From the chapter Intentionality:
The context of this question around INTENTIONALITY comes from Another Oscar we unexpectedly met in the North Guateng High Court. This Oscar was a lot different to the Blade Runner. So who’s who? Is Oscar a vulnerable cry baby who screams like a girl?
At the end of the day, is his story 100% true that he innocently woke up and mistook an opening window and the movement of wood for a burglar. Is his schpiel credible, that the sound of a window and wood moving behind a closed and locked door made the Blade Runner shit himself to the extent that he helplessly shot 4 bullets into the pitch dark? Did he really fire those shots whilst not hesitating a moment to find out where Reeva is, not knowing where she was or how she was – in what state she was? Really? He didn’t know? Because he wasn’t in control…he wasn’t certain…he was anxious, and afraid, tentative and unclear, right?
That’s Another Oscar and this chapter is an interrogation into that schema. Is it credible, or is it just a schpiel?
14. Intentionality and a ‘withdrawal of the offer’ [2007-2008]
Although the IAAF invited Oscar to strut his stuff in 2007, technically, in March 2007, the IAAF issued a ban for athletes using prosthetic limbs [‘using technical aids’] from competing alongside able-bodied athletes. If you want a test of Oscar’s determination, his tenacity, his intensity, his ambition and yes, his intentionality, look what he does when….
FUGITIVE is available on Amazon.
Don’t have a Kindle? Not a problem. Just download the free Kindle Reading App and read on any of your smart devices or your PC.
Share your thoughts with the authors on Twitter at:
The narrative will continue with THE APPEAL coming out in November.
Juror13 