Is This Man A Good Pick For Secretary Of...
News2 mins ago
Pistorius Polarisation
120 Answers
i can't recall another case where, from the outset, people for and against the accused have publicly claimed such opposing accounts of what happened. It seems that every few hours someone from one side or the other comes out with an explanation to try and sway opinion as to whether Pistorius did or didn't kill his girlfriend. The media will lap up anything about the case because it is sensational, it features a high-profile celebrity, and most importantly to them it features a beautiful young girl - the greatest obsession of the media today. Both the coverage and the counter claims are so totally distasteful considering the girl is dead. Her hideous demise and its effects on her loved ones appears completely overlooked as the media milks the case for all its worth and Pistorius' friends and foes focus on clearing or blackening his name before a court can decide. Your thoughts?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by princerupe74. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
society
/// People are speculating, no one knows the truth except
Oscar. ///
Exactly society, thank you for that, at least someone is being sensible.
It is interesting to note however that the culprits who are already finding him guilty are more that likely the same persons who continuously condemn the Daily Mail of such things.
/// People are speculating, no one knows the truth except
Oscar. ///
Exactly society, thank you for that, at least someone is being sensible.
It is interesting to note however that the culprits who are already finding him guilty are more that likely the same persons who continuously condemn the Daily Mail of such things.
Not really followed this but from what I can make out, he admits to killing her. So the issue is whether there is reasonable doubt about it being murder. Whilst I'm sure there has to be some doubt, I'm unsure how reasonable one can claim, "I felt vulnerable so I fired a gun blindly through the bathroom door not knowing/caring who was there, but knowing my girlfriend was in the place", is likely to be thought. So a complete pardon then.
"that was a fine off-drive there, took the girlfriend all the way to the boundary."
Didn't they say that about our Geoffrey (Boycott) when he was done for a bit of wife-battering.....
More seriously, this case I think becomes a bit simpler to resolve. If OP did use the bat to enter the bathroom and there is likely to be some of her blood and fluids on it, ok - however if he hit her with it, there would be substantial bruising on her body - if not, then maybe he is indeed not guilty.
"No shyte Sherlock", MT, comes to mind.....
Didn't they say that about our Geoffrey (Boycott) when he was done for a bit of wife-battering.....
More seriously, this case I think becomes a bit simpler to resolve. If OP did use the bat to enter the bathroom and there is likely to be some of her blood and fluids on it, ok - however if he hit her with it, there would be substantial bruising on her body - if not, then maybe he is indeed not guilty.
"No shyte Sherlock", MT, comes to mind.....
The judge read out some of Pistorius' affidavit, in which he gave his version of the events on the night.
"During the early morning hours of 14 February 2013, I woke up, went onto the balcony to bring the fan in and closed the sliding doors, the blinds and the curtains," it read.
"I heard a noise in the bathroom and realised that someone was in the bathroom.
"I felt a sense of terror rushing over me. There are no burglar bars across the bathroom window and I knew that contractors who worked at my house had left the ladders outside."
Fair do's Oscar, that seems a reasonable enough reason to shoot bullets blindly through a bathroom door..
Is there anyone who still believes he is not guilty?
"During the early morning hours of 14 February 2013, I woke up, went onto the balcony to bring the fan in and closed the sliding doors, the blinds and the curtains," it read.
"I heard a noise in the bathroom and realised that someone was in the bathroom.
"I felt a sense of terror rushing over me. There are no burglar bars across the bathroom window and I knew that contractors who worked at my house had left the ladders outside."
Fair do's Oscar, that seems a reasonable enough reason to shoot bullets blindly through a bathroom door..
Is there anyone who still believes he is not guilty?
Need O J Simpson's lawyer? Not really. The one he's got has done a textbook job so far, absolutely impeccable. He's got the case up and running and got everyone focussing on a peculiarly ill-trained policeman, who looked completely unaccustomed to being in court, and thus on apparent defects in the prosecution case.
The problem remains that Pistorius shot 4 times intending something and that something must have been to kill or seriously injure whoever was in that tiny room. Over here, that's enough for murder. It only fails to be murder if he was acting in self-defence, which is a complete non-starter.
The problem remains that Pistorius shot 4 times intending something and that something must have been to kill or seriously injure whoever was in that tiny room. Over here, that's enough for murder. It only fails to be murder if he was acting in self-defence, which is a complete non-starter.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.