Obama can't kick his legacy down road

President Obama has a small window of opportunity to get Congress to act on his priorities, Gloria Borger says.

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• Gloria Borger: Prospect of deep budget cuts was designed to compel compromise


• She says the "unthinkable" cuts now have many supporters


• The likelihood that cuts may happen shows new level of D.C. dysfunction, she says


• Borger: President may want a 2014 House victory, but action needed now

(CNN) -- So let's try to recount why we are where we are. In August 2011, Washington was trying to figure out how to raise the debt ceiling -- so the US might continue to pay its bills -- when a stunt was hatched: Kick the can down the road.

And not only kick it down the road, but do it in a way that would eventually force Washington to do its job: Invent a punishment.

Gloria Borger

If the politicians failed to come up with some kind of budget deal, the blunt instrument of across-the-board cuts in every area would await.

Unthinkable! Untenable!

Until now.

In fact, something designed to be worse than any conceivable agreement is now completely acceptable to many.

And not only are these forced budget cuts considered acceptable, they're even applauded. Some Republicans figure they'll never find a way to get 5% across-the-board domestic spending cuts like this again, so go for it. And some liberal Democrats likewise say 8% cuts in military spending are better than anything we might get on our own, so go for it.

Opinion: Forced budget cuts a disaster for military

The result: A draconian plan designed to force the two sides to get together has now turned out to be too weak to do that.

And what does that tell us? More about the collapse of the political process than it does about the merits of any budget cuts. Official Washington has completely abdicated responsibility, taking its dysfunction to a new level -- which is really saying something.

We've learned since the election that the second-term president is feeling chipper. With re-election came the power to force Republicans to raise taxes on the wealthy in the fiscal cliff negotiations, and good for him. Americans voted, and said that's what they wanted, and so it happened. Even the most sullen Republicans knew that tax fight had been lost.

Points on the board for the White House.

Now the evil "sequester" -- the forced budget cuts -- looms. And the president proposes what he calls a "balanced" approach: closing tax loopholes on the rich and budget cuts. It's something he knows Republicans will never go for. They raised taxes six weeks ago, and they're not going to do it again now. They already gave at the office. And Republicans also say, with some merit, that taxes were never meant to be a part of the discussion of across-the-board cuts. It's about spending.

Politics: Obama more emotional on spending cuts

Here's the problem: The election is over. Obama won, and he doesn't really have to keep telling us -- or showing us, via staged campaign-style events like the one Tuesday in which he used police officers as props while he opposed the forced spending cuts.

What we're waiting for is the plan to translate victory into effective governance.

Sure, there's no doubt the president has the upper hand. He's right to believe that GOP calls for austerity do not constitute a cohesive party platform. He knows that the GOP has no singular, effective leader, and that its message is unformed. And he's probably hoping that the next two years can be used effectively to further undermine the GOP and win back a Democratic majority in the House.

Slight problem: There's plenty of real work to be done, on the budget, on tax reform, on immigration, climate change and guns. A second-term president has a small window of opportunity. And a presidential legacy is not something that can be kicked down the road.

Follow @CNNOpinion on Twitter.

Join us at Facebook/CNNOpinion.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Gloria Borger.

Read More..

EU nears national budget oversight

BRUSSELS: The EU moved closer Wednesday to centralised oversight on national budgets, negotiators said, an increasingly sensitive topic as Brussels readies to issue new economic forecasts with France in the firing line over puny growth and a probable deficit overshoot.

Long-contested tweaks to a package of laws designed to harmonise economic governance especially across the eurozone met with a breakthrough, participants said.

The talks included European Parliament, the European Commission and the current Irish chair of the council of European Union governments.

The idea is that national spending decisions not only are proofed by Brussels before parliamentary approval is sought, but also that priority -- and leeway if excessive deficits return -- is given to spending towards growth and jobs, the new EU mantra amid dogged recession.

The deal has still to pass a full vote in the EU legislature, but talks co-sponsor, Portuguese Socialist MEP Elisa Ferreira, said that with austerity "not delivering ... we need to adapt the medicine."

She underlined: "We need to rebalance our short-term objectives to better address growth and the vicious spiral of high debt-financing interest rates.

"Countries now making superhuman sacrifices need to know that their efforts are recognised and will be rewarded."

EU economy and euro commissioner Olli Rehn, whose forecasts on Friday morning will mainly be watched for their likely effect on French leaders' promises to meet treaty-agreed deficit targets, also hailed the agreement.

-AFP/ac

Read More..

Report: Gang hacked Apple, Facebook

The hackers appear bent on stealing company secrets to sell on the underground market, according to reports.

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• Cybersecurity expert says most savvy Web crime originates in Eastern Europe


• Apple, Facebook, Twitter attacks came from Eastern European gang, report says


• "Water hole" attack apparently used a site for developers on Apple's mobile system


• Apple said this week that some employees' computers had been compromised

(CNN) -- An Eastern European gang of hackers bent on stealing company secrets was responsible for recent attacks on Apple, Facebook and Twitter as well as dozens of other less-publicized hacks, according to new reports.

Two unnamed "people familiar with the matter" told Bloomberg that the hackers appeared to be looking for research, intellectual property or other private information that they can sell on the underground market.

Apple confirmed Tuesday that some of its employees' computers had been compromised after they visited a hacked website for iPhone developers. That site exploited a vulnerability in the Java browser plug-in.

Weeks earlier, Facebook said that some of its computers were also compromised after employees visited a developer site.

Both Facebook and Apple said no user data were accessed in the attacks.

Earlier in January, Twitter said it, too, was attacked and that about 250,000 user accounts may have been compromised, with names and e-mails possibly being uncovered.

As news of the intrusions spread, suspicions turned toward hackers in China. The nation's government denies it supports hacking.

But experts said it wouldn't be surprising if the attacks originated in Eastern Europe instead.

"We've all been watching China, but they're not the most advanced cybercriminals," said Tom Kellermann, the former commissioner of President Barack Obama's cybersecurity council and head of security at Trend Micro. "The most advanced are from the Eastern Bloc and Russia."

Kellermann said that a "giant arms bazaar" has developed in Eastern Europe by which criminals sell cybertools to others. That way, he said, organized crime elements and even terror groups end up with the same kind of advanced tools some governments possess.

"That's what I'm most worried about," Kellermann said. "I wish this stuff were just nation-state on nation-state, so then we could crank up our diplomacy. But regimes don't have a monopoly on Big Brother, and they don't have a monopoly on cyber capabilities."

The recent hacks appear to have used what cybersecurity experts call a "water hole" attack. Like a lion waiting for those speedy gazelles to slow down and have a drink, criminals hack and load viruses onto sites they suspect attractive targets will visit, then wait.

They don't know exactly who their victims will be. But once the victims are infected, the hackers can follow them back to their own businesses' networks to snoop around.

One site used in the attacks appears to be called iPhone Dev SDK, a forum for developers who work with Apple's mobile operating system.

"iPhoneDevSDK has learned it was used as part of an attack whose victims included large Internet companies," read a message at the top of the site's home page Wednesday. "We have no reason to believe user data (were) compromised, but to be safe, we've reset all user passwords."

Security holes in Oracle's Java programming language have been responsible for a number of the recent attacks. The Department of Homeland Security released a warning about the software in January.

Apple pointed out in its statement that Macs running the most recent operating system, OS X Lion, have not come with Java pre-installed and that the computers automatically disable the plug-in after 35 days of inactivity.

CNNMoney's David Goldman contributed to this report.

Read More..

Pistorius prosecution: Error in "testosterone" testimony

PRETORIA, South AfricaThe investigating officer in the Oscar Pistorius murder case made an error in his court testimony Wednesday when he identified a substance found in the athlete's bedroom as testosterone, the national prosecutor said.

Medupe Simasiku, the spokesman for South Africa's National Prosecution Agency, told The Associated Press that it was too early to identify the substance as it was still undergoing laboratory tests.

"It is not certain (what it is) until the forensics." Simasiku said, adding that it wasn't certain if it was "a legal or an illegal medication for now."

Play Video

Pistorius case: Police say they found testosterone, needles in bathroom

19 Photos

Olympic athlete charged with murder

Detective Warrant Officer Hilton Botha, the investigating officer, said earlier in court during Pistorius' bail hearing that police found two boxes of testosterone and needles in the bedroom of the Olympic athlete, who is charged with premediated murder in the Feb. 14 shooting death of his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp.

It was a mistake to identify the substance now, Simasiku said, as it was still unknown. He said the discovery of needles was in Botha's statement, however.

Pistorius denies murder, saying in an affidavit Tuesday that the Valentine's Day shooting was accidental because he thought there was an intruder in his house.

In response to Botha's claim, the defense said Wednesday, the second day of Pistorius' bail hearing at Pretoria Magistrate's Court, that the substance found was not a steroid or a banned substance but an herbal remedy.

Pistorius' lawyer Barry Roux had slammed Botha's testimony earlier, saying police "take every piece of evidence and try to extract the most possibly negative connotation and present it to the court."

International Paralympic Committee spokesman Craig Spence told the AP soon after the substance claims that Pistorius — the world's most famous disabled athlete — was drug tested twice in London last year by the IPC, on Aug. 25 and Sept. 8. Both test results were negative, Spence said.

The Aug. 25 test was an out-of-competition test, and the Sept. 8 one in-competition, a day before the end of the London Paralympics.

The International Olympic Committee said it didn't test Pistorius at the Olympics, but referred the AP to the IPC's negative tests. International athletics body the IAAF and the World Anti-Doping Agency would not comment because it was an ongoing legal case.

"Bearing in mind the ongoing police investigation, WADA must refrain from making any statement at present," WADA said.

Giving testimony, Botha said police made the discovery of testosterone in bedroom of the double-amputee runner and multiple Paralympic champion's upscale Pretoria house after the shooting of Steenkamp but offered no further details or explanation. State prosecutor Gerrie Nel also had to correct Botha when he initially called it "steroids."

Simasiku later told the AP that the detective, Botha, thought it was testosterone by reading the first few letters of the label.

Pistorius' lawyer Roux, said on questioning the detective — who has 16 years' experience as a detective and 24 years with the police — that it was not a banned substance and that police were trying to give the discovery a "negative connotation."

"It is an herbal remedy," Roux said. "It is not a steroid and it is not a banned substance."

The debate over the substance added another dramatic twist to a case that has already gripped the world's attention since Steenkamp's killing at Pistorius' home last Thursday.

Prosecutor Nel also had to clarify that police were not saying that Pistorius was using the substance, only that it was discovered along with the needles in his bedroom.

Pistorius said Tuesday in a written affidavit and read in court by Roux that he mistakenly killed model Steenkamp in the early hours of Valentine's Day when he fired four shots into a locked toilet door, hitting his girlfriend three times after thinking she was a dangerous intruder.

The prosecution claims Pistorius intended to kill the 29-year-old Steenkamp after they had a fight.

Read More..

Arias Can't Remember Gory Death of Ex-Boyfriend

Accused murderer Jodi Arias told an Arizona jury today that her ex-boyfriend became enraged when she dropped his new camera, body slammed her to a tile floor and threatened to kill her, and in the frantic struggle that followed she remembers a gun being fired accidentally but does not remember stabbing him.

Her version of Travis Alexander's death was the culmination of more than a week of testimony in which Arias, 32, has tried to convince the jury she killed Alexander, 27, in self-defense during a violent episode in what she has described as an increasingly abusive relationship. She is on trial for murder and could face the death penalty if convicted.

Arias said that Alexander lost his temper when she dropped his camera on his bathroom floor while taking nude photos of him. Enraged, he picked her up and body slammed her onto the floor, screaming at her, she told the jury.

She ran to his closet to get away from him, and then exited through the closet's second door into Alexander's office where she grabbed a gun that she knew he kept on a top shelf.

She tried to keep running, but as Alexander came after her she said she pointed the gun at him in an attempt to ward him off.

"I pointed it at him with both of my hands. I thought that would stop him, but he just kept running. He got like a linebacker, he got low and grabbed my waist, and as he was lunging at me the gun went off. I didn't mean to shoot. I didn't even think I was holding the trigger," she said.

Jodi Arias Testifies Ex Assaulted Her, Broke Her Fingers Watch Video

Jodi Arias Gives Explicit Details About Doomed Relationship Watch Video

Jodi Arias Murder Trial: Why She Said She Did It Watch Video

"But he lunged at me and we fell really hard toward the tile wall, so at this point I didn't even know if he had been shot. I didn't see anything different. We were struggling, wrestling, he's a wrestler.

"So he's grabbing at my clothes and I got up, and he's screaming angry, and after I broke away from him. He said 'f***ing kill you bitch,'" she testified.

Catching Up on the Trial? Check Out ABC News' Jodi Arias Trial Coverage

Timeline of the Jodi Arias Trial

Asked by her lawyer whether she was convicted Alexander intended to kill her, Arias answered, "For sure. He'd almost killed me once before and now he's saying he was going to." Arias had earlier testified that Alexander had once choked her.

Arias said that she has no memory of stabbing or slashing Alexander whose body was later found with 27 stab wounds, a slit throat and two bullets in his head. She said she only remembered standing in the bathroom, dropping the knife on the tile floor, realizing the "horror" of what had happened, and screaming.

"I have no memory of stabbing him," she said. "There's a huge gap. I don't know if I blacked out or what, but there's a huge gap. The most clear memory I have after that point is driving in the desert."

Arias said that she remembered driving away from Mesa, Ariz., where she had killed Alexander, and realizing that he was likely dead. She said she threw the gun she used out of her window and into the desert and kept driving to Utah, where she was supposed to meet up with friends and a new romantic interest.

"I don't remember anything else after that. I just couldn't believe what had happened, that I couldn't take anything back that had happened, I couldn't rewind the clock," she said.

Arias' defense rests heavily on the description of Alexander's death, as her attorneys have argued she was forced to kill Alexander in self-defense. She has described what she said were Alexander's increasingly abusive and rage-filled outbursts toward her in the weeks leading up his death.

The prosecution alleges that Arias murdered Alexander in a jealous rage, and has attempted to prove that the killing was pre-meditated. They will cross-examine Arias after she is done testifying for the defense.

Read More..

How can U.S. deal with cyber war?

Michael Hayden says lack of domestic agreement is driving U.S. to take the offense on cyber attacks.

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• Obama administration beefing up effort to counter cyberattacks


• Michael Hayden says emphasis is on striking first, as the U.S. does with drone attacks


• Ex-CIA director says drone policy reflects lack of consensus on handling prisoners


• Hayden: Is killing terrorists preferred because of division over how to try them?

Editor's note: Gen. Michael V. Hayden, who was appointed by President George W. Bush as CIA director in 2006 and served until February 2009, is a principal with the Chertoff Group, a security consulting firm. He serves on the boards of several defense firms and is a distinguished visiting professor at George Mason University.

(CNN) -- Human decisions have complex roots: history, circumstance, personality, even chance.

So it's a dangerous game to oversimplify reality, isolate causation and attribute any particular course of action to one or another singular motive.

But let me tempt fate, since some recent government decisions suggest important issues for public discussion.

Michael Hayden

Over the past several weeks, press accounts have outlined a series of Obama administration moves dealing with the cyberdefense of the United States.

According to one report, the Department of Defense will add some 4,000 personnel to U.S. Cyber Command, on top of a current base of fewer than a thousand. The command will also pick up a "national defense" mission to protect critical infrastructure by disabling would-be aggressors.

A second report reveals another administration decision, very reminiscent of the Bush Doctrine of preemption, to strike first when there is imminent danger of serious cyberattack against the United States.

Both of these represent dramatic and largely welcome moves.

But they also suggest the failure of a deeper national policy process and, more importantly, the failure to develop national consensus on some very difficult issues.

Chinese military leading cyber attacks

Let me reason by analogy, and in this case the analogy is the program of targeted killings supported and indeed expanded by the Obama administration. Again, I have no legal or moral objections to killing those who threaten us. We are, as the administration rightly holds, in a global state of war with al Qaeda and its affiliates.

But at the level of policy, killing terrorists rather than capturing them seems to be the default option, and part of that dynamic is fairly attributable to our inability to decide where to put a detainee once we have decided to detain him.

Congress won't let him into the United States unless he is going before a criminal court, and the administration will not send him to Guantanamo despite the legitimate claim that a nation at war has the right to detain enemy combatants without trial.

Failing to come to agreement on the implications of the "we are at war" position, we have made it so legally difficult and so politically dangerous to detain anyone that we seem to default to killing those who would do us harm.

Clearly, it's an easier path: no debates over the location or conditions of confinement. Frequently such action can be kept covert. Decision-making is confined to one branch of government. Congress is "notified." Courts are not involved.

Besides, we are powerful. We have technology at our fingertips. We know that we can be precise, and the professionalism of our combatants allows them to easily meet the standards of proportionality and distinction (between combatants and noncombatants) in such strikes, despite claims to the contrary.

And we also believe that we can live with the second and third order effects of targeted killings. We believe that the care we show will set high standards for the use of such weapons by others who will inevitably follow us. We also believe that any long-term blowback (akin to what Gen. Stanley McChrystal calls the image of "arrogance" such strikes create) is more than offset by the immediate effects on America's safety.

I agree with much of the above. But I also fear that the lack of political consensus at home can drive us to routinely exercise an option whose long-term effects are hard to discern. Which brings us back to last week's stories on American cyberdefense.

In the last Congress, there were two prominent bills introduced to strengthen America's cyberdefenses. Neither came close to passing.

In the Senate, the Collins-Lieberman Bill created a near perfect storm with the American Civil Liberties Union and the American Chamber of Commerce weighing in strongly against the legislation. That two such disparate bodies had issues with the legislation should suggest how far we are from a national consensus.

In the House, a modest proposal from the Intelligence Committee to enhance cybersharing between the private sector and the National Security Agency was met with a presidential veto threat over alleged privacy concerns and was never even considered by the Senate.

Indeed, my preferred option -- a more active and well-regulated role for NSA and Cyber Command on and for American networks -- is almost a third rail in the debate over U.S. cybersecurity. The cybertalent and firepower at Fort Meade, where both are headquartered, are on a short leash because few dare to even address what we would ask them to do or what we would permit them to do on domestic networks.

And hence, last week's "decisions." Rather than settle the roles of these institutions by dealing with the tough issues of security and privacy domestically, we have opted for a policy not unlike targeted killing. Rather than opt for the painful process of building consensus at home, we are opting for "killing" threats abroad in their "safe haven."

We appear more willing to preempt perceived threats "over there" than spill the domestic political blood that would be needed to settle questions about standards for the defense of critical infrastructure, the role of government surveillance or even questions of information sharing. And we seem willing to live with the consequences, not unlike those of targeted killings, of the precedent we set with a policy to shoot on warning.

I understand the advantage that accrues to the offense in dealing with terrorists or cyberthreats. I also accept the underlying legality and morality of preemptive drone or cyberstrikes.

I just hope that we don't do either merely because we don't have the courage to face ourselves and make some hard decisions at home.

Follow @CNNOpinion on Twitter

Join us at Facebook/CNNOpinion

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Michael Hayden.

Read More..

Pistorius says "no intention" to kill girlfriend

PRETORIA: South African Olympic hero Oscar Pistorius on Tuesday tearfully denied the premeditated murder of his model girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp, telling a court he shot at her through a locked bathroom door believing she was an intruder.

"I am absolutely mortified by the events and the devastating loss of my beloved Reeva," Pistorius said in an affidavit at a court hearing in the capital Pretoria, his first public comments on the Valentine's Day killing.

The 26-year-old double amputee track star broke down in tears repeatedly as his own words filled the court: "We were deeply in love and couldn't be more happy."

"I had no intention to kill my girlfriend," he said in the statement, read out by his lawyer as Pistorius sat in the dock, struggling to hold his composure.

At one point the court was forced to break so the track star could get himself together.

"He's definitely been broken," his public relations manager Stuart Higgins said.

As the court hearing was under way, Steenkamp was being laid to rest at an emotional private ceremony at a crematorium in her hometown of Port Elizabeth.

The "Blade Runner" became an inspiration to millions when he became the first double amputee to compete against able-bodied athletes in the Olympics.

He now faces a charge of premeditated murder, which will likely result in remand without bail and, if convicted, a life sentence behind bars.

Pistorius said the couple, who had been dating since late last year, had spent the evening at his upscale Pretoria home watching television and with the 29-year-old Steenkamp doing yoga.

He awoke in the dead of night to bring in a fan from the balcony when he heard a noise.

"Filled with horror and fear" that someone was in the bathroom, he said he felt "very vulnerable" because he did not have his prosthetic legs on.

"I fired shots at the toilet door and shouted to Reeva to phone the police.

"Reeva was not responding. When I reached the bed, I realised that Reeva was not in bed.

"That is when it dawned on me that it could have been Reeva who was in the toilet."

After smashing the door with a cricket bat, Pistorius said "Reeva was slumped over but alive"

"I tried to render the assistance to Reeva that I could, but she died in my arms."

He said he kept a firearm, a 9 mm Parabellum, under his bed at night because he had been a "victim of violence and burglaries before."

He was not only acutely aware of intruders intending to commit violent crime but that "I have received death threats before."

Prosecutors argued that far from being an accident, Steenkamp's death was a premeditated act of murder.

Prosecutor Gerrie Nel told the court Pistorius had armed himself, put on his prosthetic legs, walked seven metres and fired four shots into the bathroom door, hitting a terrified Steenkamp three times and fatally wounding her.

"She could go nowhere," Nel said. "She locked the door for a purpose. We will get to that purpose."

There was no decision on bail Tuesday, with court proceedings adjourned until Wednesday.

Prosecution spokesman Medupe S'Maiku said the hearings could take all week.

Magistrate Desmond Nair said he could not rule out that there was some planning involved in the killing, which may be considered as a premeditated murder for the purposes of bail.

But Pistorius's legal team rejected the claims as he sought to argue he was not a flight risk.

Pistorius revealed he earned 5.6 million rand ($640,000) a year and owned the $570,000 house in the gated estate where the killing took place and two other homes.

Lawyers submitted affidavits from friends of both Pistorius and Steenkamp, which spoke of the couple's close relationship.

Pistorius, who off the track has a rocky private life of rash behaviour, beautiful women, guns and fast cars, has built up a powerful team of lawyers, medical specialists and public relations experts for his defence.

In 2009 Pistorius -- who once admitted to a newspaper that he slept with a pistol, machine gun, cricket bat and baseball bat for fear of burglars -- spent a night in jail after allegedly assaulting a 19-year-old woman at a party.

Meanwhile in Port Elizabeth, tearful friends and family said goodbye to Steenkamp, whose cloth-draped coffin with white flowers laid on top was carried into a chapel in the southeastern coastal city where she grew up.

"There's a space missing inside all of the people that she knew that can't be filled again," her brother Adam, who gave the eulogy, said after the ceremony. "We'll miss her."

A funeral programme simply entitled "Reeva" bore the dates of her birth and death, and a black-and-white portrait of Steenkamp with the words "God's Gift, A Child" written on the back.

Pistorius, a Paralympian gold-medallist, became the first double amputee to run against able-bodied athletes at last year's Olympics in London on the carbon-fibre running blades that inspired his nickname.

But his career has been put on hold since the shooting, forcing him to cancel races in Australia, Brazil, Britain and the United States between March and May.

The case has shocked South Africa, where Pistorius is still considered by many to be a shining example of how individuals can triumph over adversity.

South Africa's sports minister on Tuesday expressed shock and disbelief that the star has been charged with the murder of his girlfriend as the country battles epidemic levels of violence against women.

"None of our sporting heroes and heroines should be associated with such acts of violence against women and children," said Fikile Mbalula.

-AFP/ac

Read More..

Pistorius: 'She died in my arms'

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• Oscar Pistorius paints a detailed picture of his version of his girlfriend's death


• "I had no intention to kill my girlfriend," he says in the statement


• "We were deeply in love and couldn't be happier," he said


• Prosecutors dispute Pistorius' version, say he meant to kill her

Pretoria, South Africa (CNN) -- It was the middle of the night, Oscar Pistorius says, and he thought an intruder was in the house. Not wearing his prosthetic legs, feeling vulnerable in the pitch dark and too scared to turn on the lights, the track star pulled his 9mm pistol from beneath his bed, moved toward the bathroom and fired into the door.

It was only after he called to girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp -- whom he thought had been in bed beside him after a quiet evening -- that he realized something horrible might have happened, he told Chief Magistrate Desmond Nair in a statement read by his lawyer during his bond hearing Tuesday. Prosecutors dispute the version of events that Pistorius detailed in his statement.

Pistorius says he broke down the locked bathroom door -- at one point in the statement saying he kicked the door in, at another saying he used a cricket bat to break it down -- then scooped up the mortally wounded Steenkamp and carried her downstairs after for help.

"I tried to render the assistance to Reeva that I could, but she died in my arms," he said in the statement. "I am absolutely mortified by the events and the devastating loss of my beloved Reeva."

Pistorius' affidavit in alleged murder of girlfriend

Pistorius' girlfriend dies on Valentine's Day

HIDE CAPTION

'Blade Runner' Oscar Pistorius

HIDE CAPTION

<<

<

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

>

>>

While prosecutors and defense lawyers agree Pistorius shot Steenkamp, the track star denied intentionally killing her, in the statement read Tuesday.

Prosecutors say they believe Pistorius put on his prosthetic legs, picked up his gun and walked to the bathroom where Steenkamp, 29, had locked herself -- apparently after a heated argument -- and shot at her four times.

Three of the bullets struck Steenkamp, who died soon after. Her funeral was Tuesday.

Pistorius spent much of the hearing sobbing and heaving at the mention of his girlfriend's name, at one point forcing Nair to stop the proceedings to ask him to compose himself. His family stood nearby, huddling during breaks and appearing to pray. During parts of the hearing, Pistorius' brother placed his hand on the suspect's back.

During Tuesday's hearing, Nair upgraded the charge against Pistorius to premeditated murder, saying he could not rule out the possibility that the track star planned Steenkamp's death. But Nair said he will consider downgrading the charge later.

The allegation of premeditation makes it more difficult for Pistorius' attorneys to argue he should be released on bail pending trial. To win bail, the defense must argue that "exceptional circumstances" exist that would justify Pistorius' release.

The session ended Tuesday afternoon with no decision on bail for Pistorius, 26. Prosecutors said they needed time to study the affidavits read in court before deciding how to proceed.

In the statement read by his lawyer, Pistorius said he would not try to flee or influence any witnesses if he is allowed out on bail, and argued that his release wouldn't be a danger to public order.

The hearing is scheduled to resume Wednesday morning.

Follow updates on our live blog

A tragic mistake?

In his statement, Pistorius said Steenkamp came over February 13, opting for a quiet dinner in over a night out with friends. They wrapped up the night with a bit of television in bed for him, some yoga for her. She had brought him a Valentine's Day present to open the next day.

After the couple had gone to bed, he said he got up in the early hours of February 14 to close the balcony door in his bedroom when he heard a sound in the bathroom.

Pistorius said he'd been a victim of violence and burglary in the past, and realized with terror that contractors who worked at the house had left ladders outside.

Fearing someone had entered the home through the open bathroom window, moving in the dark on the stumps of his amputated legs, Pistorius grabbed his pistol from under the bed and yelled at the intruder to get out.

"I fired shots at the toilet door and shouted to Reeva to phone the police. She did not respond and I moved backwards out of the bathroom, keeping my eye on the bathroom entrance," Pistorius said in his statement. "Everything was pitch-dark in the bedroom and I was still too scared to switch on a light."

"When I reached the bed, I realized that Reeva was not in bed. That is when it dawned on me that it could have been Reeva who was in the toilet. I returned to the bathroom calling her name," he said.

He said he threw open the balcony door and screamed for help, put on his prosthetic legs and tried to kick in the door to the separate room inside the bathroom containing the toilet. Then, he said, he picked up a cricket bat, smashing panels out of the door before finding a key and unlocking it.

"Reeva was slumped over but alive," he said.

Pistorius said he called for help and was told to take her to the hospital himself.

He carried her downstairs and tried to help but, but she died.

"I cannot bear to think of the suffering I have caused her and her family, knowing how much she was loved," he said.

But he said he did not mean to kill her, and protested the charges against him.

"I fail to understand how I could be charged with murder, let alone premeditated murder because I had no intention to kill my girlfriend," Pistorius said in the statement.

"We were deeply in love and couldn't be happier," he said."I loved her and I know she felt the same way."

A premeditated murder?

Prosecutors, however, painted a different picture.

They rejected Pistorius' claim that he mistook her for a burglar, saying it would make no sense for an intruder to hide behind a locked bathroom door.

Instead, they say Pistorius armed himself, attached his prosthetic legs and walked 7 meters (23 feet) to shoot Steenkamp through a bathroom door after a heated argument.

Defense attorney Barry Roux questioned the state's argument, asking how prosecutors would know Pistorius had put on his prosthetic legs and walked to the bathroom before shooting his girlfriend.

Police were alerted to the shooting by neighbors, and residents had "heard things earlier," police spokeswoman Denise Beukes said.

Authorities said there had been "previous incidents" at the home, including "allegations of a domestic nature," but did not provide details.

Detectives are investigating the blood-stained cricket bat found in the home, Johannesburg's City Press newspaper reported. They are trying to determine whether it was used to attack Steenkamp, if she used the bat in self-defense, or if Pistorius used it to try to break down the bathroom door, the newspaper said.

Final farewells for Steenkamp

As the drama in court unfolded, friends and family mourned Steenkamp at a private funeral in her hometown of Port Elizabeth.

"There's a space missing inside all the people she knew that can't be filled again," her brother Adam Steenkamp told reporters outside.

Steenkamp was a law school graduate whose modeling career was on the rise. She landed the cover of FHM magazine and recently appeared on a reality TV show.

On Sunday, South Africans heard Steenkamp's voice one last time after her death, when the national broadcaster aired a pre-recorded episode of the show. The model talked about her exit from "Tropika Island of Treasure," on which local celebrities compete for prize money.

"I'm going to miss you all so much and I love you very, very much," she said, blowing a kiss to the camera.

Case rivets fans

The case of the global sports hero known as the "Blade Runner" has riveted stunned fans around the world.

As he walked into court in a blue shirt and gray suit, frenzied photographers snapped away, prompting the judge to demand they stop.

The scene was a far cry from the packed stadiums that erupted in applause whenever the double-amputee competed against men with legs.

On social media, sentiment appeared to mixed. "Oscar Pistorius is telling us rubbish," one Twitter user posted.

But others were more supportive after hearing Pistorius' story. "I for some reason believe Pistorius after reading his affidavit!!," another person tweeted.

Robyn Curnow reported from South Africa; Holly Yan reported and wrote from Atlanta. CNN's Nkepile Mabuse also contributed to this report.

Read More..

Pistorius' account of shooting, in his own words

Oscar Pistorius, the famed double amputee South African Olympian, has been charged by prosecutors with intentionally murdering his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp in his Pretoria home.

Play Video

Pistorius: I thought girlfriend was a burglar

He has said it was an accident, that he mistook her for a burglar when he fired several rounds through a locked bathroom door with a 9mm pistol. When a judge ruled Tuesday that he could not outright dismiss the prosecution's premeditated murder charge, Pistorius told his side of the story to the court on the same day Steenkamp's family laid her to rest in coastal Port Elizabeth.

The following are the portions of the statement Pistorius' lawyers submitted to the court via an affadavit that offer his view of the tragic events of this past Valentine's Day:

• 16.2 I have been informed that I am accused of having committed the offence of murder. I deny the aforesaid allegation in the strongest terms.
• 16.3 I am advised that I do not have to deal with the merits of the case for purposes of the bail application. However, I believe that it is appropriate to deal with the merits in this application, particularly in view of the State's contention that I planned to murder Reeva. Nothing can be further from the truth and I have no doubt that it is not possible for the State to present objective facts to substantiate such an allegation, as there is no substance in the allegation. I do not know on what different facts the allegation of a premeditated murder could be premised and I respectfully request the State to furnish me with such alleged facts in order to allow me to refute such allegations.
• 16.4 On the 13th of February 2013 Reeva would have gone out with her friends and I with my friends. Reeva then called me and asked that we rather spend the evening at home. I agreed and we were content to have a quiet dinner together at home. By about 22h00 on 13 February 2013 we were in our bedroom. She was doing her yoga exercises and I was in bed watching television. My prosthetic legs were off. We were deeply in love and I could not be happier. I know she felt the same way. She had given me a present for Valentine's Day but asked me only to open it the next day.
• 16.5 After Reeva finished her yoga exercises she got into bed and we both fell asleep.
• 16.6 I am acutely aware of violent crime being committed by intruders entering homes with a view to commit crime, including violent crime. I have received death threats before. I have also been a victim of violence and of burglaries before. For that reason I kept my firearm, a 9 mm Parabellum, underneath my bed when I went to bed at night.
• 16.7 During the early morning hours of 14 February 2013, I woke up, went onto the balcony to bring the fan in and closed the sliding doors, the blinds and the curtains. I heard a noise in the bathroom and realised that someone was in the bathroom.
• 16.8 I felt a sense of terror rushing over me. There are no burglar bars across the bathroom window and I knew that contractors who worked at my house had left the ladders outside. Although I did not have my prosthetic legs on I have mobility on my stumps.
• 16.9 I believed that someone had entered my house. I was too scared to switch a light on.
• 16.10 I grabbed my 9mm pistol from underneath my bed. On my way to the bathroom I screamed words to the effect for him/them to get out of my house and for Reeva to phone the police. It was pitch dark in the bedroom and I thought Reeva was in bed.
• 16.11 I noticed that the bathroom window was open. I realised that the intruder/s was/were in the toilet because the toilet door was closed and I did not see anyone in the bathroom. I heard movement inside the toilet. The toilet is inside the bathroom and has a separate door.
• 16.12 It filled me with horror and fear of an intruder or intruders being inside the toilet. I thought he or they must have entered through the unprotected window. As I did not have my prosthetic legs on and felt extremely vulnerable, I knew I had to protect Reeva and myself. I believed that when the intruder/s came out of the toilet we would be in grave danger. I felt trapped as my bedroom door was locked and I have limited mobility on my stumps.
• 16.13 I fired shots at the toilet door and shouted to Reeva to phone the police. She did not respond and I moved backwards out of the bathroom, keeping my eyes on the bathroom entrance. Everything was pitch dark in the bedroom and I was still too scared to switch on a light. Reeva was not responding.
• 16.14 When I reached the bed, I realised that Reeva was not in bed. That is when it dawned on me that it could have been Reeva who was in the toilet. I returned to the bathroom calling her name. I tried to open the toilet door but it was locked. I rushed back into the bedroom and opened the sliding door exiting onto the balcony and screamed for help.
• 16.15 I put on my prosthetic legs, ran back to the bathroom and tried to kick the toilet door open. I think I must then have turned on the lights. I went back into the bedroom and grabbed my cricket bat to bash open the toilet door. A panel or panels broke off and I found the key on the floor and unlocked and opened the door. Reeva was slumped over but alive.
• 16.16 I battled to get her out of the toilet and pulled her into the bathroom. I phoned Johan Stander ("Stander") who was involved in the administration of the estate and asked him to phone the ambulance. I phoned Netcare and asked for help. I went downstairs to open the front door.
• 16.17 I returned to the bathroom and picked Reeva up as I had been told not to wait for the paramedics, but to take her to hospital. I carried her downstairs in order to take her to the hospital. On my way down Stander arrived. A doctor who lives in the complex also arrived. Downstairs, I tried to render the assistance to Reeva that I could, but she died in my arms.
• 16.18 I am absolutely mortified by the events and the devastating loss of my beloved Reeva. With the benefit of hindsight I believe that Reeva went to the toilet when I went out on the balcony to bring the fan in. I cannot bear to think of the suffering I have caused her and her family, knowing how much she was loved. I also know that the events of that tragic night were as I have described them and that in due course I have no doubt the police and expert investigators will bear this out.

Read More..

'Celebrity Rehab' in Spotlight After McCready's Death

Dr. Drew Pinsky defended his show "Celebrity Rehab" on "The View" today, saying that he received messages of support from former participants after the death of Mindy McCready. . She was the fifth person who has appeared on the show to die in the past two years.

Dr. Drew was defending his show in the face of fresh criticism from the public and recovery advocates who say the process "doesn't belong on our TV screens." The grandfather of another one of the show's deceased alums said that when he heard about McCready, he thought to himself, "Dr. Drew lost another one."

"I wish I could be more responsible for them," Dr. Drew said of the show's alums when he called into "The View" today. "I've received yesterday about 10 emails and texts from those that are doing well that are so grateful and wanted to reassure me."

Former madam and show participant Heidi Fleiss emailed Dr. Drew to tell him the show was "the best thing I've ever done for myself," he said.

Mindy McCready is Fifth 'Celebrity Rehab' Death

Dr. Drew said he hadn't been McCready's doctor in years, but wished some of the show's participants would have continued treatment with his team. The VH1 show had five seasons from 2008 to 2011. McCready appeared on the third season of the show.

Mindy McCready Dead at 37 From Apparent Suicide Watch Video

Country Singer Mindy McCready Dead at Age 37 Watch Video

Mindy McCready Details Moment Cops Found Her, Son Watch Video

McCready, 37, died Sunday of an apparent self-inflicted gunshot wound at her Arkansas home, police said.

Dr. Drew said he reached out to McCready recently after her boyfriend and father of one of her two children, David Wilson, died in January of a self-inflicted gunshot wound.

"She was so severely shattered by that experience. All the people around her, her friends began calling me," Dr. Drew told "The View." "She was in trouble...She was really struggling and she knew it."

He said McCready was "mortified" about the "stigma and judgment" from the public and the press and that it took convincing to get her to go a hospital. He said she eventually went, but left "prematurely" because of the fear of stigmatization and "that's when things really unraveled."

Losing custody of her children was "the last straw," Dr. Drew said.

SEE PHOTOS: Notable Deaths in 2013

The country singer who soared to the top of the charts with her debut album, "Ten Thousand Angels," struggled with substance abuse, served time in jail and fought a lengthy battle with her mother over custody of her son.

McCready's death has revived much criticism for the TV show from the pubilc on social media and from experts.

"For whatever reason, there's this incredible fascination with people while they're actively using and their lives in addiction and we really think it doesn't belong on our TV screens," Patricia Taylor, executive director of Faces & Voices of Recovery, an advocacy group for people in recovery, told ABCNews.com.

"We don't have shows with people with cancer or diabetes or other health conditions," she said.

Taylor said that people not wanting to get treatment because they are afraid of how others will perceive them is an issue with many people, not just celebrities.

"We are very concerned about the deaths and unfortunately too many people in America are dying from addiction and we really need to make sure to make it possible for people to get the help that they need to recover," she said.

Read More..