart beating out of your chest and terror stealing your breath, what tricks could your mind play??

What mistakes could a person under such stress make??

Now what if that person had no legs and was even more vulnerable and less able?? How much further could their terror be heightened??

It's easy to judge in hindsight using ideas of what we think he should have done, youre also using standards that we use  in the UK

South Africa is not the green and pleasant land that the UK is, its a fucking war zone in many places , when robbers break into your house in South Africa your wife and daughter WILL be raped before you and they are murdered no ifs ands or buts about it, and most times they will be armed.

The police in South Africa WILL Not turn up to save you

I'm reminded of the BLM activist who called for police involved in shooting unarmed black men to lose their jobs and go to jail.

He was invited to attend a police  training session, in one of the scenarios he immediately shot and "killed" an unarmed black man.

No one can truly know if he knew reeva was behind the door.

What I do know is that if he goes to a max security prison he will be raped every day of his life by dozens of different men, probably until he dies in there, if he survived he will most certainly be infected with every STD known to man.

Is that really a fair punishment for a man who may have just been an idiot who accidentally killed his missus??

Pistorius wasn't living in a secluded outback homestead where his screams wouldn't have been heard.   He lived in a high security compound guarded 24/7 where it was guaranteed that any alarm would be answered in 3 minutes.   It has electrified fences, 24 hour armed security and manned controlled access areas. 

I don't think he killed her in cold blood.  I think he shot her in temper.

HoratioTarr wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

You're making a lot of assumptions there.

You're assuming Oscar and everyone else are some kind of battle hardened combat soldiers used to dealing with stress situations where intruders are outside the door coming to kill you.

I don't think many people can appreciate the paralysing arse clenching terror they would experience in that situation.

Does anyone know how they would react to being woken from sleep by the sounds of footsteps outside their bedroom door in close proximity to the one room in the house where every person is asleep and at their most vulnerable??

In the dark with your heart beating out of your chest and terror stealing your breath, what tricks could your mind play??

What mistakes could a person under such stress make??

Now what if that person had no legs and was even more vulnerable and less able?? How much further could their terror be heightened??

It's easy to judge in hindsight using ideas of what we think he should have done, youre also using standards that we use  in the UK

South Africa is not the green and pleasant land that the UK is, its a fucking war zone in many places , when robbers break into your house in South Africa your wife and daughter WILL be raped before you and they are murdered no ifs ands or buts about it, and most times they will be armed.

The police in South Africa WILL Not turn up to save you

I'm reminded of the BLM activist who called for police involved in shooting unarmed black men to lose their jobs and go to jail.

He was invited to attend a police  training session, in one of the scenarios he immediately shot and "killed" an unarmed black man.

No one can truly know if he knew reeva was behind the door.

What I do know is that if he goes to a max security prison he will be raped every day of his life by dozens of different men, probably until he dies in there, if he survived he will most certainly be infected with every STD known to man.

Is that really a fair punishment for a man who may have just been an idiot who accidentally killed his missus??

Pistorius wasn't living in a secluded outback homestead where his screams wouldn't have been heard.   He lived in a high security compound guarded 24/7 where it was guaranteed that any alarm would be answered in 3 minutes.   It has electrified fences, 24 hour armed security and manned controlled access areas. 

I don't think he killed her in cold blood.  I think he shot her in temper.

Have you ever been to South Africa??

For longer than a holiday??

Sorry smelly... but it's common practice to be woken up any number of times every night by a partner who you share a bed with... and regardless of whether they're fidgeting about too much, snoring, getting up for a piss, rustling about somewhere in the house, or whatever...


The first thing you ALWAYS think is this...




































'Oh ffs... can't believe that noisy fucking twat has woke me up again!!!'

You don't think...


'Oh shit... what's that noise...!? Girlfriend not next to me in bed...! Can't possibly be her having a piss in our toilet in the bathroom right next door to our bedroom, as I've heard her doing countless times before...! So I must get my gun and kill the unknown person who is locked in the toilet...'

Tommy Monk wrote:Sorry smelly... but it's common practice to be woken up any number of times every night by a partner who you share a bed with... and regardless of whether they're fidgeting about too much, snoring, getting up for a piss, rustling about somewhere in the house, or whatever...


The first thing you ALWAYS think is this...




































'Oh ffs... can't believe that noisy fucking twat has woke me up again!!!'

You know it's true though!!!


Maybe that was his motive... sick of being woken up too many times through the night...?

smelly-bandit wrote:

HoratioTarr wrote:

Pistorius wasn't living in a secluded outback homestead where his screams wouldn't have been heard.   He lived in a high security compound guarded 24/7 where it was guaranteed that any alarm would be answered in 3 minutes.   It has electrified fences, 24 hour armed security and manned controlled access areas. 

I don't think he killed her in cold blood.  I think he shot her in temper.

Have you ever been to South Africa??

For longer than a holiday??

I don't have to go to South Africa to know how violent it is.    And knowing South Africa has fuck all to do with Pistorius firing that gun.   Talk sense for once.

HoratioTarr wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

Have you ever been to South Africa??

For longer than a holiday??

I don't have to go to South Africa to know how violent it is.    And knowing South Africa has fuck all to do with Pistorius firing that gun.   Talk sense for once.

So you've never been but know all life in South Africa.

You ever been mugged??

I have

Ever been hijacked??

Guilty

Ever been burgled??

Shit it gets boring after the third time.

How many people you know who have been shot, hijacked mugged or robbed?? Probably about the amount of people I know who haven't.

This isn't a boo hoo look at me, this is me telling you, you don't have a clue about how violent south Africa is, you don't have a clue what you would do in those situations or in Oscars situation, you're not James bond neither is Oscar so stop acting like you are, stop acting you know the right thing to do in that situation, because you don't.

I'd like to run you through scenario training and see how many times you die and how many times you kill when you shouldn't.

sb wrote:So you've never been but know all life in South Africa.

You ever been mugged??

Yep.  In New York City, twice in San Francisco.

sb wrote:I have

Ever been hijacked??

Two tried it...got their ass kicked.

sb wrote:Ever been burgled??

Yep. However, burglary is not, itself, a violent crime.

sb wrote:How many people you know who have been shot, hijacked mugged or robbed?? Probably about the amount of people I know who haven't.

There's nothing special about SA.  Been there, done that.

Original Quill wrote:

sb wrote:So you've never been but know all life in South Africa.

You ever been mugged??

Yep.  In New York City, twice in San Francisco.

sb wrote:I have

Ever been hijacked??

Two tried it...got their ass kicked.

sb wrote:Ever been burgled??

Yep.

sb wrote:How many people you know who have been shot, hijacked mugged or robbed?? Probably about the amount of people I know who haven't.

There's nothing special about SA.  Been there, done that.

Yeah ok rambo

smelly-bandit wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Yep.  In New York City, twice in San Francisco.



Two tried it...got their ass kicked.




Yep.



There's nothing special about SA.  Been there, done that.

Yeah ok rambo

You're the one whose making a big deal of it. There's nothing special about suburban Pretoria.

Original Quill wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

Yeah ok rambo

You're the one whose making a big deal of it.  There's nothing special about suburban Pretoria.

Must have been awful Quill, you have my deepest sympathies.

But you're missing the point

Par for the course

It doesn't matter where he lived, how many legs he has or what he thought when he woke up. The point is, he could've taken two seconds to shout out for her. Instead he shot her through the bathroom door and he knew it was her in there. He knew it.

I hope he does get his arse raped. He's a c8nt.

I am surprised the sentence for murder is only 16 years in Sarf Efrika.
I wonder if the light sentences are in place for whites killing blacks or whites. Do the same sentences apply to black comitting the murders?

smelly-bandit wrote:

HoratioTarr wrote:


I don't have to go to South Africa to know how violent it is.    And knowing South Africa has fuck all to do with Pistorius firing that gun.   Talk sense for once.

So you've never been but know all life in South Africa.

You ever been mugged??

I have

Ever been hijacked??

Guilty

Ever been burgled??

Shit it gets boring after the third time.

How many people you know who have been shot, hijacked mugged or robbed?? Probably about the amount of people I know who haven't.

This isn't a boo hoo look at me, this is me telling you, you don't have a clue about how violent south Africa is, you don't have a clue what you would do in those situations or in Oscars situation, you're not James bond neither is Oscar so stop acting like you are, stop acting you know the right thing to do in that situation, because you don't.

I'd like to run you through scenario training and see how many times you die and how many times you kill when you shouldn't.

Oh, stop being melodramatic!    If you're going to troll, at least make an effort.

He's a low down bum !

nicko wrote:He's a low down bum !

Pistorius too!

eddie wrote:It doesn't matter where he lived, how many legs he has or what he thought when he woke up. The point is, he could've taken two seconds to shout out for her. Instead he shot her through the bathroom door and he knew it was her in there. He knew it.

I hope he does get his arse raped. He's a c8nt.

You're a really good and kind hearted person eddie.

smelly-bandit wrote:

eddie wrote:It doesn't matter where he lived, how many legs he has or what he thought when he woke up. The point is, he could've taken two seconds to shout out for her. Instead he shot her through the bathroom door and he knew it was her in there. He knew it.

I hope he does get his arse raped. He's a c8nt.

You're a really good and kind hearted person eddie.

Thank you, and might I add, I think you'd be singing a different tune entirely if Pistorius was black.

eddie wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

You're a really good and kind hearted person eddie.

Thank you, and might I add, I think you'd be singing a different tune entirely if Pistorius was black.

No eddie I wouldn't be, but you would, race matters far more to you than it does to me, you're more of a racist than I could ever be

Blacks kill more blacks than whites in South Africa, so the stats would be against him if he was black

The facts remain the same though whether he is black or white

Okay, I accept that you're telling the truth about that.

I don't consider myself a racist but then again, that word is so misunderstood and overused I don't think it has any great meaning any more.

People ruin words.

So smelly is excusing someone not checking to see the noises that wakes them up is there girlfriend, based off murder rates and break in's.

I really have to say, that is the lamest argument going.

Ignoring that the girlfriend had locked herself within a bathroom she shares with her partner?

Has he at any point explained both these problems to his argument?

What if they had a child?

Would he have excused him blasting away into the bathroom, and the child was in there, based off a very remote possbility, an intruder was in the bathroom?

I mean lets even look at this. As why would an intruder hide within a bathroom, if they were looking to rob the place and even more if they were armed?

In other words smellys argument has no bases.