Trial Discussion Thread #46 - 14.07.7, Day 37

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
M'lady in the backroom with her advisors...anyone got a coin??
 
Masipa could be walking on glass here because DT might have grounds for an appeal on the basis they were not allowed to consult a State witness. Surely there is a precedent somewhere!
 
we didnt like what our Pysch said can we borrow yours, pathetic
 
G.bng said:
But they were witnesses called by the State. Had the State not called them then the DT could have called them. This was even stated by Nel during another day when he said something about that the DT could have called Botha but chose not to.
Click to expand...

The point is that they had Wollie and the State had Mangena, just like they each have a psychiatrist, albeit assigned to them through/by the court. Did the State get to interview Wollie before they crossed him?
 
zwiebel said:
Nel was making it sound like Roux doesn't actually want to call his own psych witness, Dr Fein/Fine?
Click to expand...

True, so neither appears to wants to call their State appointed psych... maybe they should have swapped!

Seriously, is Dr Fine recovered now to testify since they just had a heart attack I thought... sure there must be a health warning about coming under Nel's questioning!
 
Val1 said:
The point is that they had Wollie and the State had Mangena, just like they each have a psychiatrist, albeit assigned to them through/by the court.
Did the State get to interview Wollie before they crossed him?
Click to expand...
BBM - good point. And I'm sure if there was a precedent, then either Roux or Oldwage would be able to cite it - and they can't.
 
I think if Roux speaks to the state's psych, Dr Kotze, and don't like what they hear, "My Lady, we do have one more witness".
 
So this seems to be that defence are wanting to suss out how the state's witness might rebut any evidence their own expert might give, in the event they call him? That doesn't seem fair.

Or would state not be able to call their own witness if defence had consulted with her?
 
She's an amazingly brave woman - I couldn't imagine being as strong in her position
 
Nel: The defence can not consult with everyone & then decide who they want to use.
 
The guy on Oscar Radio thinks it's a cat and mouse way of trying to figure if Nel's going to re-open his case.
 
After grilling OP for thirty days assessing his mental health at Weskoppies, the three member psychiatrist panel submitted its ONE page final report to Masipa, sheer madness!
 
According to oscar radio, this is all a cat & mouse game on Roux's part to force Nel's hand to say if he's going to ask to re-open his case. It's not normal practice to get access to the states psych. Iirc on Thursday morning Barry Roux actually said after reading the psych findings into the record that he's not allowed to speak to the state witness.
 
Forensics said:
On a different tack....this just posted on the Sydney Morning Herald website saying "I forgive Oscar Pistorius, says Reeva Steenkamp's mother". Reeva's mother and father's most recent interview.


Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/world/i-forgi...amps-mother-20140707-zsz8e.html#ixzz36mMwTHif
Click to expand...

Didn't her folks say that a year ago.... as her mom said, it's their religion to forgive, though she certainly wants to face him and get to the truth. Even though the bible spouts forgiveness, it also says an eye for an eye and the first step to forgiveness is atonement.
 
canny said:
After grilling OP for thirty days assessing his mental health at Weskoppies, the three member psychiatrist panel submitted its ONE page final report to Masipa, sheer madness!
Click to expand...

No the one page report was the psychiatrist's own summation there was a full report produced by the panel.
 
Val1 said:
The point is that they had Wollie and the State had Mangena, just like they each have a psychiatrist, albeit assigned to them through/by the court. Did the State get to interview Wollie before they crossed him?
Click to expand...

BIB
But isn't that the whole point? Had the State not called Mangena, Saayman, Van der Nest, etc then it would have been the DT's right to call them if they wanted.

Right or wrong that is what Roux is arguing and it IMO it sounds correct unless there is a legal exception or a precedent saying that psychs appointed (and they are chosen by each side) to carry out a Mental State at Time of Offece Order are excepted witnesses to the rule.

IDK, difficult conundrum for Masipa if no precedent since she risks an appeal on that basis and a retrial if the appeal panel thought her refusal to allow it was incorrect.
 
The definition of "running": IMHO

Derman is the only person who used a "technical" definition of running ( i.e., both feet off the ground), which I think is probably an important distinction in science/research.

Before he got here everyone knew what running meant when Oscar said he "ran." I humbly suggest that that common parlance use of the term "to run" is the more appropriate one to use in most general discussions about the case.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 170 more.
Total: 754 (members: 171, guests: 583)

Online statistics

Members online
171
Guests online
583
Total visitors
754
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
596,463
Messages
18,048,093
Members
230,008
Latest member
tmholden913
Back
Top