Constitutional Hill

Oscar Pistorius: Criminal Law 101

Many people have been treating the bail hearing of Oscar Pistorius as if it were a trial, jumping to conclusions about whether he will be found guilty of murder based on the (often untested) allegations made by both sides at this hearing. But those who think they know what the outcome of this trial will be, are probably still going to change their minds several times before the trial is over. The only thing we can be relatively certain of is that specific legal principles will play a decisive role in this trial. It might be helpful to familiarise yourself with these principles before pontificating on the outcome of the trial.

Based on the version of events provided by Pistorius and his lawyers at the bail hearing, the disputed element of the crime will be fault. You can only be found guilty of murder if you unlawfully and intentionally killed another person. You can be found guilty of culpable homicide if you unlawfully and negligently killed another person.

There is no dispute that the killing of Reeva Steenkamp was unlawful as it would be impossible to argue that Pistorius acted in self-defence (or private defence, as it is known in law). You can only rely on self-defence to exclude unlawfulness if an attack on your life (or the life of another), on your property or other similar interest has commenced or is imminent. This is an objective test, so where no attack actually occurred, one cannot rely on self-defence to justify the killing of another person, which you thought was necessary to defend yourself. No such attack occurred or was imminent in this case. (Whether the common law should be developed in line with the values in the Constitution to restrict the right to kill others in defence of your property, is an interesting question, which I cannot discuss here.)

The question then is whether the accused had the requisite intention to kill another person. Intention must not be confused with motive. The person’s motive is the reason why he acted in the manner he did and is usually thought of as irrelevant for determining guilt. Motive can explain why an accused formed the intention to kill another person, but is separate from that intention.

The state can prove the direct intention by proving that the accused actually meant to kill the deceased. Evidence that the accused and the victim were involved in a stormy argument before the killing or that the accused had previously threatened the life of the victim could be important.

The state can also prove intention via the concept of dolus eventualis. This form of intention exists where the state can prove that while the accused might not have meant to kill the victim, he nevertheless foresaw the possibility and nevertheless proceeded with his actions. “Jub Jub” Maarohanye and his co-accused Themba Tshabalala were convicted of murder on the basis of dolus eventualis as the court found that they foresaw that their reckless driving in a built up area might lead to the killing on innocent bystanders.

Forensic evidence about the trajectory of the bullets and the other evidence at the crime scene could be important — especially if this contradicted the version of events put up by the accused. No such evidence has been led at the bail hearing.

In a case where the state has proven that an accused had shot and killed another person in his house in the absence of an attack on his life or property, it would be difficult to escape conviction for murder unless the accused is found to have acted in putative self-defence. Where an accused is found to have genuinely believed that his life was in danger and that he was using reasonable means to avert an attack on himself or his property, he may escape conviction for murder on the grounds that he lacked the requisite intention.

As intention is tested subjectively, the pivotal question would be what the actual state of mind of the accused was at the time when he killed the victim. If an accused genuinely but mistakenly believed that an attack was imminent or that his life was in danger, the court will find that he lacked the intention to be convicted of murder.

An interesting case in which this issue came up was that of S v De Oliveira in which the then Appellate Division had to decide whether Mr De Oliveira, who shot and killed a man in the driveway of his house, genuinely (but wrongly) believed that he was acting in self defence and therefore lacked the intention to commit murder.

Mr De Oliveira had not testified as to his state of mind at the time of the shooting. Because he did not testify the court had to rely on other evidence that could reflect on his state of mind. It commenced from the premise “that no reasonable man in the circumstances in which the appellant found himself would have believed that his life or property was in imminent danger”. Reading between the lines, and taking note of the rather racist references in the case to “black men” as the victims of this crime, Mr De Oliveira might well have killed the victim in his driveway because was black and he harboured racist views about black people.

In any event, as there was no evidence of any noise of glass breaking coming from inside the house, and as the evidence of other witnesses suggested that the victim was not close to the house, the court concluded that Mr De Oliveira could not have acted in putative private defence. Even though the trial judge held that Mr. De Oliveira had “a marked dullness of intellect” and had “not been blessed with more than a comparatively low level of intelligence”, the court could not find that this alone would indicate that he genuinely believed that he acted in self-defence because the accused did not himself testify in his own defence. In the absence of personal testimony about his state of mind:

One would normally impute to a person in the position of the appellant (in the absence of any evidence by such person as to his state of mind at the relevant time) a state of mind akin to that of a reasonable man. In a given case, however, proved facts or circumstances may exist which would justify a different conclusion. In the present instance there are none…. Even from someone with the appellant’s limited intellectual capacity one would prima facie not expect a reaction different from that of the reasonable man, having regard to the particular circumstances of the present matter. In the circumstances there was prima facie proof that the appellant could not have entertained an honest belief that he was entitled to act in private defence. The appellant failed to testify as to his state of mind and to refute this prima facie proof. His silence must weigh heavily against him.

The De Oliveira case suggests that if the state could make out a prima facie case that a reasonable person in Oscar Pistorius’s position could not honestly have believed that he was acting in self-defence, that a defence of putative self-defence would not easily succeed unless Pistorius himself testified as to his state of mind.

If this defence of putative private defence succeeds, that would not, however, be the end of the matter. A court could still find that a reasonable person would have foreseen that his actions would have caused the death of a person and would not have proceeded with his actions despite foreseeing the consequences. In such a case the accused can be convicted of culpable homicide. In other words if a court finds that a reasonable person would not have proceeded with the conduct, then he would be found guilty of culpable homicide.

As I pointed out at the start, it is rather nonsensical from a legal point of view, to speculate at this point whether Pistorius will be found guilty of murder. None of us know. This is not going to stop people speculating about his guilt or innocence, but such speculation might have to do more with the morbid fascination of people with the case than with any legally responsible analysis.

  • Ian Jooste

    Any idea on what the likely sentence would be on a verdict of culpable homicide?

  • cinga

    I’ve only had the privilege of media information and have not been really following the Oscar bail application (for personal reasons).

    I’m a candidate attorney who enjoys litigation very much. From what I’ve been reading in the media is that the defence, atleast at this stage, is arguing that Oscar didn’t have “intention” to kill Reeva (whether this translates to admitting to having intention to kill the “burglar” is another issue which I intend dealing with hereinunder). Mr. Roux’s line of argument is this: the state is arguing that Oscar fired shots, thus had intent to kill, therefore he committed murder. But, Mr Roux further argues, intent [to kill burglar] can’t be transferred to Reeva. With all due respect to Mr. Roux it is my humbly submission that he’s line of argument is misplaced and thus wrong. If the media info is anything to go by it seems as if Oscar admits all the elements except that of intention [because he thought that he was shooting a burglar]. It is further my submission that case law has clarified that the mere fact that Oscar (X) thought that he was killing the Burglar (Y) when infact he was killing Reeva (Z) does not mean he didn’t have intention. The mere fact that he admits to having an intention to kill the burglar means he (subjectively) foresaw that his shooting at the burglar might kill the burglar (which turned out to be Reeva).

  • Ozoneblue

    “No such attack occurred or was imminent in this case.”

    How would OP know that their was no attack imminent? What, if at that point he felt they might just come bursting in through that toilet door. Perhaps three for meters and if you believe him he claimed he had no legs.

    “(Whether the common law should be developed in line with the values in the Constitution to restrict the right to kill others in *defence of your property*, is an interesting question, which I cannot discuss here.)”

    And in defence of your life and your family’s lives? Do you think the Walkerville family or Chris Preece were particularly worried about “their property”.

  • Mike

    @cinga – you are contradicting yourself because Roux said an intent to kill an intruder cannot be transferred by the prosecutuion as an intent to kill Reeva.That then leaves culpable homicide and destroys the argument of premeditated murder.
    The other problem we face is the level of violence that accomapnies house break ins which was unknown in 1946 and indeed in many parts of world today.
    Read the Griekwastad matter were a 14 year old girl was raped first before being murdered, the type of crime that is evident in a civil war situation and for further information on this research what happened in Bosnia because this is where we are heading.

  • Ginela

    May I ask, Was he aware of his partners whereabouts? I mean, speaking under correction, if i am so in-love with someone, why would i not first see if my partner is in bed or if maybe he/she is also roaming around the house before shooting at anything that i hear move? I feel that situation could have been handled beter thus the statement provided does not tally up for me.

  • Brett Nortje

    Many gun owners feel this in a nutshell was the purpose of the Firearms Control Act – to school white South African gunowners into accepting that it is no longers justifiable to kill black perpetrators to protect property.

    Of course, as you know, I believe the purpose of the FCA was far more sinister – Praise the Lord the ANC and the ‘transformed’ SAPS are so inept and made such a hash of its implementation.

    Pity about the uncounted billions wasted, but, except for the likes of Maggs, South Africans no longer have much of a taste for gun control….

    (Whether the common law should be developed in line with the values in the Constitution to restrict the right to kill others in defence of your property, is an interesting question, which I cannot discuss here.)

  • Ozoneblue

    Brett Nortje
    February 22, 2013 at 13:59 pm

    LOL Brett.

    Just quickly remind me again when it was it in fact “justifiable” to kill black perpetrators to protect property. Which par. no of Criminal Law 101 was that again?

  • Howard Klaaste

    Thanks for the crash course for “lawless” (not legally trained) people like me. I however do not understand that if the prosecution pushes for premeditated murder, can the court find someone guilty of culpable homicide nonetheless, or throw out the case because the initial charge was wrong?

  • Mikhail Dworkin Fassbinder

    @ Brett

    “except for the likes of Maggs, South Africans no longer have much of a taste for gun control….”

    Speak for yourself. I am nothing like Maggs. Yet I have an unquenchable appetite for gun control. How do you explain that?


  • Ozoneblue

    Mikhail Dworkin Fassbinder
    February 22, 2013 at 14:40 pm

    “Speak for yourself. I am nothing like Maggs. Yet I have an unquenchable appetite for gun control. How do you explain that?”

    Sure. You don’t need a gun when you have the Lord on your side.

  • Pierre De Vos

    cinga, yes if I am not mistaken the so called error in objecto case, in which X intends to kill Y but kills Z who he believes to be Y, X has intention to kill. If Pistporius had intention to kill intruder but kills Reeva who he believe to be intruder, then he is guilty of the murder.

  • cinga

    @ Mike I appreciate your response and thank you for the material you’re referring me to I will surely look into it. And before my head is bitten off by other bloggers I, once again, reiterate that all I comment about is stuff I have been picking up on social media and thus cannot vouch for its truthfulness or correctness)

    I’ll once again clarify my point the defence’s case is that Oscar did not have intention because he did not have intention to kill Reeva [but had intention to kill the burglar although it later came out that, with the benefit of hindsight, the victim was infact Reeva]. The question therefore is this “does the mere fact that Oscar thought he was killing a burglar mean he lacks intention to kill”[Reeva]? I humbly submit that the answer is No. I further submit that one need not know the identity of his victim in order to have intention. The crucial question to ask is whether or not he (Oscar) had intention to kill? [Whether the burglar or Reeva, its immaterial. In this matter he admits he had (intention to kill the burglar)].

    I am still a candidate attorney maybe I have not (or perhaps did not) fully grasp the basic concepts of criminal law.

  • Ozoneblue

    Hi PdV/cinga.

    What happened to to the Walkerville Trio. I hear their sentencing has been “postponed”. Cinga – do you think if Tony Viana could somehow manage to kill on or two of those burglars – he, his wife and his son may still be alive today, albeit rotting in jail?

  • Gwebecimele
  • Ozoneblue

    “The sense of entitlement and lack of gratitude displayed by these students who come from a country with such high levels of desperate need for higher education, and with limited state resources, is totally unacceptable,” Nzimande said in a statement.”

    LOL. Wake the fuck up Blade, they are black and those Whitish racist Cubans don’t take their we-are-black entitlement bullshit.

  • Mikhail Dworkin Fassbinder

    @ Gwebe

    I am glad you brought up the Cuban crisis. (Those who want to discuss only Pistorious should form their own dedicated “satellite” blog.) But back to the topic; I am proud that our militant students are bringing our revolutionary spirit to the so-called SOCIALIST PARADISE. What do you say, OzoneGuy?

  • Gwebecimele

    Nel & Botha prep for this case is questionnable or are they holding back some cards for later.

    15:52 – Nair: Botha didn’t check on Pistorius’s call to emergency services.

    15:51 – Nair: Botha blundered on the exact nature of substance and needles found on scene.

    15:50 – Nair: Botha may well have contaminated the crime scene by not wearing protective shoes.

    15:48 – Nair: [Botha] didn’t verify cellphone data of deceased, didn’t follow up on phone records of accused.

  • Gwebecimele

    Pretoria Central will be his new home for a while.

  • Ozoneblue

    Mikhail Dworkin Fassbinder
    February 22, 2013 at 15:59 pm

    Look you speaking to the wrong guy about socialism there. gwebs already stated quite unambiguously he doesn’t believe in this national “SERVICE” concept at all.

  • Anonymouse

    Pierre De Vos

    February 22, 2013 at 15:15 pm

    Prof – yes you are not mistaken – error in objecto can never be a valid defence on a count of murder, provided that it stands firm that the accused’s error was only as far as the identity of the victim is concerned. In other words, the accused inttends to kill Y (a suspected intruder in casu), but, inadvertently kills Z (Reeva in casu) – error in objecto cannot be a valid defence. In such a case it does not matter whether the accused did not have the subjective foresight that he might be killing Z instead of Y – and it does not matter that Z’s details are mentioned in the charge (and not that of Y). … On the other hand, I think that error in objecto might be a valid defence if the accused subjectively erred by thinking that he is shooting an animal, and not a human being, under circumstances where he would have been lawfully permitted to kill an animal (e.g., a hunting dog or a wild animal out in fields where a farmer’s sheep are; or baboons suspected of stealing mealies; etc.) … It will all depend on whether the trial court (and / or the appeal courts) believes the accused’s version of the events.

    In this case, however, it appears from the outset that Oscar (on his version) only erred in as far as the identity of the person is concerned – he did not think that he was shooting at something else than a real person. So the defence of error in objecto will not constitute a valid defence.

    Most of what you said above is correct, but I think that more detail should be given as part of your 101 so that other readers may understand – I see one person asks what the possible sentence would be if Oscar is in the end convicted of culpable homicide instead of murder.

    Murder is defined as the unlawful and intentional killing of another human being. The elements that the state will have to prove is (1) willful conduct – either an omissio or commissio [no problem in this case – Oscar was, on his own version, perfectly in his sound and sober senses and he clearly and willfully wanted to discharge some shots from his fire arm, which he did]; (2) unlawfulness of the conduct [again no prolem in this case – conceded by Barry Roux – as obectively judged, Oscar’s life and limb or property were not in danger at all, therefore, not entitled by law to act in private defence]; a consequence of the conduct (which is causally linked to the conduct) – in this case, the death of another person – Reeva [again no problem in this case as consequence – death of a person – and causal link between the conduct – shooting – and the consequence stands beyond any doubt whatsoever). All that remains is to determine whether Oscar was at fault and can thereffore be blamed in terms of the criminal law for his unlawful killing of another human being.

    Murder requires intent as the form of mental blameworthiness (mens rea if you will) – as opposed to culpable homicide where negligence (sometimes called culpa or criminal negligence if you wish) is enoght to establish culpability. The test for intent (as youn rightly observe) is subjective – in other words, the state (through evidence and other objective facts) must establish that the accused (in his own subjective mind) legally intended the killing of another person. Again, as you rightly observe, there are more than one form of intent that is recognized here – dolus directus (or direct intention) where the accused intends killing the other person (regardless of the identity of that person – I might add); dolus indirectus (or indirect intention – where the accused shoots at an object but realises that, in order to hit that object, he will necessarily have to hit and kill a person); and dolus eventualis (subjective forseeable intent – where the accused person foresees that his conduct might kill another person – e.g.’the motorvehicle accident cases resulting in convictions of murder). Again, in this case, I do not think that, even on Oscar’s own version, can he escape the ultimate conclusion that he intended killing another person. He shot at what he perceived to be another person – on the state’s version, Reeva, on his version, a suspected intruder, and a court will have to be naive to hold that he did not intend killing that person (firing four shots, in close grouping, through a closed door on the hieght of the toilet). I do not think that the court will even be required to test for negligence, since intention, probably direct intention, to kill another person would easily be established by the objectively ascertainable facts in this case. (However, if negligence must in the end be tested for – as suggested by Gerrie Nel the best possible scenario for Oscar – the test will be objective, not subjective. In other words, the court will have to determine whether the reasonable person in Oscar’s posistion would have foreseen that he might kill another human being. In such a case – the crime to be considered would be culpable homicide.) I do not think it will come to that though – we have enough facts disclosed at the bail hearing to conclude otherwise, namely that Oscar intended killing another human being. At the most, there can be a difference of opinion whether he directly intended killing another person, or whether he can only be blamed on grounds of dolus eventualis.(The argument by Barry Roux during the bail hearing that the state charged Oscar with the intention to kill Reeva and not with the intention to kill a suspected intruder, and that he can therefore never be held guilty of the crime charged – is laughable to say the least because, as we have established, any error in objecto will not assist Oscar in escaping conviction. If a bomber boms a place, he will be charged and convicted of the murder and attempted murder of every victim by name, even though the accused did not know their identity.)

    However, and again you are right – intention does not only require that the accused person intends (in law) to kill another person – be it with direct, indirect or foreseebale intent; but, also that the accused subjectively knew or, at least, foresaw, that his conduct will also be legally inexcusable or unlawful.

    This is where putative private defence comes into play as in the De Oliveira case you cite. If one subjectively thinks (or, in the case of negligence, if the reasonable personin the same circumstances would have thought) that one’s conduct is lawful – that one is entitled to act in private defence, then intent (or negligence) in the unlawful killing would not have been established. Again, the question will be – who does the court believe? The SCA spelt it out in the De Oliveira matter that a court will not easily come to a decision favourable as to the accused’s state of mind if he does not testify so that his version can be tested through cross examination. However, if an accused person does testify in such circumstances, and his version is not believed to be reasonably possibly true when weighed against the state’s case (evidence and other objectively ascertained facts), and where the court finds that the state’s case had to be believd instead – in other words that there was no error on the legal position, the accused will still be convicted of murder. (By the way – putative private defence also arises in culpable homicide or negligent killing cases – in such cases the court will have to determinne whether the reasonable person in the position of the accused would have known or, at least, foreseen, that his conduct is unlawful.)

    It is in this regard that I have argued elsewhere that Oscar’s version of putative private defence (that he thought he shot at suspected intruders) – on the probabilities alone, sounds less convincing than the version of the state, that he intended killing Reeva. I am also of the opinion that, even should his own version be accepted (which is the most improbable of the two postulations), the trial court will in the end find that he indeed erred in law, in other words that he indeed thoyught that he is entitled to shoot and kill an intruder without first warning and challenging and without establishing that a killing of the person is required. Even if he testifies at his own trial, I do not think he will escape conviction on this defence. If, on the other hand, the state’s case is accepted, which I think more probable at the moment, the court will outright reject his version and find that there was no case of error.

    OK. I am not going into the onus of proof thing – and I know that criminal cases are usualy not settled only by ascertaining the inherent probabilities and improbabilities (the onus is proof beyond reasonable doubt, not proof on a preponderance of probabilities as in civil matters). But, on the facts as they stand, I think one can argue that Oscar’s chances of escaping a conviction at his ultimate trial is less than favourable (or slightly less than average as someone else would have said).

    Now – the question of sentence. The issue of planning or premeditation to murder is only relevant as far as sentence is concerned (and to determine whether the charge is a schedule 6 or a scedule 5 one at a bail hearing). If premeditated or planned – the minimum sentence would be life imprisonment in terms of section 51(1) of the Criminal law Amenment Act 105 of 1997; or, if not premeditated – the minimum sentence would be 15 years imprisonment in terms of section 51(2)(a)(i) of the same Act, except if the court could find that there are substantial and compelling circumstances justifyaing a lesser sentence. In the case of culpable homicide, there is no minimum sentence – but in cases of gross negligence (and I think IF a court finds that intent has not been proven, only negligence, the court will be hell-bent to find that thjere was only minor negligence, not gross negligence on his part), courts will almost invariably impose a term of gaol.

    Oscar’s chances are therefore not good – but, as far as the possibility of bail is concerned, I have remarked elsewhere that, even if the state’s case is strong, which I think it is, he will be granted bail. I do not know what Desmond Nair is thinking – as I am not listening to his judgment right now – but, I think that there is a reasonable possibility of him being granted bail nonetheless. One should however still bear in mind that the magsitrate’s findings at the bail hearing are not binding on the trial court – and two different findings may indeed be possible, depending on the evidence eventually ptesented to the trial court.

    Phew! Please excuse the typos – this was not edited before posted and is strictly off the cuff

  • Anonymouse

    Ok – I just heard – bail was granted.

  • Anonymouse

    But, unfortunately I missed the part where Nair said whether the state’s case is strong or whether Oscar has established that it is not the case.

  • Anonymouse

    Ok I have it – the defence did not show that the state’s case is weak – right or wrong, Nair found other exceptional circumstances to grant bail.

    16:28 – Barry Roux is smiling, chatting to journalists. Gerrie Nel sits alone, impassive, says Phillip de Wet.

    16:27 – Oscar’s brother Carl prays for family who are holding onto each other. Tears flow freely.

    16:25 – Oscar’s sister Aimee bursts into tears as family prays in a circle about the bail ruling, says Adriaan Basson.

    16:25 – Near pandemonium in the Pistorius court room. A week’s worth of pent-up emotions just exploded, says Phillip de Wet.

    16:23 – Phillip de Wet says: Pistorius bail conditions yet to be set. Will be discussed right now. Unclear what the bail amount is.

    16:22 – Nair: I have come to the conclusion that the accused has made a case to be released on bail.

    16:21 – Nair: The accused is not a flight risk and does not show a propensity to violence.

    16:19 – Nair: If public outrage was going to be used as grounds to oppose Pistorius bail, the State should have led evidence to prove it.

    16:18 – Nair, after a pause, jumps straight into more case law.

    16:17 – Nair cites case law where court shouldn’t ignore the personal circumstances of a bail applicant.

    16:16 – Defence looking unhappy says Alex Crawford.

    16:15 – Nair takes a gulp of water. More dramatic effect, says Mandy Wiener.

    16:15 – Nair: No grounds for denying bail on claims of violent past for Pistorius.

    16:09 – Nair the accused has shown tendencies of aggression. Not in dispute he threatened to break someone’s legs.

    16:08 – Nair: I cannot find that it has been established that the accused is a flight risk.

    16:06 – Pistorius is sobbing, clasping tissue and head in hands, says Alex Crawford.

    16:03 – Yet, Nair says, the State can’t show a watertight case either, enough to induce Pistorius to scamper.

    16:02 – Nair: The defence has failed to show this court that there is a weakness in the State’s case.

    16:02 – Nair: I have a problem also with why the accused would venture further into danger… What if the intruder was waiting for him?

  • Gwebecimele

    How is the interest of justice (or of Sttenkamps) being served by granting bail??

  • Anonymouse

    Gwebs – I dunno – but I’m glad Barry Roux now makes the following telling admission

    “16:35 – Roux: we knew that he should get bail…but allowing him to tell the court his entire defence was massive risk.

    16:32 – Barry Roux says he expects bail amount to be about R250 000, tweets Karyn Maughan.”

    Indeed, had Oscar taken the stand, Gerrie Nell would have taken his version to pieces, even more than what Roux did to Botha – the objective facts simply outweigh his version by far as far as I am concerned – but now its the trial court’s baby. (On the side: I doubt whether Nel will attempt to appeal – but there
    is case law on which he can draw to argue an appeal that bail was eroneously granted.)

  • Anonymouse

    Conflicting tweets mention R250,000 and R1,000.000 bail – nevertheless, such high amount shows that even nair thinks that a conviction is probable and, at least that a gaol sentence is probable.

  • Anonymouse
  • Mikhail Dworkin Fassbinder

    All I can say is thank God we now have equal justice under law. I am full of confidence that a poor black man who said he shot his wife in the darkness of his shack, thinking she was an intruder, would likewise have got bail!

  • Beetle

    How many lay people know/ or have tested /proven that a bullet will penetrate a door? … Or that if a bullet should exit on the other side, that such a bullet could inflict serious injury?
    A door does not have a face. It might be quite easy to pump bullets into a door without associating the act with injury, but rather as an act of warning.

    Firing at a door makes me think of the analogy of playing chips at a casino. Ever found that it just doesn’t feel like your hard earned money going down the drain!

  • Adeleida Bingham

    But is it not possible that any murder done by a resident on a potential trespasser could be argued as putative self-defense, considering the track record of violence that typically accompanies a burglary in South Africa?

    And, I miss my dad. Wish he was alive, so we could debate this, for hours, around Sunday lunch.

  • Banjoza

    MDF …. it is likely that a “poor black man who said he shot his wife in the darkness of his shack, thinking she was an intruder” would never be arrested, let alone be denied bail.

    OP’s status as a celebrity has made him a target for an immense amount of speculation, as indeed it made him a target for odd-balls and attention seekers frequently in the recent past. This is common for people in the public eye. There are all sorts of people who want to be able to say “I beat up OP” or “OP is violent – he swore at me when I wanted to grope his girlfriend” … that sort of thing happens to most young men at some time in their lives, more often for the famous. Then when something dreadful happens, as has done, they then claim a propensity for violence.

    As far as the intention to kill one person, then by happenstance killing another is concerned, planning to defend one-self in the situation of attack can hardly be compared to planned (premeditated) murder.

    Reasonable people, living in a situation of extreme crime and the likelyhood of being a target of that crime (as OP is) would be expected to plan (premeditate) and take precautions against the possibility of that event occuring, and what to do in the event it DID happen.

    In the event of violent crime, people almost always ask what the victim failed to do to protect themselves. Yet planning what to do if it DOES occur is considered intent to murder? Heads you lose, tails you lose!

    The prosecution says OP planned (premeditated) the murder (!) of “someone” when he bought a gun to defend himself. Then cited “a defenceless, unarmed burglar””. How would anyone know what the armed state or intention of an intruder behind a closed door would be?

    It is extremely foolish to shoot at something you cannot see. This is basic weapons training but we cannot escape the fact that OP is a highly strung, obviously fearful (of the crime) person who reacted in that situation with the classic “fight or flight” manner. Choosing to “fight” when he percevied himself to be vulnerable without his legs.

    Unless one is in that situation, no-one can know for certain what they would do. Even if you have been in a similar situation you may react differently the next time.

    On balance, and knowing of many other similar cases where this sort of thing has happened (people killing members of their family in the dark, by mistake) I think there is a strong probability that OP’s version of those tragic events is factual.

    Either way, that poor man’s life as he knew it is permanently over and a young woman (who he loved) is dead.

  • Maggs Naidu – Hallelujah – praise the Lord! (

    Mikhail Dworkin Fassbinder
    February 22, 2013 at 17:05 pm


    “I am full of confidence that a poor black man who said he shot his wife in the darkness of his shack, thinking she was an intruder, would likewise have got bail!”

    If I shoot Brett (four times to make sure) dead, can I claim in defence that he was using my toilet?

    Or is it better to claim that I mistook him for a Black guy?

  • Paul

    Thanks Pierre and Anonymouse.
    That was informative.

  • Singh

    @ Anonymouse

    Thanks for the posts. It was much appreciated.

  • Dmwangi


    “Or is it better to claim that I mistook him for a Black guy?”

    It is better if you stop violating the sovereign integrity of SA by overstaying your visa. While it may be common-practice in India to shoot every black guy at will, it is incompatible with the culture and values of an African country.

  • Maggs Naidu – Hallelujah – praise the Lord! (

    February 22, 2013 at 21:38 pm

    Brother Dm,

    If I convince Brett to shoot you a few times, the Lord will thank me.

    BTW – nobody’s calling for the Death Penalty since 14 Feb – do you think it’s a Valentine’s Day resolution?

  • Dmwangi

    @Sister Maggs:

    “If I convince Brett to shoot you a few times, the Lord will thank me.”

    This may reflect some bizarre Hindu belief – that your god countenances murder. But here in Africa we worship the God who infuses each person with an ineffably great dignity. You are free to stop violating SA immigration law and join your brothers at the Taj any time….

  • Maggs Naidu – Hallelujah – praise the Lord! (

    February 22, 2013 at 22:01 pm

    Praise the Lord brother Dm, praise the Lord.

    “But here in Africa we worship the God who infuses each person with an ineffably great dignity.”

    I have been anointed into the great African religion by some Brothers and Sisters who the Lord directed to me in the last few days.

    I have been promised that I will be infused “with an ineffably great dignity” as soon as I pay some money which I am arranging.

    I am so glad that I have found the way to heaven – it’s a bit expensive but with eternal salvation at hand I have been convinced that no cost is too high.

    Will you join us in fellowship?

  • Dmwangi

    “I have been promised that I will be infused “with an ineffably great dignity” as soon as I pay some money which I am arranging.”

    No cash required. In fact, you need not do anything. In fact, it is a fact you cannot change. I understand this is so radically different from the caste-system and ‘paying your way up’ the reincarnation ladder you have difficulty comprehending. But if you’re serious about immigrating to SA, you’ll need to make an effort to understand the culture.

  • Maggs Naidu – Hallelujah – praise the Lord! (

    February 22, 2013 at 22:21 pm

    Dmwangi – you have pain and anger in your heart dear Brother, I can feel it.

    Let the Lord speak to you and you too shall find salvation (cash also helps)!

    “When you start focusing on a loving God who’s given everything & stop focusing on what seems to be going wrong, you will see breakthrough.” I pray that this breakthrough will be peace in the heart regardless of your circumstances. NO ONE CAN TAKE AWAY THE TRUTH IN YOUR HEART.

    God is in control.

    The bible says “Be still, and know that I am God” Psalm 46 (read the whole psalm).

    Also you posted: “Be strong & courageous. Do not be terrified or discouraged, for the LORD your God will be with you wherever you go”. -Josh 1:9.

    Continue to read His word.

    Trust Him when He says “And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.” Romans 8:28 It might not look like it right now, but God has a special purpose for you. Trust him and be still.

    May God bless you

    I am praying that you will be free soon and allow you to grieve properly. I will also pray that God will guide you and your attorneys with full wisdom and grant you full grace in the eyes of the judge to your blessing and freedom from all of this.

    You have strengthened many and now is the time for us to strengthen you. I believe there are many of us. May we do so through prayer and may those prayers cause God to pour His strength unto you to His glory.

  • Dmwangi


    “Dmwangi – you have pain and anger in your heart dear Brother, I can feel it.”

    No pain or anger here, sisi. I think you’re feeling the anxiety of your deportation hearing. But not to worry. As I said, we Africans are very welcoming and hospitable. Make a bit of an effort and you’ll get perm. res. no problem. Just don’t start talking all that kak about the caste-system and the wonderfulness of shooting black guys.

  • Brett Nortje
  • Brett Nortje

    The ANC crudesters believe very deeply in this kind of myth!

    Ozoneblue says:
    February 22, 2013 at 14:05 pm

    Just quickly remind me again when it was it in fact “justifiable” to kill black perpetrators to protect property. Which par. no of Criminal Law 101 was that again?

  • Brett Nortje

    When I speak of ‘you people’ ‘the likes of Maggs’ I mean those with double-digit IQs – in which respect you two ARE very alike. As you show here.

    Thank you.

    Or wait – before I let you off the hook, here is how Gwebecimele does irony:
    Gwebecimele says:
    February 22, 2013 at 15:54 pm

    Isn’t he so much better at it than you?

    Mikhail Dworkin Fassbinder says:
    February 22, 2013 at 14:40 pm

    Speak for yourself. I am nothing like Maggs. Yet I have an unquenchable appetite for gun control. How do you explain that?

  • Mikhail Dworkin Fassbinder

    Maggs, if you want to turn this blog into a sentimentalist poster board of “messages of support” for OP, I am afraid you are barking up the wrong tree. Why don’t you rather convene an OP-dedicated “satellite blog” for that purpose? Anyway, in you native Hindu culture, an athletic hero like he would be “untouchable”, or “caste in stone”. (Ha ha!)

  • Maggs Naidu – Hallelujah – praise the Lord! (

    Brett Nortje
    February 22, 2013 at 23:04 pm


    “When I speak of ‘you people’ ‘the likes of Maggs’ I mean those with double-digit IQs – in which respect you two ARE very alike. As you show here.”

    Please don’t associate me with Dworky.

    He’s a WHITE person.

    But what do you think of me finding the Lord, eh?

  • Maggs Naidu – Hallelujah – praise the Lord! (

    Mikhail Dworkin Fassbinder
    February 22, 2013 at 23:28 pm


    “an athletic hero like he would be “untouchable”, or “caste in stone””

    He who castes the first stone, has been touched by SATAN.

    I shall pray for you, dear child of the devil.

    p.s. Send money.

  • Ozoneblue

    Adeleida Bingham
    February 22, 2013 at 17:25 pm

    “But is it not possible that any murder done by a resident on a potential trespasser could be argued as putative self-defense, considering the track record of violence that typically accompanies a burglary in South Africa?

    And, I miss my dad. Wish he was alive, so we could debate this, for hours, around Sunday lunch.”

    Thank you Adeleida Bingham. Your post says it all.

  • Ozoneblue

    I want to cry, but the tears don’t fit my words.

  • Mikhail Dworkin Fassbinder

    OK, forget OP now until June at least.

    You will not catch me crying like Oscar about the rejection of GAUNTLETT SC. He strikes me as the epitome of acerbic liberal WHITIST positivism that we do not need in Braamfontein. With all his so called “technical” skill, he is the very antithesis of the TRANFORMATIONIST imperative of the Constitution


  • Ozoneblue

    Mikhail Dworkin Fassbinder
    February 23, 2013 at 0:11 am

    Thank you mfd. For putting better words to my tears. Are you in fact saying he is a full on [white, heterosexual ?] CRIPPLE that just ended up trying too hard?

  • Ze Philosopher

    Thank You Anonymouse for imparting your knowledge with us, unlike Maggs, lol

  • Ze Philosopher

    Thank You Anonymouse for imparting your knowledge with us, unlike Maggs, lol. Cinga, you were right all along or atleast that’s my view just that Mike is arrogant and ignorant, deadly combination. Like Nel said : Even if Oscar didn’t plan to shoot Reeva; we say it was pre-planned because he planned to shoot the alleged intruder, it is the cold facts that matter. There were two people in that house, one is dead and the other one is the accused. I know Prof De Vos has advised against being prophets of doom, but the bottom line is, OP’s affidavit gave away much and it is within our rights to draw inference. Further, Roux use of so what makes one wonder. Is he afraid Gerrie Nel will make it 2-0? Cinga, keep up the good eye for facts.

  • Dmwangi


    “But what do you think of me finding the Lord, eh?”

    It’s all fine and good that you found Vishnu. But I think we’re all waiting for you to solve all India’s problems before posting here.

  • Maggs Naidu – Hallelujah – praise the Lord! (

    Ze Philosopher
    February 23, 2013 at 0:46 am


    “Thank You Anonymouse for imparting your knowledge with us, unlike Maggs, lol”


    Doc Mouse is as always the ready reference on matters before the courts, it is invariably delightful to read his wit and wisdom filled insights.

    Now back to my love of the Lord.

    The are some pretty standard indicators of how responses will unfold when matters such as this hits Twitter and media.

    Anene Booysen’s rapists/murderers were condemned to death, to castration, to lynch mobs and more. That the “third suspect” (who was arrested, detained and later released) knew neither Anene nor the other suspects, was not anywhere near where the brutal crimes on the night was irrelevant. Those cops it seems were Botha with a vengeance. Now there’s silence.

    There’s no chance that those suspected of that brutality or the memory of Ms Booysen will receive equitable respect and treatment before the courts.

    We even have a Premier and seasoned ANC cadre, Modise, calling for castration of rapists – even though (as Dworky pointed out) the Freedom Charter calls for “Peace and Friendship”.

    When the guy shot and killed his worker’s child thinking “it was a monkey” let alone an intruder – it was a slap on the wrist.

    We’ve seen the muted responses when homosexuals are murdered, even in the horrific mass murders.

    Race, wealth, sexual orientation, social status …

    But the most fascinating thing (perhaps the cause of my new found love of the Lord) is the amount and the nature of the Lords prayers for OP – but that’s another entire subject.

    But in all this the Steenkamp family have been about the most dignified I’ve come across – all respect to them!

  • Maggs Naidu – Hallelujah – praise the Lord! (

    February 23, 2013 at 8:40 am


    “It’s all fine and good that you found Vishnu.”

    I’ve abandoned Hinduism for the sham that it is a long time ago.

    Take for example that it is the only religion on the planet (maybe the universe) which has a god of education, Saraswathi.

    Yet in India where it is widely practiced over 60 million kids of school going age are not in schools. We might as well pray for Angie Motshekga – she’s kinda god-like, ain’t she?

    There are temples that have more porn than Hustler, more rats than Alex, more monkeys than the DA, more snakes than former ANC presidents. Eish.

  • Ozoneblue

    “She also wanted the court to direct that all future proceedings regarding Oscar be held in camera, “until such time as the media refrain from making a circus out of the South African judicial system”. Annamarie explained to the judge that she felt Pistorius snapped the night he shot Steenkamp as this was not the “Oscar I knew as a little boy”. She also said that she on Monday night saw Pistorius’s biological mother, Sheila, who died years ago, in a dream. “I could feel her presence and I knew she was asking me to do something. I also saw him vividly as he was as a disabled little boy. I just knew I had to do this in memory of Sheila. Was Oscar mentally sound on the night of the shooting? This is what it is all about,” the woman said. According to her, his disability had a big mental effect on him. She said she was no stranger to mental problems, as her former husband (Riethmiller) also suffered from a mental condition. “Oscar felt vulnerable when he did not have his legs on. He was then like a wobbly midget. I know his disability was very difficult for him. His mother brought him up as a true Christian and he is a lovely boy. He has such a lovely character.” Annamarie is of the opinion that on the night of the shooting, Pistorius was like a pressure cooker that just boiled over. “I truly believe he had a mental breakdown, as this is not the Oscar I know.” She told Judge Raulinga that she tried to voice these fears earlier in the morning to the magistrate’s hearing the bail application, but he was not prepared to hear her. She then, in the name of justice and because the constitution demanded it of her, decided to turn to the high court.”

  • Ozoneblue
  • Ozoneblue

    “He grew up in a Christian home,[10] and has an elder brother, Carl, and a younger sister, Aimée.[11][12] Pistorius credits his late mother, who died at the age of 43 when Pistorius was 15 years old, as a major influence in his life.[13][14]”


  • Dmwangi


    “There are temples that have more porn than Hustler, more rats than Alex, more monkeys than the DA, more snakes than former ANC presidents.”

    Are you describing your home in Mumbai? Nevermind, just make sure you don’t contribute anything here until you sort out the corruption in India. It’s nice that you take such interest in SA issues but you should show some attention to your country’s endemic problems before posing solutions to Africans.

  • Ozoneblue

    Maggs Naidu – Hallelujah – praise the Lord! (
    February 23, 2013 at 8:43 am

    We’ve seen the muted responses when homosexuals are murdered, even in the horrific mass murders.

    “Race, wealth, sexual orientation, social status …”

    I have now noticed you have now totally dropped disability. Why. How do you think it must feel to grow up without legs?

  • Ozoneblue

    “Oscar felt vulnerable when he did not have his legs on. He was then like a wobbly midget. I know his disability was very difficult for him.”

    I cannot imagine that I can live like that.

  • Maggs Naidu – Hallelujah – praise the Lord! (

    February 23, 2013 at 9:57 am


    “How do you think it must feel to grow up without legs?”

    I have no idea – probably less difficult that those who lose their legs later in life.

    But I’m wondering what it must be like to be shot dead for using a toilet!

    Perhaps Cape Town was ahead of its time with open toilets, ne.

  • Ozoneblue

    Maggs Naidu – Hallelujah – praise the Lord! (
    February 23, 2013 at 10:10 am

    “But I’m wondering what it must be like to be shot dead for using a toilet!”

    Do you think that is why Oscar shot her. Let me ask you again, why did you now drop the structural prejudice towards disability from your list of prejudices that you have categorised just to posts ago?

    It doesn’t fit into your own pattern of prejudice and in this case it is rather inconvenient and will just unnecessarily complicate the “critical theory”.

  • Maggs Naidu – Hallelujah – praise the Lord! (

    February 23, 2013 at 10:25 am

    Ozone Boy,

    “Do you think that is why Oscar shot her.”

    I dunno why he shot and killed her.

    It is reported that she was in the toilet; the lights were off; the door was locked; he shot her, several times. She’s dead.

    #ShootMan syndrome?

  • Ozoneblue

    This is a comment I saw on another forum.

    X wrote:
    “I’m not sure that the fist-pumping “yes” that erupted when bail was granted is going to do much to win over those people who think that shooting your defenceless girlfriend dead, even accidentally, is an awful, shameful thing.”

    Y replies:
    “That is unfortunately what happens when tragedies of this nature are politicised to this extent. The trauma of the victims and family are totally ignored, we see this everyday in South Africa when liberals and politicians ignore some of the most brutal crimes committed on daily basis especially against whites simply because it doesn’t fit into their politically correct take on things. In this case the ANCWL were demonstrating outside the court, calling for Pistorius to “rot in jail” – perhaps correctly so but it turns Oscar into the underdog, the victim himself since he comes from a minority that has absolutely no political power, and despite his disability he has managed to overcome. That courage, work ethic and “can do” attitude is not welcomed in a place such as South Africa that is dominated by politics of victimhood and racial entitlement.”

  • Gwebecimele
  • Gwebecimele

    No speeches or noises will change this behaviuor only action. These rapists are also watching how the likes of OP can squeeze bail out of the system.

  • Ozoneblue

    February 23, 2013 at 11:40 am

    “No speeches or noises will change this behaviuor only action.”

    How about the reintroduction of national service to make men out of rapists?

    You seem to be one of those people who like to complain a lot, always claiming victimhood to see how many privileges you can squeeze out of the system. But like those medical students in Cuba you want to do fokkol.

  • Ze Philosopher

    Maggs: You reckon Zille anticipated OP’s reckless actions? Maybe she must have erected lots of those open toilets at Langebaan. Modise might be suffering from late Menopause. OB, How do you think it feels to loose your child for taking a pee in the wee hours of the morning? Further, perhaps Y is smoking zol. I mean who has politicised this issue?

  • Ozoneblue

    Ze Philosopher
    February 23, 2013 at 11:54 am

    “I mean who has politicised this issue?”

    The usual suspects.

    What was the ANCWL lunch mob doing screaming for revenge outside court? Just the other day they endorsed that “sexist pig” Zuma for prez?

  • Mikhail Dworkin Fassbinder

    @ Ze Philosophisticate

    “You reckon Zille anticipated OP’s reckless actions”

    With respect, it is ridiculous to suggest that the tragedy would have been averted had the gated community had been equipped with Zille’s special “loos with views.” Remember, no lights were on; OP would have had to take a proverbial shot in the dark anyway.


  • Maggs Naidu – Caste Away! (

    Mikhail Dworkin Fassbinder
    February 23, 2013 at 13:43 pm


    CT is working on the lighting issue – the HRC has noted that one light every 100 metres is not helpful.

    But in any event the advantage of a loo-with-a-view is not for the shooter to see the shootee, but for the shootee to know that “now is the time”, start saying goodbyes quick.

    May the Lord bless you (send money)!

  • Mikhail Dworkin Fassbinder

    @ The Chief Justice

    “We refuse to be populist and say: ‘Hey what are they likely to say tomorrow, the people in the media, the commentators, what is so and so going to say in the blog.’”

    One can only respect the JSC for standing firm against the relentless demand of the masses — as well as the armchair jurisprudes on blogs like this one — that the wildly popular Gauntlett SC be elevated to Braamfontein!

    Thanks JSC!

  • Mikhail Dworkin Fassbinder

    Maggs, are you saying that even those answering the call of nature must be armed and vigilant, so they can take pre-emptive “pot-shots” at their assailants?

  • Maggs Naidu – Caste Away! (

    Mikhail Dworkin Fassbinder
    February 23, 2013 at 14:02 pm


    Our CJ is quite correct – only the President can dictate to the JSC.

    And the JSC must suck up only to the President!

    p.s. “even those answering the call of nature must be armed and vigilant” – no. The lesson is, never use someone else’s toilet without their permission!

  • Mpho

    For all those who refuse still to internalise what Pierre and Anonymouse have written, do you honestly think that we have a Criminal Justice system that permits, condones even, that men with unlicensed firearms can stumble about the house firing off shots at whatever sounds they claim to have thought were made by a tresspasser?????

    Even poor white men frightened that the big bogey black man wants his flat screen are not allowed to shoot out indiscriminately.

  • Ze Philosopher

    @Dworki, anticipation of death is better than death; go right ahead and give Zille a Bells.

  • Kwena

    If only we, as citizens of this beautiful, crime ridden country, knows that, if you kill someone thinking you were killing an intruder in your home, intruder who in most cases are violent. You’ll still be charged with murder. Common sense tells me you are not supposed to be charged with murde of the ‘intruder’ but, thats law. This is sad.

  • Christo

    What will happen if forensic evidence (ballistics) indicates that Oscar did had his legs on at the time of the incedent? Wont this indicate that he wasnt in bed at the time? Wont this imply that he knew Reevas wherabouts at the time of the incident?

  • Lisbeth

    @ Mpho

    The gun OP used to kill Reeva was, to the best of my knowledge, licensed.

  • Also Anonymouse

    Two years ago my father-in-law was working inside his home, painting & renovating his lounge. The time was estimated to be around 17:00. He was attacked and murdered in a typical ‘overkill’ way – first hit over the head in the passage interleading the kitchen to the lounge, away from where he was working at the time. Blood and brain tissue marked the spot where he had fallen. It seems that he had heard a noise in the kitchen and went to investigate when he was attacked. The attackers then used galvanized wire and twisted it around his neck, before dumping his body in a back room where his body was discovered a week later with a pillow covering his face as if his attackers wanted to suffocate him.

    My issue with the OP case is that he is under scrutiny 24/7. His facial expressions are noted. His actions are blasted across the planet so that he instantly became the most mentioned name in the press here and abroad.

    Yet, in the case of my father-in-law, the police didn’t bother taking finger prints, never requested DNA test from the pathologist, never opened a case file, never contacted (to this day) his next of kin to a) inform them of the murder and b) interview his two children and/or ex-wife. We have had no progress reports or any communication regarding his murder from the SAPS.

    The stolen vehicle was discovered two weeks after his death by the insurance company who managed to alert us in August 2011, approximately 5 months later. That was the only item stolen and served as the only motive for his murder.

    I fail to understand why the OP case is on everybody’s lips while the rape of a toddler is a small paragraph in the newspaper. I fail to understand why one murder goes unnoticed when the next celebrity-induced ‘murder’ takes preference.

    I feel very sad for Reeva’s family, but if OP is telling the truth, imagine his living nightmare? Imagine if you were Mr Patterson, being tied up, having to watch burglars brutally attack your petite wife and raping your 16 year old daughter in front of your 10 year old son – wouldn’t murder cross your mind as well?

    Imagine if you were Julian Lap, walking down the stairs, investigating a noise at 19:00 on a Sunday night and you face armed burglars in your last moment of your life – would you not wish you had a gun to defend yourself?

    There are many holes in OP’s version of events and I will follow his trial with interest. At the same time I feel that it is wrong to turn this into a racial or even a religious matter. We need more educational articles like this one by Prof de Vos to inform the uninformed who are so willing to cast the first stone.

  • ozoneblue

    Kwena February 23, 2013 at 19:47 pm

    We all have to make difficult choices. I don’t own a gun. I wish I did. However if I did own one I will not hesitate one second if Im confronted with some intruder/s in my house. I say you shoot first and ask questions later, better sorry than raped and tortured to death.

  • christine anthonissen

    If a person flies into a rage, grabs a gun, shoots wildly, kills the person who annoyed him: can that count as premeditated murder? Is ‘premeditated’ the same as ‘intentional’?

  • William D. Chappell

    Autopsy has shown no defensive injuries…

  • Gwebecimele
  • Maggs Naidu – Yikes, another seven years! (

    Ze Philosopher
    February 23, 2013 at 15:57 pm

    Hey Zeep Guy,

    “go right ahead and give Zille a Bells.”

    You meant “give that MAN a Bells” didn’t you?

    No need to go all ANCYL on her – she’s looking rather charming these days.

    But the dancing … (Dworky will explain)!

    p.s. If you see Dmwangi heading to the loo, please call me asap.

  • Maggs Naidu – Yikes, another seven years! (

    Karyn Maughan ‏@karynmaughan

    Culpable homicide case against Carl Pistorius – over 2010 accident death of woman biker – postponed to next month. @eNCAnews

    Carl Pistorius was supposed to have gone on trial for culpable homicide on Thursday – day before #OscarPistorius got bail. @eNCAnews

    Culpable homicide charge against Carl Pistorius confirmed to @eNCAnews by his lawyer Kenny Oldwage – who also defends #OscarPistorius

  • Gwebecimele

    President must be having a good laugh this wknd!!!!

    The “Gang” moves from one PR disaster to another.

  • ColleenSA3

    Question: won’t the height the shots were fired at show the difference between intent to kill or intent to injure? If it was a suspected burglar one would expect him to be standing and my understanding is that the victim was sitting and thus was killed. If the person was standing surely the shots would’ve been below waist height, showing an intent to injure rather than kill?

  • Ozoneblue

    William D. Chappell
    February 24, 2013 at 7:38 am

    “Autopsy has shown no defensive injuries…”

    Which fits into my theory, fitted to the circumstantial evidence, that it was a heated lover’s quarrel that culminated in a violent rage. Interesting too that the magistrate wouldn’t send him for psychophysical evaluation. I would have imagined that would be an obvious thing to do.

  • Ozoneblue

    …psychological evaluation…

  • Brett Nortje

    There are so many warning lights that he is psycho….Of course, it may be a frontal lobe injury.

    Of course, I might just dislike Oscars because mine used to bite me.

  • Brett Nortje

    Also Anonymouse says:
    February 23, 2013 at 22:03 pm

    WHat happened to your father in law is terrible – a reminder that in 18 years of the New South Africa we have had 400 000 out of 500 000 murders unsolved unprosecuted untried unconvicted. But not regarding murder in South AFrica as a racial or political matter is wishful thinking.

    (I have a private investigator on my speed dial in case anything happens to a member of my immediate family, and, you can be sure if it does I will be holding the ANC responsible.)

    When I first was forced to take notice of PdV’s blog Maggs and Michael were having a field day racially mobilising here against white ‘farmers’ unchallenged. Now they are more circumspect largely because I started posting media reports of the murder of white victims by black perpetrators – the message soon got home since the murder of black victims by white perpetrators is a rare media event – like the sighting of a unicorn. Maggs still poohpoohs the story of a white 78 year old smothered in his strangled 79 year old wife’s circumcised vagina by means of a wire hanger (It got so bad that community policing forums sent out messages ‘DON’T KEEP WIRE HANGERS IN THE HOUSE!) around his neck.

    But, like I say, more circumspect.

    The composition of the ConCourt is racial and political. The ConCourt’s judgement in Makwanyane was racial and political. The ConCourt’s assertion that the only deterrent to murder is the certainty that a perpetrator will be tried convicted and locked up amounts to judicial fraud seen against conviction rates of 1% in trio crimes and 2,7% of rapes. The ConCourt’s judgement in Swartbooi which overturned the Free State High Court’s attempts to hold members of the Executive personally liable if they acted deliberately unlawfully and unconstitutionally was racial and political. The packing of the Benches as we see this weekend again is racial and political.
    The ‘transformation’ of the NPA and the SAPS? Racial and political.
    The disarmament of elderly white South Africans? Racial and political.

    Not keeping homicide statistics of a threatened, vulnerable minority? Racial and political.

    Constant racial mobilisation on SABC TV? The constant blame motiff?
    ANC crudesters like Nkwinti doing what they can to to keep the ANC’s foundational myths based on grievance against whites alive? Malema?

    The fact has to be that the ANC never bought into the idea of a modus vivendi nor apparently gave up the armed struggle against whites.

    One could go on all day giving examples?

  • Ozoneblue

    Brett Nortje
    February 24, 2013 at 14:18 pm

    Agreed with most of that Brett, but how do we solve the problem? Where was your Genocide Watch when I send them through links regarding Mngxitama, you are aware that he works for the Ford Foundation sponsored FHR. They ignored it – why? So I suspect there are a fair amount of whites and foreign interest who abuses this “genocide” thing as a blunt political instrument with the only purpose of discrediting the ANC – they are just as manipulative and dishonest as these race-obsessed nationalists in the ANC.

  • Ozoneblue

    In fact Genocide Watch go further – totally ignoring Mngxitama’s [extremely provocative] BC propaganda and sort of endorsing Ramphele now.

    “The party is called Agang, a Sotho word meaning “build.” In recent years, Dr. Ramphele, 65, a medical doctor who became an anti-apartheid activist and a leader of the Black Consciousness Movement, has focused on social activism and business.”

    And here is where the money is: “Until last week, she served as the chairwoman of Gold Fields, a major mining company. The new party is the latest in a string of challengers to the dominance of the A.N.C.”

    And where are Afriforum and Solidarity now? Not a single squeak from you or any of those two regarding what Mngxitama had to say. That is why I don’t take you okes seriously any more.

  • Brett Nortje

    As you know, I decided a while ago the demographics and 18 years of ANC wheelspinning made a resolution without tears in the NSA highly unlikely and the rational response was an exploration of S235 of the Constitution.

    As for Genocide Watch, Michael Osborne did not even know who they were and he is a fan of Maddy Allbright.

    I had to tell him it was a think tank of subject knowledge experts started by the US and the UN after the genocide in Rwanda to study and try to prevent future genocide.

    The likely answer is GW has an observer or two in SA anbd they have day jobs and do not have time to answer all correspondence or do more than cut and paste the most pertinent news and developments. Or you’ve run them off by means of serial intemperate outbursts. Direct them to me and I’ll give them my buddy Dewald emigrant engineer’s ‘Brett jy moet nie ‘n man op sy baadjie takseer nie’ lecture.

    Just keep plugging away at Solidariteit and Afriforum on public forums.

  • Brett Nortje

    Might I ask why you have not hauled that silly dwis Andile before the HRC?

    (If they have time to take silly henfights seriously….Or maybe they were looking for an excuse to take on Sunette because she is the only person trying to keep tabs on the homicide rate against whites?)

  • Ozoneblue

    Brett Nortje
    February 24, 2013 at 15:10 pm

    It more than a silly henfight Brett. Mngxitama works as an activist amongst rural and landless communities. He is known to have incited racial violence before – as with pamphlets that were distributed during the some outbreaks of xenophobic violence.

    “The press ombudsman ruled on July 12 2010 that City Press had ‘breached the press code by publishing an opinion piece on 11 April 2010 headlined “Blacks in Bondage’’ by Andile Mngxitama, who not only is a founder/organiser of the black-racist group Blackwash, which is currently distributing pamphlets (below) throughout South African townships urging black South Africans not to engage in ‘xenophobic violence’ against fellow blacks – but rather to ‘vent their anger on settlers’. The man also is an influential policy advisor to the European Union-funded Foundation for Human Rights… This grant-gathering organisation, funded by the European Union, is run by influential ANC-linked leadership figures such as Mrs Louise Asmal. Blackwash is publicly posing as a ‘black-consciousness group’ although it has direct links with the ANC-leadership. ”

  • Brett Nortje

    What are you waiting for? Take him on!

  • Ozoneblue

    Brett Nortje
    February 24, 2013 at 15:23 pm

    “What are you waiting for? Take him on!”

    Silly me. Here I fought that Genocide Watch, Afriforum, Solidarity these are the guys who mobalise and organise around issues like this on our behalf. Your cynical response is telling though and confirms my suspicion of complicity – your regular diatribes about “genocide” is highly selective and not much more than political grandstanding.

    BLACKWASH pamphlet

  • Ozoneblue

    …Here I thought…

  • joeslis
  • Brett Nortje

    Ozoneblue says:
    February 24, 2013 at 15:31 pm

    Don’t be a chump. I’m telling you to take personal responsibility and lift your azz.

  • Mikhail Dworkin Fassbinder

    @ Ozone/Brett

    It saddens me to see two doughty anti-GENOCIDE activists squabbling over matters of subtle nuance. Rather, join me and Maggs in our joint demand the South Africa be elevated to +200,000 on the GENOCIDE watch list!

  • Ozoneblue

    Mikhail Dworkin Fassbinder
    February 24, 2013 at 17:00 pm

    mfd. I suspect, for reasons I have mentioned, the likes of Brett (and Genocide Watch) are pretty fucking far from being anti-GENOCIDE activists. I’m suspecting what we are dealing with here are bleddy agents.

  • Lisbeth


    When you have a country where the males of the human species systematically set upon eliminating the females – i.e. the mothers and future mothers – wouldn’t that be worse, genocidally speaking, than merely killing members of a particular ‘race’?

  • Pingback: The rush to judgement on Oscar Pistorius | Indigo Jo Blogs()

  • Ozoneblue

    February 24, 2013 at 20:07 pm

    “When you have a country where the males of the human species systematically set upon eliminating the females – i.e. the mothers and future mothers”

    I’m always ready for a bit of childish inter gender mud slinging. Isn’t it fascinating that in a country like SA with so many broken homes mothers raise the boys all alone? Are you implying Lisbeth, that women are raising a nation of rapist and women killers – why do you think it is so?

  • Brett Nortje

    ZooKeeper, a couple of days ago you asked whether I had more complete homicide figures. Well, I stumbled across this graph by the GunSite Commando:

    Interesting, isn’t it? Look at the way the sharp decline in the homicide rate after 1994 slows down and flattens out after the promulgation of the FCA in 2004, even spiking in 2006/2007? And they are selling the ‘success’ of the Firearms Control Act?

    Well, I suppose the people who still believe the statist collectivists will ‘do something’ about violent crime while still keeping our Bill of Rights intact will believe anything. Given conviction rates of 1% of trio crimes and 2.7% percent of rapes.

  • Ozoneblue

    Really – just how low can our “activists” of victimhood and entitlement sink before they become lower than crab shit at the bottom of the Atlantic ocean.

    “I also saw it suggested that disabled people might have been “relieved” at the spectacle of Pistorius, widely held up as a kind of “super crip” role model, being “knocked off his pedestal”.

  • Maggs Naidu – Caste Away! (

    A family friend just lost his two sons who were murdered by their mother – 11 and 17 years.


    Fortunately the fucking filthy, evil woman killed herself too.

    Oh the sadness of parents losing their beloved children in this awful way being murdered by someone they ought to have trusted.

  • See See

    Is the likelihood of an accused committing suicide taken into consideration when bail is considered?

  • Zoo Keeper


    Can you chat to your mates and see what the violent crime picture is like since 1994?

    This is especially relevant for rape, house robbery with the occupants home versus not at home and business robbery.

    I would love to see if they could put together the graphs so we could see if the FCA had any positive impact.

    As you know, I expect the FCA to be shown up as a failure. But these studies are absolutely necessary to prove whether or not the concept of gun control is a valid anti-crime initiative.

    Then you can move the debate beyond simple death rates and well into the realm of immediate personal safety and security. Once you’re there, you will begin to dominate the constitutional aspect too – if the evidence supports you.

  • Chris

    See See says:
    February 25, 2013 at 10:25 am

    It is an important factor. Her history of suicide attempts was the reason that Najwa Petersen did not get bail

  • Chris

    Najwa Peterson went on appeal: S v PETERSEN 2008 (2) SACR 355 (C)

  • Gwebecimele
  • Maggs Naidu – Caste Away! (

    February 25, 2013 at 11:54 am

    Fancy caption to the MG piece, Chris.

    I wonder how many times she’s committed suicide!

  • Mikhail Dworkin Fassbinder

    @ Gwebe

    With respect, we did not need Eusibius to tell is that Ramphele was “more Mazibuko than Biko on questions of race. ” As long ago as when she was at UCT, Remphele was pushing so-called “excellence” as an excuse for slowing TRANSFORMATION.

    That being said, RW Johnson is already promoting the blatant LIE that Ramphele herself has been a beneficiary of AA, and that she would not have got jobs at the World Ban, UCT or Goldfields, had she not been a black woman!


  • Gwebecimele

    “But you do appreciate that every judge in the Supreme Court of Zimbabwe, bar one who has just retired – and his name should be mentioned because he is a credit to all judges, Wilson Sandura – each one has accepted at least one confiscated farm. And because of the wear-and-tear on judicial Mercedes Benzes they then had the impertinence to lay a claim, which was immediately given because you must keep your judges happy if they are going to see things with the correct spectacles. They have been given 4×4 vehicles. They go out to their farms on a Thursday, so you can never get a case on a Friday, and they will return, if you are fortunate, on Monday night.”

    @ Dworky

    Is RW not the same guy who suggested that there was a $20 MILLION fund for Agang??

  • Brett Nortje

    Calling on any members of the NPA who are disgusted by conviction rates of 2,7% for rape and 1% in trio crimes: If you want to do something about it go public! Blow the whistle!

    If you have conviction rates – the further they go back the better – get hold of me thru

    Or: Send them to Pierre to forward! Pierre has sisters…

    Zoo Keeper says:
    February 25, 2013 at 11:03 am

    Can you chat to your mates and see what the violent crime picture is like since 1994?

    This is especially relevant for rape, house robbery with the occupants home versus not at home and business robbery.

    I would love to see if they could put together the graphs so we could see if the FCA had any positive impact.

  • Chris

    Maggs Naidu – Caste Away! ( says:
    February 25, 2013 at 13:11 pm

    Few people manage suicide more than once. Makes me think of the 19 year old girl, about to marry a 90 year old man. To be on the safe side she took him to dr to verify if the old man would still be able to do the job. He will manage once weekly, the dr told her. Please spell weekly, the girl ansered.

  • Brett Nortje

    Typical vignette of gun control in the NSA. Regulatory ‘inspections’. These intimidation tactics were aimed at ‘persuading’ the few surviving gun dealers to close shop quietly to avoid the stress and the hassle. (The few gun dealers surviving Dir Jaco Bothma’s unlawful de facto gun ban, in which he simply refused to issue licences. One of the few provisions of the FCA to be promulgated in 2001 ‘de-regulated’ blackpowder muzzleloaders and had the potential to save the gun industry. He simply refused to abide by the Gazette. In 2006 the ANC re-regulated muzzleloaders. FNB case? What FNB case?)

    The SAPS 13 store at Silverton police station is full of guns I bought it auction – all registered, in the auctioneers books.
    This happened to Cahi Auctioneers in Pretoria, Venditor….Others. That I know of personally. After that, the rest got the message and handed them in.
    How I know Mike Waters and the bullshyte that happened to him was my dog was kenneled at the same centre (ex Goldfields security training) and I went to visit her that day.

    Sakeman mag eis ná sy arrestasie

    2013-02-25 08:54
    Jeanne-Marié Versluis

    ’n Sakeman wat as luitenant-kolonel uit die polisie afgetree het, het die eerste ronde in sy eis teen die minister van polisie gewen omdat hy in 2008 onregmatig gearresteer en oornag aangehou is.

    Mike Waters (61) van Roodepoort, eienaar van Waters Firearm Training & Assessment Centre, ’n vuurwapen-opleidingsentrum met ’n skietbaan in Krugersdorp, het volgens sy hofstukke ’n virus in die Krugersdorp-landdroshofselle opgedoen.

    Die virus het glo ’n abses in ’n seerplek op sy linkervoet (wat hy weens diabetes opgedoen het), veroorsaak. Gevolglik het hy twee tone verloor ondanks operasies en behandelings, lui sy eisbesonderhede.

    Regter Bill Prinsloo het in die hooggeregshof in Pretoria in Waters se guns bevind wat die meriete van sy saak betref.

    Die geding om die omvang van sy skade vas te stel, indien die polisie nie ’n skikkingsooreenkoms voorstel nie, volg later.

    Waters eis R3,5 miljoen se skadevergoeding plus rente.

    Luidens sy hofstukke is die polisielede skriftelik deur sy dokter ingelig oor sy ernstige diabetes en dat hy ’n oop seerplek op elke voet het wat twee keer per dag ontsmet en verbind moet word.

    Waters is saam met agt ander mense in ’n vuil sel aangehou waarin “vrot” water van die verstopte drein en toilet 4 cm diep op die vloer gelê het, word beweer.

    Waters het sandale aangehad en die verbande aan sy voete het die water glo geabsorbeer.

    Die polisie het Waters op 21 Augustus 2008 by sy opleidingsentrum gearresteer op klagte van die onwettige besit van 24 vuurwapens en etlike duisende patrone.

    Alle aanklagte teen hom is in Oktober 2008 laat vaar.

    Die polisie het onder die vaandel van ’n roetine-gehoorgewingsinspeksie by Waters opgedaag, maar ’n klopjag uitgevoer waarvoor hulle ’n spesiale lasbrief nodig gehad het en wat hulle nie vooraf verkry het nie.

    Prinsloo het in sy uitspraak gesê ’n “formidabele” span polisielede, sowat 12 tot 15 mense en onder leiding van kol. Yvonne Burger, het onaangekondig by die sentrum opgedaag.

    Prinsloo het bevind die operasie was onregmatig.

    Die minister moet Waters se regskoste betaal.

    Luidens Waters se hofstukke was van die mede-aangehoudenes in die sel daar weens geweldsmisdaad. Hy is in boeie in die sel aangehou.

  • Zoo Keeper


    I found some stuff, maybe you guys could use it. ISS issued BTW.

    business robberies: 2004/2005 = 3320,
    2009/2010 = 14 534

    House robberies: 2004/2005 = 9391
    2009/2010 = 18 786


  • Mikhail Dworkin Fassbinder

    @ Gwebs

    Yes, I think it may have been RW Johnson who reported the imperialist overseas funding of Agang. That being said, I have my suspicions that RW may be doing his best to help Ramphele out a bit. He know well that anyone who is attacked by him will swiftly garner massive support from the chattering classes!

  • Beetle

    The statistics about robberies are skewed.

    One must bear in mind that robberies perpetrated in 2004/5 probably reflected crime where far less security was in place than is the practice now, ie likely to be oportunstic.
    Current crime is proffesional, planned and executed with intent to use weapons. Walls, bbars, razorwire, alarms, panic buttons, electric fencing, beams, floodlights, cameras, gated communities,- are mere hinderances.

    The statistics have quadrupled in spite of security’s exponential increase.
    And that is scary!

  • Zoo Keeper


    Over the same period 2004 – 2010 sex crimes went from 66 000-odd to 68 000-odd. There has been a bot of drop back to 66 000-odd in 2012.

    So, murder has decreased at a slower rate than previously, house and business robbery has exponentially increased and sex crimes remained the same with a mid-term increase.

    Better get those arguments out there.

  • Mikhail Dworkin Fassbinder

    @ Brett and Zooky

    You are not going to get a significant drop in the crime rate just by dishing out subsidies to householder to purchase weapons. Intruders will just respond by upping their firepower. That is why I call upon you to support my demand to release of stockpiles of ex SADF ordinance to our people. Even an old-fashioned Vickers machine gun (water cooled), mounted behind sandbags at the top of the driveway, will help deter house invaders. And believe me, a Claymore mine in the shrubbery can work wonders!


  • Gwebecimele

    Hello Jeff

    Where is the Sexual Offenders Register?
    Tender Blacklisting?

  • Gwebecimele
  • Gwebecimele

    While we are busy with Oscar, more important stuff is falling thru the cracks.

  • Mike

    @MDF – What do you consider Libya’s and China’s funding of the ANC during the last election to be.

  • Mikhail Dworkin Fassbinder

    @ Mike

    “What do you consider Libya’s and China’s funding of the ANC during the last election to be.”

    Because the DA has been refusing to cooperate in enacting party funding disclosure, we have no idea what parties have received. But that is not the point. To whatever extent progressive internationalists may have supported the ANC, it has always been motivated by an intent — as in the days of the struggle — to assist in deepening our democracy. By contrast, the DA, and now Ramphele, appear to have received funding from IMPERIALIST forces hell-bent on subverting the will of our people and promoting CAPITALISM.

    P.S. For more insights of this nature, please read Dr Floyd Shivambu’s brillant op-ed in yesterday’s Independent.

  • Brett Nortje

    What stockpiles of exSADF ordinance? The same ANC which sold sniper rifles to Gaddafi and Allouettes to Mugabe, which did not surrender one of its arms caches as it was obliged to ito the National Peace Accord and is probably sitting on the four truckloads of heavy weaponry delivered to Inkatha in 1994, dumped tens of thousands of LeeEnfield 303 rifles in the sea.

    You know, the rifles my Oupa and his brothers Jan and Isak and South Africans like them carried all over North Africa and Italy?

    Progressiveness is bliss.

    Mikhail Dworkin Fassbinder says:
    February 25, 2013 at 16:20 pm
    @ Brett and Zooky

    That is why I call upon you to support my demand to release of stockpiles of ex SADF ordinance to our people.

  • Maggs Naidu – Yikes, another seven years! (

    February 25, 2013 at 13:33 pm


  • Maggs Naidu – Caste Away! (

    Mikhail Dworkin Fassbinder
    February 25, 2013 at 17:39 pm


    “For more insights of this nature, please read Dr Floyd Shivambu’s brillant op-ed in yesterday’s Independent.”

    This brilliant one?

    p.s. Have you seen Dmwangi. I must talk with him urgently – I had a vision (sort of like the one the young lady from Boksburg had, but mine’s real). If anyone sees DM – please alert me asap!

  • Ozoneblue

    February 25, 2013 at 12:45 pm

    Interesting post gwebs. More or less what I said and why she won’t get no votes.

    It also tells us how confused and anti-Africa these Eusebius McKaiser type commentators really are – in relation to the real Biko. “Black” is not “African” cause then this mixed-grill of Kentucky Fried Chicken Blackness stands totally exposed.

    Dmwangi – the stage is all yours.

  • Brandon

    In the matter concerning Oscar Pistorious…from what I’ve read I’ve really learnt a lot…but there a definite facts here and there…Something just doesn’t add up man…everything is there and obvious..which I find very appalling…there’s more to this case which isn’t being revealed

  • eduardo

    Oscar may be lying –
    he claims he woke up, went to the balcony …

    why were, I believe, both of them, dressed ? Do you sleep with your clothes on ?
    If they were dressed, then things were likely not as usual during that night.

    It seems to suggest, that there was no uninterrupted intimacy in the build up of Valentine’s day; rather that Reeva was waiting for daybreak to leave.

    Also, he was an excellent shot – scared ? With a gun in your hand, sure to hit your target with precision ?

    Vulnerable without prosthesis ? That MUST be outright dishonest: if you have had a disability for your entire life, you have completely adapted to it and it will not be a source of vulnerability. Even less if you are an Olympic athlete, and even more again, a runner !

    First aid:
    Why does he remove the body from the bathroom, instead of performing first aid in the bathroom/bedroom ?

    Lawyer there when police arrived ???

    Of course, pure speculation.

  • Pingback: A Mind of One's Own()

  • cracked steam client

    Aw, this was an incredibly good post. Finding the time and actual effort to
    generate a very good article… but what can I say… I procrastinate a whole lot
    and never seem to get anything done.

  • Manthata Dikeledi

    Oscar pistorius’ story doesnt add up,it doesnt make sense at all…if I was him I would just plead guilty because he is loosing fortune for nothing,i mean nobody s gonna believe him. He could have looked for Reeva first and made sure that she is not anywhere near the bathroom before shooting….this explains all,OSCAR PISTORIUS should go to prison,he didnt just kill REEVA but murdered her.END OF STORY

  • Anna-Dean Rombolakis(14071615)

    In my opinion i defiantly do agree with the conclutions as well as with the points stated out in this article.There is no reason at all from a legal point of view and perspective to speculate and make at this point conclutions of whether Pistorius will be found guilty of murder and the other actions his being accused of .
    None of us know as we were not present that evening and none of will as there were only people present that evening; the accused and deceased
    .We as poeple want to be heard , our opinions want to be known and made aware of ,therefore comments , opinions , and speculations will continue to take place and on basic legal knowledge.
    But such speculation might have to do more with the depressing fascination of people with the case this referring to the case being titled as “High Profile” and those involved with a celebrity status rather than with any legally responsible analysis.

  • Pingback: The Pistorius Defence and the Fear that Grips White South Africa -()

  • Pamela Valemont

    I have just edited my book Oscar Pistorius Reeva Steenkamp A Double Tragedy, to include a numerological
    analysis of Judge Masipa and Barry Roux as they relate to Oscar Pistorius. I have been unable to obtain birth details for Gerrie Nel so far. Working with what I have, it would appear that there is a correlative “full house” you might say, numerologically speaking, operating for the defence team, and the
    prosecution would have to come up with a “royal flush” to beat it.

    Pistorius ebook

    Pistorius paperback

  • Pingback: What the Hell Just Happened to Oscar Pistorius? An Explainer()