IS HE GUILTY?

I saw that betting but was very surprised at the odds. Do they know something I don't????????????:S

Safest bet Imo bet on the verdict to be appealed ()

Trial will probably be on Channel 239. Cecil will be the roving reporter><

I am not against this post but consider it a waste of time and space.
All we know to date is that he has admitted he shot her,for the reasons HE has given.
The case to prove is what was the motive.
Time will tell.

Im led to believe there was another woman involved who shot her and Oscar is taking the rap???

mr hawaii Wrote:

---

> Were there any holes in the ceiling? The size of
> the toilet is also important as a reasonable man
> would know that if they were shooting into such a
> confined space they would be likely to injure or
> kill someone, much like canned hunting. If the
> shots were grouped then that shows that the
> shooter had a reasonable idea where the victim
> was. Were any shots fired into the ground ? Also
> the height of the shots is important as the Victim
> was shorter than the shooter (unless he had not
> put on his legs)and if the shots were aimed in
> such a way to suggest the shooter knew the height
> of the person behind the door that could also be a
> factor. Is there a door leading into the bathroom
> that could have been locked to keep the "intruder"
> in that area(not the toilet). A reasonable man
> would have closed that door and called for help
> before shooting into a closed toilet door I think.
> I think a reasonable man would not have done many
> of the things that OP did and that will be his
> downfall

very good points raised here even a few that I wasn't thinking about
this is the type of post that I was looking for to stimulate discussions and interest
thanx fpr that Mr H

For me the dead give away is how Oscar reacted once he had fired the shots and returned to his bedroom.

According to Oscar's version in his affidavit his alleged state of mind was being filled with “horror and fear of an intruder or intruders being inside the toilet”, and then “I realised that Reeva was not in bed. That is when it dawned on me that it could have been Reeva who was in the toilet. I returned to the bathroom calling her name.”. It does not reason that he would have assumed that it “could have been Reeva who was in the toilet” without having checked the entire house first to ascertain her whereabouts.

Furthermore Oscar acted upon this assumption. It does not make sense that one minute he was fearful for his life shooting at a potential intruder and the next minute he was frantically trying to open the toilet door simply on the basis of “it could have been Reeva who was in the toilet” because in his mind there would still have been a chance that there could still have been an intruder/intruders in the toilet, and he would have then been risking his life.

I believe the only logical and reasonable scenario is that Oscar KNEW Reeva was in the toilet when he was trying to open the door, and the only way he could have known this was because he knew she was in the toilet when he fired the shots.

OP has hired the best Legal Brains available in RSA with the Yanks assisting , will out witt what the state has to Offer.

final Verdict not Guilty ( Money Talks )

Saksy Wrote:

---

> For me the dead give away is how Oscar reacted
> once he had fired the shots and returned to his
> bedroom.
>
> According to Oscar's version in his affidavit his
> alleged state of mind was being filled with
> “horror and fear of an intruder or intruders
> being inside the toilet”, and then “I realised
> that Reeva was not in bed. That is when it dawned
> on me that it could have been Reeva who was in the
> toilet. I returned to the bathroom calling her
> name.”. It does not reason that he would have
> assumed that it “could have been Reeva who was
> in the toilet” without having checked the entire
> house first to ascertain her whereabouts.
>
> Furthermore Oscar acted upon this assumption. It
> does not make sense that one minute he was fearful
> for his life shooting at a potential intruder and
> the next minute he was frantically trying to open
> the toilet door simply on the basis of “it could
> have been Reeva who was in the toilet” because
> in his mind there would still have been a chance
> that there could still have been an
> intruder/intruders in the toilet, and he would
> have then been risking his life.
>
> I believe the only logical and reasonable scenario
> is that Oscar KNEW Reeva was in the toilet when he
> was trying to open the door, and the only way he
> could have known this was because he knew she was
> in the toilet when he fired the shots.

Very logical argument

I say guilty.....but not of 1st degree murder.....

craig1974 Wrote:

---

> Im led to believe there was another woman involved
> who shot her and Oscar is taking the rap???


hah....:

There is a lot of talk about OP's cellphone/s..................surely the key is Reeva's phone ?

If they were fighting ,and she was fearful or hiding, every woman I know would be phoning/texting /tweeting etc somebody !