02-20-2014, 08:12 PM
(02-20-2014, 04:25 PM)crash Wrote: I'm assuming this would be a considerable setback for the prosecution, given it will significantly aid the defense establishing reasonable doubt around premeditation.
I think it's a big setback, crash.
The prosecution presented the fact that Pistorius put on his legs as a major point towards premeditation during the arraignment. IIRC, they also made the case that the bullet trajectory through the toilet door supported their contention that he was lying about being on his stumps at the time of the shooting.
I never understood why the prosecution focused on that so early, but they did; very publicly and to the court. So, the defense will be able to use the backpedal against the prosecution and contend that the investigation was sloppy, the original theories were never supported, the initial lead detective (Botha) was biased... Lack of credibility is gonna hurt the prosecution, IMO.
BUT, it's better that the prosecution drop a claim that can't be reasonably substantiated now than have it blow up in their faces at trial.
And, since I think he fully intended to shoot Reeva through that door, I hope authorities now have a lot more circumstantial evidence to support a murder charge -- i.e. the couple was arguing, she was communicating with an ex, he lied to investigators early on, etc... With no eyewitnesses and no camera footage, the prosecutors may not have enough to prove that Pistorius killed Reeva with premeditation (I'm not convinced that he did, based on what's been disclosed so far). But, they should have enough to convince the judge that he was not under the impression that he was shooting at an intruder when he blew his top and started shooting - he knew it was Reeva inside the toilet - and he should therefore be held culpable for her death.