villa_shere Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 Has it been mentioned if she was at the house during the day/night? Otherwise wouldnt he wake up and think 'hold on where's my mrs gone?' before pumping four shots off. sounds like premeditated murder to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 In south africa I believe it is legal to shoot someone who is in your house. You are supposed to fire a warning shot first but after that, if they are still in your house it is fair game. No, that's wrong. Apparently the law used to be more permissive, so that you could shoot someone even if they were running away. Now it's based on whether there is an imminent threat to life. So you can't continue shooting after the threat has gone, eg if you incapacitate them. You can't shoot them in defence of property, or as retribution, or because they are on your property. Something here on it: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/southafrica/9871195/Oscar-Pistorius-murder-charge-South-African-self-defence-law.html I suppose the question would be (assuming you accept that he woke up believing there was an intruder, rather than pursued his fleeing girlfriend in order to kill her) whether an intruder locked in a toilet posed a threat to life sufficient to justify killing them. That would seem quite a leap of the imagination, even if SA courts take a fairly wide interpretation of this.Has it been mentioned if she was at the house during the day/night? Otherwise wouldnt he wake up and think 'hold on where's my mrs gone?' before pumping four shots off. sounds like premeditated murder to me. CCTV shows her arriving at 6pm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted February 19, 2013 VT Supporter Share Posted February 19, 2013 (edited) On the intruder thing Trent has mentioned above, surely (and I don't know the setup of his house) the last thing you'd want to do is give the intruder a chance to shoot you. His best bet would have been to get cover and wait until this person came out of the bathroom and then take him out, by shooting through the door he may have missed and then given the intruder a chance to get himself some cover and fire back, illogical. I love comments like this. He's not a trained secret agent. IF (a big if) the story of him thinking she was an intruder was true, I doubt he'd be thinking completely logically and weighing up his best strategic options, and hatching some master plan by "getting cover" like some sort of commando. I'd imagine it would be more like "****!! THERE'S SOMEONE IN MY HOUSE" *bang bang bang bang* I love comments like this. Putting words into somebody elses mouth and trying to make them look stupid. Who said anything about him being a trained secret agent? Merely pointing out that I would imagine that put into that situation, the last thing that you would do is start unleashing bullet after bullet into a door, without having any clue who was behind it, what they were doing, where they were stood etc etc. Perhaps I am idealistic, I'm sure he wouldn't have time to hatch any kind of plan, or be in the frame of mind to do so but I would have thought that hiding behind something would be the most natural thing to do, after all, he is not a trained killer who is used to firing a weapon (perhaps he is). Either way, it is a flimsy excuse whichever way you flip it around, it will be interesting to see what 'story' they end up with and how the justice system deals with him. I wasn't trying to make anyone look stupid, chill out. I was merely pointing out that put in that situation, I don't think you'd be thinking straight. I agree you wouldn't shoot through a door without knowing who was behind it. But IF (and again it's a big IF) his story is true then he "knew" it was an intruder (it's just that what he "knew" was incorrect). And if you thought you were enough at risk to have to shoot the other person I'd say it's much more likely that you'd just shoot them while you could rather than find cover and sit and wait for them. Either way, I think we can both agree that it's a flimsy excuse either way and it sounds very unlikely that he thought she was an intruder in the first place. Edited February 19, 2013 by Stevo985 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coda Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 I wonder if his defence will go down the parasomnia route. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CI Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 What time is the bail decision ? The guy struck me as an A Grade clearing in the woods after last summers sour grapes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meath_Villan Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 What time is the bail decision ? The guy struck me as an A Grade clearing in the woods after last summers sour grapes to be fair hes hardly going to do a runner .......... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
choffer Posted February 19, 2013 VT Supporter Share Posted February 19, 2013 So his defence is that they were in bed together, he woke up and went to close a door but at the same time, unbeknown to him, she got up and went to the bathroom. He mistook her for an intruder and shot through the door. Then he called out for her to call the rozzers. It was only when she didn't respond that he realised it was her in there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shillzz Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 So he then proceeded to bash her in with a cricket bat because it would have been rude not to? (Did he even bash her in with a cricket bat? He seems to be suggesting that it was only used to knock the door down) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 So his defence is that they were in bed together, he woke up and went to close a door but at the same time, unbeknown to him, she got up and went to the bathroom. He mistook her for an intruder and shot through the door. Then he called out for her to call the rozzers. It was only when she didn't respond that he realised it was her in there. That 'defence' is worthy of a Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 (edited) So his defence is that they were in bed together, he woke up and went to close a door but at the same time, unbeknown to him, she got up and went to the bathroom. He mistook her for an intruder and shot through the door. Then he called out for her to call the rozzers. It was only when she didn't respond that he realised it was her in there. Worst. Defence. Ever. (Even worse than Villa's defence at corners). Edited February 19, 2013 by Tamuff_Villa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 From what I've heard so far about this, I really hope this tosser goes down for life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shillzz Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 One thing I will say in his defense is that it could only have been pre-meditated murder if he was the most idiotic of individuals. If you were going to plan to kill someone, even a 5 year old could come up with something a little more inconspicuous than shooting her in your own bathroom. Probably still murder, but pre-meditated seems highly unlikely to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pongotastic Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 I'm forever getting in trouble with my missus for taking random shots at the bathroom door when she gets up in the night for a jimmy riddle. At this rate we're gonna need a new bathroom door the amount of gun shot holes.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frobisher Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 I may have read it wrong but part of his defence is that he was without his prosthetic legs and therefore felt vulnerable and had limited mobility. He also claims that after shooting her he carried her downstairs, how did he do this on stumps? Is that possible? Or did he stop to put his legs on while his girlfriend lay dying? There is no way this is going to hold up, surely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 One thing I will say in his defense is that it could only have been pre-meditated murder if he was the most idiotic of individuals. If you were going to plan to kill someone, even a 5 year old could come up with something a little more inconspicuous than shooting her in your own bathroom. Probably still murder, but pre-meditated seems highly unlikely to me. Well they are arguing that it was premeditated by him having to actively go for his gun, get his legs on(!), pursue her around the house and then still shoot her whilst she hid in the bathroom. Not that he had been planning it for some time, just that he thought "I'll kill her!" then went through the steps required to make it happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PussEKatt Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 He dos'ent appear to be too worried about it as he still has a spring in his step. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pongotastic Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 5 days he's had to put this affadavit together. Is that the best he could come up with? This is more unbelievable than a Crossroads story line. He will have to spend more on his defence than QPR to survive this one! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shillzz Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 One thing I will say in his defense is that it could only have been pre-meditated murder if he was the most idiotic of individuals. If you were going to plan to kill someone, even a 5 year old could come up with something a little more inconspicuous than shooting her in your own bathroom. Probably still murder, but pre-meditated seems highly unlikely to me. Well they are arguing that it was premeditated by him having to actively go for his gun, get his legs on(!), pursue her around the house and then still shoot her whilst she hid in the bathroom. Not that he had been planning it for some time, just that he thought "I'll kill her!" then went through the steps required to make it happen. ****, I didn't realise that's what constituted pre-meditated murder. You could pretty much stretch that out to cover any murder that ever took place, the murderer always has to put into action a number of things in order to end the life of the victim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 (edited) Guilty as sin as I see it. A few things to note: he now claims he didn't have his 'legs' on, went to get a fan or some such as then heard noise from the bathroom so decided it MUST be an intruder and opened fire (presumably before going back to the bedroom and seeing GF was not there). So: a. Did he take his gun with him to go and get this fan? Seems a bit strange, if he keeps his gun by his bed in his bedroom. b. would he not think to check it's not his GF in the bathroom, a far more lilely scenario than an intruder? c. Why would an intruder be in the bathroom?! d. Why the feck would an intruder be LOCKED in the bathroom. e. Why had no alarms gone off if there was an intruder - we're told these places have very high security. Is there a cricket bat with her blood/DNA on it? Does she have any bruising consistent with a cricket bat attack? Did the neighbours hear earlier disturbances from the house - I think we've heard yes on that Have the police been called to domestics at this address between these 2 people before - I think we've heard yes on that too. If this guy gets off with anything less than murder, the prosection want 'shooting'. Edited February 19, 2013 by Jon 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarewsEyebrowDesigner Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 From what I've heard so far about this, I really hope this tosser goes down for life. This. What a prick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts