ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags murder cases , Oscar Pistorius , South Africa cases

Reply
Old 13th October 2017, 05:08 PM   #801
Sideroxylon
Featherless biped
 
Sideroxylon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Aporia
Posts: 18,062
“But he’s a...”
__________________
'The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool.' - Richard Feynman
Sideroxylon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2017, 12:01 AM   #802
Scordatura
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Pacific Northwest, USA, near the Isle of Lucy
Posts: 383
It's not too late to order your Oscar Pistorius "Blade Runner" costume for Halloween. Bullets not included.

https://www.joke.co.uk/goto/oscar-pistorius

Regardless of the outcome of the November appeal I don't think Oscar will ever regain the fan base he once had. He's washed up and the butt of jokes - what company would hire him to rep their products? Well, maybe Black Talon Bullets.
Scordatura is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2017, 02:38 AM   #803
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 7,324
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
As others have said, this is irrelevant nonsense. Even if one accepts that Pistorius thought it was an intruder behind the door, or at least accepts that his assertion to that effect can't be disproved, he is still guilty of murder because he knowingly shot at a person with the intent to kill them, and did in fact kill them.

That's what he was convicted of. He wasn't convicted of knowingly murdering Reeva Steenkamp in the course of an acrimonious domestic dispute because that cannot be proved to be what happened. He was convicted of intentionally murdering whoever it was behind the door. That it happened to be Reeva Steenkamp is not the point, nor is it relevant whether or not he knew it was her or believed it was someone else.

You have been told this so often by so many posters in this thread I am beginning to wonder about your reading comprehension skills.
Rolfe:
I can't and will never agree.
It is fundamental for the Steemcamp family to understand whether Pistorius was defending or attacking.
I never thought you would be an aggressor where ethics and logic are the ingredients in the debate.
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2017, 03:13 AM   #804
Sideroxylon
Featherless biped
 
Sideroxylon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Aporia
Posts: 18,062
*Chuckle*
__________________
'The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool.' - Richard Feynman
Sideroxylon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2017, 03:30 AM   #805
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,676
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
Rolfe:
I can't and will never agree.
It is fundamental for the Steemcamp family to understand whether Pistorius was defending or attacking.
I never thought you would be an aggressor where ethics and logic are the ingredients in the debate.

He wasn't even convicted of deliberately shooting Reeva. He was convicted of shooting the person behind the door with intent to kill.

It may well be very important for Reeva's family to understand whether or not he knew the person he was shooting was Reeva, but that's not something you or I or anyone on this thread can do anything about. The court accepted that it couldn't be proved he deliberately killed Reeva, only that he deliberately killed another human being. That's what he's serving time for.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2017, 03:36 AM   #806
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 7,324
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
He wasn't even convicted of deliberately shooting Reeva. He was convicted of shooting the person behind the door with intent to kill.

It may well be very important for Reeva's family to understand whether or not he knew the person he was shooting was Reeva, but that's not something you or I or anyone on this thread can do anything about. The court accepted that it couldn't be proved he deliberately killed Reeva, only that he deliberately killed another human being. That's what he's serving time for.
I don't for an instant accept he intended to kill. A fluke shot got her brain. 4 shots through a closed door certainly create a high contingent risk of death. Reeva nearly escaped death nevertheless.

Interesting question I have not considered
Did he empty the gun chamber??
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2017, 05:13 AM   #807
MikeG
Now. Do it now.
 
MikeG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 19,689
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
I don't for an instant accept he intended to kill........
So what do you think the 4 shots through the middle of a closed door of a small toilet cubical were intended to do?
__________________
The Conservatives want to keep wogs out and march boldly back to the 1950s when Britain still had an Empire and blacks, women, poofs and Irish knew their place. The Don That's what we've sunk to here.
MikeG is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2017, 05:17 AM   #808
SpitfireIX
Illuminator
 
SpitfireIX's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana, USA
Posts: 3,738
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
I don't for an instant accept he intended to kill. A fluke shot got her brain. 4 shots through a closed door certainly create a high contingent risk of death. Reeva nearly escaped death nevertheless.

Even granting, arguendo, that he didn't intend to kill whoever was behind the door, he clearly acted with depraved indifference, which still makes it murder.

Originally Posted by Samson View Post
Interesting question I have not considered
Did he empty the gun chamber??

Emptying the chamber would mean he ejected the magazine and worked the slide to clear the round remaining in the weapon. I have no idea why he would have done that, nor what the significance would be if he did.

Possibly you meant "did he fire all the ammunition in his pistol?" The answer to that is no. Not even close. The Taurus PT 917 can hold 20 rounds in its magazine.
__________________
Handy responses to conspiracy theorists' claims:
1) "I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." --Charles Babbage
2) "This isn't right. This isn't even wrong." --Wolfgang Pauli
3) "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." --Inigo Montoya
SpitfireIX is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2017, 05:21 AM   #809
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 40,730
Without disagreeing with the main commentary of MikeG and Rolfe here, I believe that Oscar did intend to kill Reeva. His testimony that he didn't notice that the love of his life wasn't in bed as he pulled his gun from under the bed and manouvered around it beggars disbelief.

He was guilty of murder regardless of this, but nothing will sway my belief that it was a cold blooded execution.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2017, 05:54 AM   #810
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,676
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
Without disagreeing with the main commentary of MikeG and Rolfe here, I believe that Oscar did intend to kill Reeva. His testimony that he didn't notice that the love of his life wasn't in bed as he pulled his gun from under the bed and manouvered around it beggars disbelief.

He was guilty of murder regardless of this, but nothing will sway my belief that it was a cold blooded execution.

I disagree with your last three words here. I don't think it was cold-blooded at all. Nobody who was premeditating murder would choose that method. I think he went after her in a temper and blazed away without thinking, then the "what have I done?" hit him a moment later.

No, that can't be proved so he was rightly convicted on the basis that he didn't know it was her, but on balance I think he did. I stress "on balance", because of course I could be swayed by more evidence in the opposite direction. I also think "what have I done?" was probably more about the consequences for himself than anything else, though.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.

Last edited by Rolfe; 14th October 2017 at 05:55 AM.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2017, 12:13 PM   #811
Ampulla of Vater
Master Poster
 
Ampulla of Vater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: North of the White Line of Toldt
Posts: 2,888
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
I don't for an instant accept he intended to kill. A fluke shot got her brain. 4 shots through a closed door certainly create a high contingent risk of death. Reeva nearly escaped death nevertheless.

Interesting question I have not considered
Did he empty the gun chamber??
Why do you keep stating this? She was shot through her hip and her elbow too. There was nothing "fluke" about the shot to her head.
Ampulla of Vater is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2017, 01:39 PM   #812
Matthew Best
Philosopher
 
Matthew Best's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Leicester Square, London
Posts: 5,880
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
His testimony that he didn't notice that the love of his life wasn't in bed as he pulled his gun from under the bed and manouvered around it beggars disbelief.
I think you mean it beggars belief.
Matthew Best is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th October 2017, 01:06 AM   #813
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 40,730
Originally Posted by Matthew Best View Post
I think you mean it beggars belief.
Yes, you are right. My apologies.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:50 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.