KZNSeagull
Well-known member
Bail hearing has started at around about the same time as Reeva's funeral. Media blackout at funeral I believe, but family will hold press conference later apparently.
Following on twitter so very patchy, but gist of hearing appears to be:
Prosecutor says Pistorius put on prosthetic legs and walked 7 metres before firing through the locked bathroom door. He then broke the door down and carried her downstairs. Prosecutor argues that this is premeditation. No mention of bloodied cricket bat. "I walk seven metres, I see a bathroom door, I shoot... The motive is to kill." They argue that there is no evidence to support his theory of there being a burglar in the house.
Defence council says that there were problems in the relationship - she did not want him anymore and told friends that she was scared. They are surprised that the state have not put this into evidence (for opposing bail)
OP is going to detail his version of what happened that night in a affidavit.
Defence says that the house was unlocked, but living in these secure estates gives a false sense of security and there are murders at these places all the time! Evidently there are many cases of husbands shooting wives/children thinking that they are burglars! This is therefore not premeditated.
They also say that "there may have been an argument earlier" but this is no proof of murder.
Prosecutor: having heard defence's version of events, he is even more convinced that it was premeditated! It's not like he woke up with someone at his bedside and he reacted. That is not premeditated. The motive now is "I want to kill". I see a closed door and I shoot. I want to kill, I don't care.
Following on twitter so very patchy, but gist of hearing appears to be:
Prosecutor says Pistorius put on prosthetic legs and walked 7 metres before firing through the locked bathroom door. He then broke the door down and carried her downstairs. Prosecutor argues that this is premeditation. No mention of bloodied cricket bat. "I walk seven metres, I see a bathroom door, I shoot... The motive is to kill." They argue that there is no evidence to support his theory of there being a burglar in the house.
Defence council says that there were problems in the relationship - she did not want him anymore and told friends that she was scared. They are surprised that the state have not put this into evidence (for opposing bail)
OP is going to detail his version of what happened that night in a affidavit.
Defence says that the house was unlocked, but living in these secure estates gives a false sense of security and there are murders at these places all the time! Evidently there are many cases of husbands shooting wives/children thinking that they are burglars! This is therefore not premeditated.
They also say that "there may have been an argument earlier" but this is no proof of murder.
Prosecutor: having heard defence's version of events, he is even more convinced that it was premeditated! It's not like he woke up with someone at his bedside and he reacted. That is not premeditated. The motive now is "I want to kill". I see a closed door and I shoot. I want to kill, I don't care.
