Norwegian fever

Went for a run - my leg went numb!

Norwegian Cinema

Chocolate Strawberry Crunch- so good

Apparently the best burger in Tromso

Sunny dog walks

Turkish dinner

Went to an amazing Turkish restaurant called Havet the other week in Bromley. Never really had Turkish before so was pleasantly surprised as just how good the food was.

I had a chicken andana which comes with spicy rice and a lovely salad all for £9. Really good value and the food tasted amazing. Definitely would recommend.

My weekend

L-R Necklace- Zara, Top-Topshop, Skirt-Zara, Shoes-Jimmy Choo, Jumpsuit - Topshop, Belt-Celeb Boutique, Shoes-ASOS

Had such a good weekend and the weather was amazing! Saturday night I went to Bridge Bar in Beckenham followed by a day of Pimms at the Rye pub. The sun genuinely makes me happy! Also chopped a lot of my hair off! Needed a change.

Flats are back!

According to Victoria Beckham, who unusually swapped her heels for flats on her new A/W14 collection, flats are definitely back.  Her twitter boasts that she is 'in love' with her new Manolo Blahnik flats which she has been seen out and about in on a few occasions now. I particularly love the pointed monochrome ones.

Flats are my go to shoes. Flat pumps, flat boots, converse, new balance etc. The list of flat shoes I have is double the list of heels, yet I still spend more money on heels. Not because they are better made, just because they look nicer. As a petite woman, heels give me height. They elongate my legs and transform an outfit from drab to fab - but even I have to admit I hardly wear my heels.

I have some beautiful heels that I hardly wear purely because I find within the hour my pinkie has cramp and I am struggling to walk. Who wants to go on a night out and be wincing in pain every step they make? Not me. Most of my expensive heels end up on ebay or sitting at the back of the wardrobe.

I made the decision to stop buying towering heels a while back and decided on a much more comfortable midi heel. No not a kitten heel. Midi heel. They still give me height and elongate my legs ticking all my boxes. It is lovely to own expensive heels, but the other day when I was looking for a flat which would not leak water I couldn't find one. I spend hundreds on choos and less than £15 on flats and I am paying the price. They are either falling apart, not waterproof or cold.

My Stuart Weitzman boots have saved me from the rain and the pain - the first pair of flat shoes I have spent a lot of money on have actually lasted. The morale of this very short story is that I need to spend more money on the shoes I wear every day : flats!!

Picture from Daily Mail 

So following on with VB's flat mantra, she stepped out in  head to toe brown the other day looking very chic in simple brown leather riding boots.
You can find similar here 


A slightly different style of the Jodhpur boot are these 'Anatomy' boots by ASOS (seen below) They have the classic chelsea boot design with elasticated side and tab at back. Full leather upper so they will be waterproof.

These will be great for those days when it is miserable outside and I want to pair with my jeans and a thick jumper. They can easily be dressed up or down and most importantly I know I will be able to wear them all day long.

ASOS Anatomy Boots

They are £48 but as I still have my student card I got 20% off (special promotion) so I got them for a really good price. Still a lot less than what I pay for my heels but I am getting there slowly...

'India' pumps by French Sole

Another brand of flats I have heard wonder stories about are brand 'French Sole'.

Love these 'India' pumps by French Sole. Perfect colour and tones for Spring and most importantly they are comfortable. At £95 they are on the pricier side of things but if like me you will wear them everyday then I reckon it is worth it.

Oscar Pistorius Trial - Cricket bat v Gun shots experiment

I have been following Oscar Pistorius' live trial for the last week and when doing some research found this video on Youtube. I have been following the trial extremely closely but I have to say I am still unsure on whether Oscar Pistorius knowingly killed Reeva Steenkamp or it was infact a mistake. 

This video which shows the audio of both a cricket bat and a gun shot. Although this experiment cannot be classed as evidence as the settings are completely different, for one the video is outside when the noises that were heard were in a secluded house, secondly we do  not know how Oscar hit the bat and nor do we know if he was on his stumps or prosthetic legs. However what this video does show is how similar the two sounds actually are.

I always thought a gun shot would sound much louder and sharper than the noise of a cricket bat hitting a wooden door, yet this video clearly demonstrates how the noises could be deemed the same. 

The distance of this experiment is not exact to Oscar Pistorius' neighbour's house and also cannot show exactly the force Oscar used so is a very broad view but it does make you think. Could the two key witnesses Michelle Burger and her husband Carl Johnson actually have heard Oscar breaking the door down with a bat instead of the four gun shots they think they heard?

To me they are very similar. Shut your eyes and you will see just how they both merge into the same sound. The gun shots are slightly sharper and quicker, but only just and at such a difference would you really know?

Oscar Pistorius' murder trial continues

Day 4 The murder trial of Oscar Pistorius entered its fourth day today in Pretoria, South Africa where he stands accused of murdering his girlfriend, Reeva Steenkamp on Valentine's Day 2013. Four days in to the trial we have heard from two key witnesses, Michelle Burger and her her neighbour Charl Johnson. Michelle and Charl say they overheard screams and loud gun shots on the morning of the 14th. Both have said the screams were lady-like which Pistorius' defence lawyer has challenged, saying it could have been infact Oscar's screams for help.  Both have stood strong in the face of relentless questioning from one of South Africa's most acclaimed defence lawyers, Barry Roux. This case for me has always been a peculiar one. A heartbreaking one at that. A well-known sporting hero in South Africa shoots dead his model girlfriend. It is something featured in movies, not so much reality - yet it has happened and happened in such an extraordinary way it seems difficult to understand. We know Reeva arrived at Oscar's gated house on the afternoon of the 14th and was caught on security cameras smiling and talking to staff. This is where the story becomes known only to Reeva and Oscar. Dubbed as the 'trial of the century' Oscar's murder case is being broadcast for the world to see. Whether this is something I agree on or not, it does make for interesting watching. The defence team will argue that Oscar mistakenly shot his girlfriend Reeva believing her to be an intruder in his house. They argue that Oscar shot through the door of his bathroom 4 times and when realising Reeva was no longer in their bed, he used a cricket bat to break down the door. Upon realising he had shot Reeva he screamed for help. The prosecution team will argue that Reeva and Oscar were going through a rough patch in their relationship and on the night of the 14th had a heated argument resulting in Oscar Pistorius killing his girlfriend. The prosecution argue that Oscar did not shoot any warning shots - shots that might be expected if you believe an intruder to be behind the door. They will use key witnesses to prove that Reeva and Oscar had an argument that night and show Oscar’s ‘real’ personality. The witness box will include ex-girlfriends of Oscar who will reveal his ‘jealous’ side. Oscar Pistorius' house in Pretoria In my opinion and I say this because all views are my own – I find it odd that Oscar would be so paranoid in a house that offered maximum security. As a double amputee, he would not have bought a house where he felt unsafe. His house is in a gated community, manned by security guards. To even get to Oscar's house, an intruder must first cross this gated security and men. I am not saying this is not possible, but it seems fairly difficult. Secondly, two key witnesses have said on the night of the 14th they heard high pitched screams of a woman crying for help, believed to be Reeva. Now Oscar's defence team have argued that the screams could not have been Reevas, for the first shot believed to have hit Reeva in the head meant she sustained such bad brain damage, she would have been incapable of screaming, hence it was Oscar screaming for help. This to me is odd, because originally Oscar's defence team said Reeva was hit three times, first in the hip, then the leg and lastly the head which I believe would have allowed her to scream for help before the final third bullet.   The supposed gun shots Michelle Burger and her husband heard have been argued by the defence to actually be the noise of Oscar using a cricket bat to break down his bathroom door (after finally realising Reeva was not in the bed). Pistorius’ bathroom light was also on according to Johnson before the screaming began which contradicts Pistorius’ claim that there were no lights on in the house. What I also find peculiar is if Oscar believed he heard an intruder why did he not check where Reeva was. If he had simply turned to look at the other side of his bed, he would have seen Reeva was absent. Yet he did not do this, he immediately grabbed his gun from underneath his bed and carried on to the bathroom. Oscar has previously said it was too dark to see anything, yet he managed to find his gun easily enough. Apparently he yelled Reeva's name and heard nothing. Why would she not reply? Why would she ignore her boyfriend's anxious screams for her? There has been suggestions that Reeva and Oscar had been arguing that night backed up by a witness who overheard them. Perhaps she was not talking to him due to this argument but I find it extremely odd that she would not reply to such a heightened yell.   Oscar said he shouted for the intruder to come out and he had a gun. Now at this point, if Reeva was not talking to Oscar due to their previous argument, I think now would have been a good time to presume that talking. Surely she would not continue to sit in the bathroom ignoring Pistorius was outside with a gun?  Murder scene (SkyNews) It has been proved Oscar was on his stumps when he fired the four shots that killed Reeva. Now this could be because he was extremely frightened and thought the best thing to do was to grab the gun immediately. This shows an anxious man thinking on the spur of the moment, however could Oscar and Reeva have had an heated argument and this spurred Oscar to seek revenge? Reeva locked the bathroom door. Now I am not an expert (clearly) but I do find it a little strange as to why she locked the bathroom door. It was late; she was quickly going to the toilet, why would she lock the door? Perhaps this is normal in South Africa, however I believe you would only lock the door if you were trying to get away from something or someone or you wanted privacy. She had privacy as the toilet was segregated from the main bathroom and Oscar supposedly was in bed so why did she still feel the need to lock the door? Also why would an intruder lock themselves in the bathroom with no route of escape. It does not make sense. Blood splatter results will later show the position Reeva was in at the time of the shooting, whether she was on the toilet or behind the door hiding from Pistorius.  There are many questions that need answering. In particular, why did Oscar say he could not remember his iphone passcode? He still has not remembered the code and his phone has been sent off to be unlocked to see if Oscar sent any messages that night. These days we use our phones all the time, surely Oscar remembers his passcode?  Is there something he is hiding? Oscar writing notes in court This is a tricky case and over the next few days I hope some more elements will come to light but having watched it live the past few days I have to say Oscar’s defence team are doing an extremely good job in scrutinising the witnesses’ statements and evidence. Even if Oscar is found not guilty of murdering Reeva, he can still be charged with murder as he intentionally shot to kill whoever he believed to be behind that door. If this is what Oscar says it is; an awful and heart wrenching tragedy of mistaken identity then Oscar has to live with the fact he has killed a woman he loved for the rest of his life. It remains for the courts to decide what actually went on that night but in my opinion, there are too many uncertainties and questions as to why Oscar did not check where Reeva was and secondly why he shot through that bathroom door not knowing whether Reeva was behind it or not.