Oscar Pistorius - Discussion Thread #66~ the appeal~

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
soozieqtips said:
BIB - that's a shame. I was looking forward to hearing a detailed explanation of how they arrived at the judgment in the first place. Mind you, if 12 judgments were handed down in a single day and they sit for 8 hours (if they do) it allows about 45mins for each judgment. That's more than enough time for some detail, especially as they won't be adjourning every 5 minutes or stopping for frequent tea breaks!
Click to expand...
LOL... yes, no tea breaks indeed!-----------Nor, I imagine, is the reading followed by Q&A.--------------------Iirc a poster here said that in SCA (unlke trial courts) the Judge discloses their ruling upfront, followed by how they came to that decision.--------------------I'm hoping they're handout copies of the "media summary" as soon as they finish the Hearing!
 
Val1 said:
For anyone else that needs a time converter, this one is pretty good.

http://www.worldtimebuddy.com/
Click to expand...

2:45 am :sheesh:

This is bringing back memories from when we were waiting for Masipa to announce her ruling regarding the state's application for a mental health evaluation. I remember it was 3:30 am my time and I said I was pretty sure I was the one in need of a psych eval for waking up at that hour just to hear her decision.

Deja vu :floorlaugh:
 
Val1 said:
For anyone else that needs a time converter, this one is pretty good.

http://www.worldtimebuddy.com/
Click to expand...

Thanks for this Val. For the past few days I've been logging on and firstly taking note of the # of posts in this thread. I figure when I see the # of posts skyrocket that will mean a verdict! :crazy:
 
Greater Than said:
2:45 am :sheesh:

This is bringing back memories from when we were waiting for Masipa to announce her ruling regarding the state's application for a mental health evaluation. I remember it was 3:30 am my time and I said I was pretty sure I was the one in need of a psych eval for waking up at that hour just to hear her decision.

Deja vu :floorlaugh:
Click to expand...

:giggle:
 
saraomar said:
Dead wrong? About what exactly? I have no idea what you are saying and what you are responding to! Did I touch a nerve?

Boo hoo! He CHOSE supposed solitary confinement because he was far to precious to be in the regular prison and its inmates, so he got what he wanted. He had a full time room mate, so to speak in the next cell and they shared a bathroom and many basketball games.
This has nothing to do with his family and their love for him, I never said that.

Maybe you should take your own advice about human love and kindness and out of respect stop comparing his grief to that of Reeva's parents, who you have so kindly stated will be spared the 'pain' because they are old and will die sooner than OP who will have to continue enduring the pain for another 50 years.

There is no comparison between the grief a parent feels who's child has been murdered in a hideous way to that of the perpetrator, who is a coward and brought it all on himself!

Why don't you show the Steenkamps some human love and kindness!
Click to expand...

Saraomar, no one in their right mind CHOOSES to be in solitary confinement as you stated above. It was for his own protection, I'm sure you can understand that as a disabled person, he'd have a very difficult time protecting himself if he was put in with the general population. He needs to be punished, not killed or we fall to his level.

In terms of being able to play many basketball games with his room mate, I'm not sure where you've pulled this nugget from? According to all the reports that I have seen, he was given the same amount of leisure time as every other inmate, nothing more, nothing less.

Your comment on compassion is uncalled for. I have a great deal of compassion for the Steenkamps as my own child was murdered when she was young. I also learnt through my own ordeal that anger is a poison that you pour and drink yourself. For me, it was a matter of letting go and also forgiving her killer (as best as I could). It's for this reason that I have compassion for OP in addition to the Steenkamps and I know you and probably most people don't like the age comment I made but it is a reality. I am speaking from my own experiences.
 
foxbluff said:
On second thought, I don't believe we're going to get much sitting-on-the-edge-of-our-seats time.--------------------KM reported that the Judgment rulings are very brief--------------------I read on SCA website that they handed down (12) judgments on Nov. 30th alone.--------------------That certainly sounds as though they simply read their written Judgment out loud and then it's on the the next case.
Click to expand...

In my day a lot of judgements were just issued - the Court does not deliver them

All the lawyers would be back at the offices working on other matters

I guess this one has the media interest
 
Karyn Maughan ‏@karynmaughan · 17h17 hours ago
Definitely on @eNCA

Laurie A Claase @LaurieAClaase
@karynmaughan @eNCA
They don't see him as a flight risk, then?

Karyn Maughan ‏@karynmaughan · 2h2 hours ago
Karyn Maughan Retweeted Laurie A Claase
NPA spokesman told me state's view is that he is technically incarcerated (under house arrest).
 
Interested Bystander said:
Barry Bateman ‏@barrybateman [video=twitter;671688132631388160]https://twitter.com/barrybateman/status/671688132631388160[/video]
#OscarPistorius Judge Eric Leach is expected to read a summary of the judgment into the record, not just the order. BB
Click to expand...

Have you see those paragraphs listed as "Summary" in the SCA judgements IB? I bet you have - if this is what is meant by the reporters, they are so short - I hope it doesn't mean just that summary for all the people getting up in the middle of the night here!
None of these reporters will have seen anything like this televised so I don't know how to interpret the likely brevity of the broadcast.

Anyone know how many hours later it is uploaded to the SCA site?
 
cottonweaver said:
Have you see those paragraphs listed as "Summary" in the SCA judgements IB? I bet you have - if this is what is meant by the reporters, they are so short - I hope it doesn't mean just that summary for all the people getting up in the middle of the night here!
None of these reporters will have seen anything like this televised so I don't know how to interpret the likely brevity of the broadcast.

Anyone know how many hours later it is uploaded to the SCA site?
Click to expand...

Yes, they are very short. I am hoping that we might get more, but reading the BB tweet, it makes me think we may not. :(
 
mhiforme said:
Saraomar, no one in their right mind CHOOSES to be in solitary confinement as you stated above. It was for his own protection, I'm sure you can understand that as a disabled person, he'd have a very difficult time protecting himself if he was put in with the general population. He needs to be punished, not killed or we fall to his level.

In terms of being able to play many basketball games with his room mate, I'm not sure where you've pulled this nugget from? According to all the reports that I have seen, he was given the same amount of leisure time as every other inmate, nothing more, nothing less.

Your comment on compassion is uncalled for. I have a great deal of compassion for the Steenkamps as my own child was murdered when she was young. I also learnt through my own ordeal that anger is a poison that you pour and drink yourself. For me, it was a matter of letting go and also forgiving her killer (as best as I could). It's for this reason that I have compassion for OP in addition to the Steenkamps and I know you and probably most people don't like the age comment I made but it is a reality. I am speaking from my own experiences.
Click to expand...

1. There are plenty of other disabled people who have been placed In The general population with no regard for their safety and protection.
2. You state OP has been given the same rec time and treated the same as other prisoners with respect to leisure time, yet he clearly is treated as special with respect to point 1 above. He was given the option to cook his own meals, have gym time, so he IS treated and has been given more than the average poor disabled joe in prison. So I don't buy the argument he was in solitary for 23 hours a day.
3. I am so very sorry about your loss, again I cannot imagine how you must feel so would not think of comparing your pain to the perpetrator. That's what I was saying in response to your comment that OP will endure this pain for 50 years yet her parents won't for very long. In my opinion it minimizes Steenkamps pain which I believe is not fair.
4. My best friend and her 4 year old son were murdered by their own husband/father in their own home, running from room to room. She screamed, there were neighbours, people heard, she was shot 7 times and the poor boy 1 time with a shot gun. There are a lot of similarities to this case, hence I feel very strongly about this.
5. I was a huge fan of OP and was living in qatar when he raced against a horse, so I am not an OP hater at all. I DO believe he did something horrible, and has played the victim card and it is despicable. I would have had a lot more respect for him if he had admitted guilt and taken his punishment. I have no respect for him as a human being and believe he is a killer, without a doubt.

This is the last post regarding this topic. Now I am only interested in the SCA decision and hope to god someone in SA has the guts to call it like it is and put this matter to bed.
 
Soooo

Still got all fingers crossed.

I think everything will hang on whether PPD was made out on the face of the judgement.

As I said all along, I am pretty sure the Supreme Court will be a bit severe about the mistakes in the judgement.

But will it change the result?

We will soon find out!
 
Interested Bystander said:
This is old but I only came across it this morning. I don't think it has been posted but apologies if it has. It really sums up what a lot of us dislike about Roux's approach with his "Poor Oscar Defence". Poor Reeva seemed to become just another unimportant cadaver.

http://www.702.co.za/articles/490/former-judge-chris-greenland-on-barry-roux-s-attack-on-media
Former Judge responds to Barry Roux's attack on media

17 October 2014 4:09 PM
Click to expand...

And very timely IB in that Roux dropped in the point at the end of the trial that some of his witnesses were intimidated by the trial media coverage and so did not give evidence.
Obviously it is a nonsense in so far as any witnesses that testified were given the option of not being filmed but yes it is rare that trials are televised there.

here was Ulrich Roux a while ago (sorry no link any more, can't re-find it)

"“The Supreme Court might then uphold or dismiss the sentence. They are also entitled to impose a harsher sentence, but if that is a possibility they have to notify the accused before the time,” Roux said.
Should the court uphold a prison sentence, Pistorius would then be able to take the matter to the Constitutional Court – the highest court in the land – as a final resort. He would only, however, be able to argue his case on constitutional grounds.
“The most glaring reason in that regard would be that he feels that his right to a fair trial was violated*by the case being televised,” Roux said."
 
cottonweaver said:
And very timely IB in that Roux dropped in the point at the end of the trial that some of his witnesses were intimidated by the trial media coverage and so did not give evidence.
Obviously it is a nonsense in so far as any witnesses that testified were given the option of not being filmed but yes it is rare that trials are televised there.

here was Roux a while ago (sorry no link any more, can't re-find it)

"“The Supreme Court might then uphold or dismiss the sentence. They are also entitled to impose a harsher sentence, but if that is a possibility they have to notify the accused before the time,” Roux said.
Should the court uphold a prison sentence, Pistorius would then be able to take the matter to the Constitutional Court – the highest court in the land – as a final resort. He would only, however, be able to argue his case on constitutional grounds.
“The most glaring reason in that regard would be that he feels that his right to a fair trial was violated*by the case being televised,” Roux said."
Click to expand...

Re BIB, you could also argue that a fair trial was more guaranteed by the TV coverage. Some poor non-famous person didn't have the world's media and umpteen legal minds looking at the proceedings. Plus, if they agreed, albeit reluctantly, doesn't it go towards nullifying that claim?

BTW, Susza, in a wicked twist of irony my flight this morning was cancelled due to heavy fog. Your fog may have lifted but mine descended! All is rerouted now but still will be in mid air. All this talk of fog makes me think I have stumbled back into the Arias case.
 
foxbluff said:
--------------------------------------EST: 2:45 am--------------------Yes, it's much more exciting to follow as Judgments take place... that exciting uncertainty that keeps you perched on the edge of your chair!!--------------------BBM = Bolded By Me
Click to expand...

Exactly!
When I once came down from a 5500m summit in the Everest valley and arrived in the camp at 4700m, I had a heart beat of 45.
During the appeal hearing my heart rate monitor failed :)
 
Interested Bystander said:
For those who don't want to use the world clock calculator the Appeal timing for the various parts of the world is as follows.

South Africa 09.45

Europe -1 hour = 08.45
UK -2 hours = 07.45

New York -7 hours = 02.45
Austin -8 hours = 01.45
Los Angeles -10 hours = 23.45 (day before)

Perth +6 hours = 15.45
Brisbane +8 hours = 17.45
Sydney +9 hours = 18.45

Wellington NZ +11 hours = 20.45
Click to expand...

You are SO nice, IB!
 
lithgow1 said:
Re BIB, you could also argue that a fair trial was more guaranteed by the TV coverage. Some poor non-famous person didn't have the world's media and umpteen legal minds looking at the proceedings. Plus, if they agreed, albeit reluctantly, doesn't it go towards nullifying that claim?

BTW, Susza, in a wicked twist of irony my flight this morning was cancelled due to heavy fog. Your fog may have lifted but mine descended! All is rerouted now but still will be in mid air. All this talk of fog makes me think I have stumbled back into the Arias case.
Click to expand...

LOL, actually I sent you mine ;) and now I realize it worked. Hmm, didn't know that I'm so powerful. Good lesson - for me ;)

Naah, don't worry, the sun will shine for you! Are you going to South Australia? Did you plan to visit the romantic vineyards of Adelaide Hills and luxuriate (bask?) on the wonderful beaches of Fleurieu Peninsula?
 
cottonweaver said:
And very timely IB in that Roux dropped in the point at the end of the trial that some of his witnesses were intimidated by the trial media coverage and so did not give evidence.
Obviously it is a nonsense in so far as any witnesses that testified were given the option of not being filmed but yes it is rare that trials are televised there.

here was Ulrich Roux a while ago (sorry no link any more, can't re-find it)

"“The Supreme Court might then uphold or dismiss the sentence. They are also entitled to impose a harsher sentence, but if that is a possibility they have to notify the accused before the time,” Roux said.
Should the court uphold a prison sentence, Pistorius would then be able to take the matter to the Constitutional Court – the highest court in the land – as a final resort. He would only, however, be able to argue his case on constitutional grounds.
“The most glaring reason in that regard would be that he feels that his right to a fair trial was violated*by the case being televised,” Roux said."
Click to expand...

Cotton, here's your Ulrich Roux link:

http://www.enca.com/oscar-trial-could-set-new-precedent-televised-court-cases

On the same subject, defence lawyer William Booth said there were two possible grounds for appeal - that of OP claiming he was badgered by the State and that of witnesses not being called because they did not want to be televised.

"If your client is being badgered, you get up as a lawyer. You object. There is also duty on the judge. I don't believe you can sit back".

Masipa called a timeout every time OP broke down, and she reprimanded Nel once or twice. If anyone did badgering in this trial it was Roux. Every newspaper reported on the grilling he gave to Michelle Burger. That was brutal, and she was only an ear witness, not someone accused of murder.

Booth said the issue of witnesses was not a relevant point because the judgment on the televising of the case made provision for witnesses being called in camera (i.e. in the judge's chamber or when spectators have been removed from the courtroom).

http://www.enca.com/oscar-trial-could-set-new-precedent-televised-court-cases

How Barry Roux could use either of these as the basis of an appeal is totally beyond me.

1. He gave his consent to the trial being televised providing that defence witnesses, including OP, not be shown.

2. His so-called witnesses who said they wouldn't appear could have done so if Roux asked Masipa to remove the spectators from the court. Who were these witnesses anyway, friends? Ha, this was Roux's excuse because I doubt there was anyone who wanted to come forward in mitigation. Roux was saving face IMO.

They should call Roux the Silver Fox - sly and cunning.
 
Susza said:
LOL, actually I sent you mine ;) and now I realize it worked. Hmm, didn't know that I'm so powerful. Good lesson - for me ;)

Naah, don't worry, the sun will shine for you! Are you going to South Australia? Did you plan to visit the romantic vineyards of Adelaide Hills and luxuriate (bask?) on the wonderful beaches of Fleurieu Peninsula?
Click to expand...

Heh heh. No, I will be in NSW. Blue Mountains, quite near JudgeJudi actually. And they too get more than their fair share of fog. Will I never escape it!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 156 more.
Total: 3,826 (members: 157, guests: 3,669)

Online statistics

Members online
157
Guests online
3,669
Total visitors
3,826
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,517
Messages
17,970,225
Members
228,791
Latest member
fesmike
Back
Top