Discussion in 'Other Sports' started by skatefan, Feb 14, 2013.
You're very environmentally friendly with all the recycling you're doing in this thread.
Likewise, I am forever impressed at your ability to reuse your cranky-old-alkie routine.
Are you suggesting that doping and murdering a woman are comparable offenses?
I'll qualify this by noting that even if Pistorius is a jerk with a nasty past, his guilt has not been proven in court.
I can't speak for heckles, but my interpretation of their comment is that our society makes heroes out of athletes. That hero persona is based on their athletic accomplishments, in this case their athletic accomplishments in the face of enormous physical challenges. Our society assumes that heroism athletically equates to goodness in a non-athletic context, and the athletes often actively fuel that assumption. But that assumption can be unwarranted.
I didn't see the comment as equating murder and doping, not in the least.
I don't know what heckles was getting at, but there have been a number of cases of athletes charged and sometimes convicted of violent crimes, so I don't see why Armstrong was the most relevant comparison. Other than recency and the involvement of high-profile athletes, the two cases have little in common. It goes without saying that there's quite a difference between someone whose fall from grace was due to doping - a sports-related offense - and someone who likely committed murder.
It's foremost the recency of it. The other similarity is that these were both athletes exalted for their overcoming of physical challenges, and society extended their ability to overcome their physical challenges into assumptions about their goodness as people. The athletes themselves parlayed that perception into fame, fortune, and influence. These two were held up as role models and inspirations in ways that other elite athletes have not been.
The offenses are naturally not comparable, but the shattering of their good-guy perception has similarities. Another way to put it is that the cases are very dissimilar in their severity and victimization of others, but they are similar in making society question some of its tendencies.
Sort of switching topics--A lady posted a comment at the bottom of a news article that I found worth repeating. Her child also has two prosthetic legs. Until they saw Oscar Pistorius at the Olympics, they were ashamed and felt hopeless. But Oscar Pistorius, even though they had never met him, gave the child the confidence to stand up for themselves to bullies, push themselves to try new physical activities, and re-evaluate what they felt was possible for themselves. Children like these are among society's most vulnerable, and they need a role model like Oscar Pistorius. (To a lesser extent, Lance Armstrong had this effect among some cancer survivors who were physically traumatized by the disease and the side effects of the treatment--another similarity to the Pistorius case.)
This mother is struggling with how to break the news to the child. The child is 5 or 6 years old and may not understand the concept of murder or even death.
I'm not a parent, so I ask the parents on this board--what would you do?
Armstrong was cited as a recent example of "physically-challenged athlete becomes a role model" narrative. You're right that the sports world in general has plenty of cretins.
Apparently he is claiming the shooting was an accident?
If what is reported here is true, I don't see how he intends to make a case for an accident: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...ife-of-pistorius/story-fnb64oi6-1226579685203
How do you accidentally shoot someone four times? Through a door yet?
Well I guess he just happened to walk down the corridor holding a loaded gun as one does in South Africa, given the crime rate, and then he tripped and whilst he was falling down, he accidentally fired the gun four times. That's totally plausible.
I am not a parent either, but my opinion is that she does not need to tell him anything right now. After he grows up enough to understand, she can explain that a person can be good in someways and not in other, and to follow only the good in him. Right now he has no concept of death/murder/bullets, etc.- that is assuming he does not hear it from other children. That could complicate matters and in that case the mother can explain the same thing.
It can happen if you believe you are at risk, and in a place with a high crime rate, I can see how someone would believe that. Take a look at this case, for instance - the guy fired three shots, thinking home invaders were threatening him and his daughter. He was tragically wrong.
That's not to say this is what happened in this case, of course, and I don't get the firing through a door thing, either.
BTW, the link you posted requires login to view anything past the first paragraph.
Reports of arguing prior to the shooting are in conflict with the burglary defense. And again, shooting through a door, presumably a bathroom door are also hard to reconcile with that. Was she inside the bathroom?
There must have been so many children in need of prostheses who were counting on his foundation for help. How sad for them.
According to the latest reports, the victim was wearing a night gown, she also had suffered a head injury prior to her death, and a blooded cricket bat was discovered at the scene.
This is chilling:
I wonder why the authorities are going after the premeditated murder charge instead of something like involuntary manslaughter, for example. I think it was a crime of passion that happened in an instance of rage and not something that he had planned to do, since early reports said that a panicked Pistorius tried to revive Steenkamp after the shooting. If it was planned then I think he would have probably killed himself also.
It's such a sad story. Two young lives with bright futures and their families are completely ruined.
I personally would never date someone with a gun in his house, especially if the person has shown any type of temper. People are just too darn quick to grab that gun as a mean to resolve problem.
This diagram of how it happened is from a South African newspaper: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BDSizBgCAAAI5x0.jpg
If accurate, it is immensely incriminating.
It truly is a horrible crime. I do wonder if drugs were involved.
Wow, he sure seems guilty as hell if all this is true. He shot her first, in plain sight, after allegedly hitting her with a cricket bat. Then she runs into the bathroom and he shoots through a door 3 times and kills her. There is no way that was an accident. What a monster.
Is there statistical data that suggests that most premeditated murders also involve suicide?
^^ I was only guessing for someone in Pistorius's position. If he had planned the murder then he must have had also thought about the consequence of its aftermath; He's only 26 and has looks, fame, money, popularity, etc. It's going to be hell giving all of that up for a lifetime in prison. So if the murder was premeditated, I think someone like him would've chosen suicide over going to prison.
It's amazing what people think they can get away with though, and I guess in many cases, do get away with.
Unless he thought he could make it look like an accident...
Well, it looks bad for him, but we will see what court have to say.
I have no idea what the concept of premeditated murder involves in South Africa - but in this case, the fact he had weapons ready for use and went to the trouble of shooting through a locked door, after he'd already shot once and had the time to rethink, could well be enough to fit the description.
They wouldn't have gone for that charge if they felt they had no chance of getting a conviction.
Or perhaps his ego is so huge that he thought he could get away with anything, and those thoughts never crossed his mind in the first place. Whenever I hear of domestic murders, I always want to ask the murderer: "Just who do you think you are? You really think this life belonged to you???!"
In any case, where I live, if a homicide it isn't a premedited murder, it could also be a non premedited murder, which is worse than involuntary manslaughter.
That's a possibility, and/or perhaps what had happened a few hours earlier gave them a clue, too.
It depends on the definition of premeditated murder in the jurisdiction they're in. In the US, definitions vary even from state to state.
Can any South Africans shed some light on South African legal terms?
The more I read about Reeva, the more I like her. Just from her modeling, she could have made a fortune large enough to fund her the rest of her life. But rather than resting on her looks, she graduated in the top 10% of her law school class and was an advocate for rape victims. I love this photo of her.
So if she was indeed wearing her nightgown, indicating she was in the house and not entering it (so no surprise and confusion with a burglar is likely) and was locked in the bathroom indicated she was trying to save herself. And if there was a bloody bat and she had a head injury that matched the bat, I think this case is open and shut.
I really don't see what the defense can do outside of a Twinkie defense (does that work in South Africa?) or an insanity plea.
A South African newspaper report:
Exclusive The case against Oscar
I'm having a difficult time wrapping my head around the premeditated part; to me, a scenario where he was loaded up on drugs and/or alcohol and an argument got out of control seems more likely.
Not that the two are mutually exclusive; and part of me does not want to think that Pistorius is capable of premeditated murder, so I realize this post is neither rational or logical.
It would all depend on the half-life of the drugs/alcohol that he presumably had in his system. By the time they got to testing, some of them may have gone down to undetectable levels or trace amounts. Depends what it is they are looking for.
Not sure why people think drugs/alcohol are necessary for this to have happened.
Separate names with a comma.