Team Boston legal (State prosecutor ) - Mr. Oscar Pistorious' Trial.

harshitfever thumbnail
13th Anniversary Thumbnail Explorer Thumbnail
Posted: 11 years ago
#1




















CROWN PROSECUTOR
Honourable Members of the Court,
We have the honor to argue on behalf of the Steenkamp Family for the justice of their daughter , Ms. Reeva Steenkamp

We, as the Crown Prosecutors of the State believe that the accused should be charged with a harsher sentence.



Edited by harshitfever - 11 years ago

Created

Last reply

Replies

5

Views

941

Users

2

Frequent Posters

harshitfever thumbnail
13th Anniversary Thumbnail Explorer Thumbnail
Posted: 11 years ago
#2



Argument No.1 : It was not Culpable Homicide.

Oscar got sentenced under "Culpable Homicide ", for those who don't know - Culpable Homicide is used where an unlawful killing of a person is done but not with an intention, but due to negligence, by mistake, in defense or foreseeing of danger.

According to Oscar, he heard a movement inside the toilet and thought whoever was inside was coming out to attack him, so he took out his forearm

'Before I knew it, I had fired four shots at the door,' he said.

We cannot accept that Mr Pistorius fired the gun by accident or before he knew what was happening. And he had armed himself with a lethal weapon and clearly wanted to use it. The other question is , why he fired not one, but four shots, it was only after the shooting he went to check Reeva. This is version is very improbable.

According to the neighbours -they heard screaming and sound of a gunshot.

From this only one question is arisen -if his neighbours heard the screaming why didn't Oscar?, why didn't he stop at first shot why did he continue?. Does the defense wants us to beleive that everybody heard the scream but not Oscar?. This is a joke to be honest.

Reeva's postmortem report shows bruises on her upper part of the right thigh and behind her left knee and shin, these bruises are not at all related to the shooting, these bruises suggests that Oscar may have been violent with her that night and she could have hid herself in the bathroom only to get shot by an angry Oscar.




Argument No.2: Oscar -Reeva relationship.

We dug in their relationship to find out how good or bad it was, the results do not indicate that they were happy.

While investigating the text chat between the two ( Oscar and Reeva , we found indications which may throw light on what happened that night between the couple.

A list of intimate cellphone messages were exchanged between the couple, some sent in the days before Pistorius fatally shot Steenkamp,

One in which she told him "I'm scared of you sometimes and how you snap at me". Now Steenkamp felt scared of Oscar, why was that?, was he violent with her before?, why else would a woman feel scared of her boyfriend.

Why did Steenkamp professed herself in messages to Pistorius to be "scared of you sometimes and how u snap at me and of how you will react to me". Steenkamp felt"attacked", she wrote, by the person she "deserved protection from." A lady only feels attacked when she is scared and she was definitely scared of him.

Even Pistorius himself said the the couple had a disagreement at a social function one day and he was "maybe just being sensitive, insecure or jealous", Although he said that he asked forgiveness from Reeva. This may be a flimflam by Oscar and his defense to prove to the court that Oscar is a sensitive man while he is not.

Reeva often used to paint a girl hiding from a man holding a gun, this might indicate that she was frightened by Oscar.

Reeva's mother - June Steenkamp shockingly claimed that Oscar Pistorius was "Sure To Kill Someone Sooner Or Later". Her mother already felt what was going to happen, she did know that Oscar was going to kill someone but little did she know that it would be her daughter.



Argument No.3: Oscar Pistorious' previous records.

Oscar is a very short tempered man and it was evident by one of his act which came in light to us , Oscar once scolded his housekeeper in-front of a whole T.V crew just because the keeper left the garage door open. His short tempered-ness would have been the reason for the shooting of Steenkamp.

In 2009, the 26-year-old paralympian, who was the first double amputee to ever compete in the Olympics, wasarrested and spent a night in jail after allegedly physically assaulting a 19-year-old girl at his house.

The girl had been asked to leave a party Oscar was hosting, and when she refused,he slammed the front door on her, incidentally catching the girl's leg with it. The door-slamming inflicted bruises on the girl, and Oscar was initially charged with assault with intent to cause grievous bodily harm.

Pistorius was said to have clashed with a police officer who picked up his firearm, telling him,"You can't just touch another man's gun." Soon after, he fired the weapon through the roof of a car in which he was traveling and laughed about it, his former friend Darren Fresco testified.

Fresco described another shooting incident in a restaurant in Johannesburg in January 2013. He said he handed his gun, a Glock 27 .40-calibre pistol, under the table to Pistorius. But the gun went off. "Instantly he passed the weapon back to me, under the table, and he said, Please, there's too much media hype around me at the moment, please can you take the rap?'" he said. "Being a friend I said I would, with pleasure

A video of Pistorius firing a gun at a watermelon and saying off-camera: "It's a lot softer than brains. But ... it's like a zombie stopper."

These incidents show us that his past records have been quite shady.

He had no control over his surge of emotions and he could be danger to the State in future. Possession of Firearms, was illegal here which shows his illegal activities were at large. We can already foresee that Oscar and Reeva had a tiff after which Reeva tried to hide herself in the bathroom from the enraged Oscar.


Edited by harshitfever - 11 years ago
harshitfever thumbnail
13th Anniversary Thumbnail Explorer Thumbnail
Posted: 11 years ago
#3







Counter - Argument No.1: The claim of victim being an intruder.

According to Mr.Pistorious,

He heard the bathroom window sliding open and believed that an intruder, or intruders, had entered the bathroom through a window which was not fitted with burglar bars.

Mr Pistorius said he grabbed his firearm and told Ms Steenkamp, who he thought was still in bed, to call the police.

Mr Pistorius could see the bathroom window was open and toilet door closed. He said he did not know whether the intruders were outside on a ladder or in the toilet.

He had his firearm in front of him, he heard a movement inside the toilet and thought whoever was inside was coming out to attack him.

'Before I knew it, I had fired four shots at the door,' he said.

Mr Pistorius said he went back to the bedroom and noticed that Ms Steenkamp was not there. Mr Pistorius said this was when he realized she could have been in the toilet and rushed back to the bathroom

As we know the shooting of Reeva took place at around 3:00 am, the claim of Oscar was that he 'thought Reeva as an intruder' which is not viable nor conceivable to a human mind about how Oscar thought of it being an intruder.

According to Oscar he asked Reeva to call for police it made no sense that Ms Steenkamp did not hear him scream 'Get out' or call the police, as she had her mobile phone with her. Why would she not reply to Oscar after she heard him scream "Get out", it is clear that Reeva intentionally went into the bathroom and Oscar knew it. Oscar's neighbour's heard Reeva and Oscar's argument which makes it clear that they had a tiff. Oscar was a short tempered man and the evidence indicates that Reeva was running from Oscar, not from an intruder.

Oscar Pistorius testified that seconds before killing Reeva Steenkamp - he did not fire a warning shot into the corner shower in his bathroom because he was concerned about a "ricochet". Does that show sufficient presence of mind to raise questions about his "unthinking", "panicking" and "instinctive" shots at the toilet door immediately afterwards?, Oscar knew what he was doing, he was in his senses which further suggests that he knew Reeva was in there.

After getting the post death report, State pathologist Gert Saayman said food in Steenkamp's stomach suggested she had eaten at about 1am, two hours before she died, raising questions over Pistorius's testimony that the couple went to bed at 10pm.

This makes it clear that Oscar had no reason to think of an intruder, Oscar and Reeva had a fight in which Reeva tried to run into the bathroom for her safety but was shot thrice. This makes a lot more sense and all the evidence indicate this.

All this adds up to only one thing, it was not a mistake, it was a deliberate homicide






Counter-Argument No.2 - Assigning the cold blooded murder under a petty Mistake.

Oscar and his Defense will try to prove this murder as a mistake done in a emotional spur of the moment, this lame reason is not really conceivable.
How can Oscar fire 4 shots by mistake?, how can Oscar not see his bedside to check Reeva, how can Oscar not even call Reeva?. These questions are fundamental and Oscar doesn't have any answer(s) to them. Does Oscar or his Defense wants us to believe that Oscar got up and fired 4 shots in his sleep before he could regain his composure, I will not be surprised if the Defense claims that his finger slipped 4 times, really they might even try this to prove their improbable version of pure lie.

Oscar and Reeva had a tiff the night Reeva was killed, Oscar's neighbour, Estelle van der Merwe told the court that
she woke up to hear an argument and four shots, this indicates that Oscar and Reeva had a big argument in which Oscar got furious, Reeva ran into the bathroom with her phone in order to call for help but Oscar shot her through the door.

Additionally State pathologist Gert Saayman said
food in Steenkamp's stomach suggested she had eaten at about 1am, two hours before she died, this raises a lot of questions over Pistorius's testimony that the couple went to bed at 10pm.




Edited by harshitfever - 11 years ago
TheWatcher thumbnail
13th Anniversary Thumbnail Voyager Thumbnail Engager Level 1 Thumbnail
Posted: 11 years ago
#4




Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury, and the respected Judges, as the State prosecution we believe that Mr.Oscar Pistorious is guilty of Homicide Murder and should be charged under the Section 51 of South Africa's Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1997 which prescribes maximum sentence up to 25 years, we humbly appeal for a sentence of 15 years at the least, this man has no surge of control over his emotions, he may pose a threat to the state in future - if not punished in accordance of to his crime.
So now its up to the judges to make a decision.

With this we end our case.


Edited by TheWatcher - 11 years ago
TheWatcher thumbnail
13th Anniversary Thumbnail Voyager Thumbnail Engager Level 1 Thumbnail
Posted: 11 years ago
#5
harshitfever thumbnail
13th Anniversary Thumbnail Explorer Thumbnail
Posted: 11 years ago
#6



Justice cannot be from one side alone,but must be for both
by Eleanor Roosevelt


Which we believe
Regards,



Edited by harshitfever - 11 years ago

Related Topics

Top

Stay Connected with IndiaForums!

Be the first to know about the latest news, updates, and exclusive content.

Add to Home Screen!

Install this web app on your iPhone for the best experience. It's easy, just tap and then "Add to Home Screen".