Trial Discussion Thread #44 - 14.07.1-2, Day 34-35

[Hatfield]

Stephanie Findlay @SJFindlay · 6 Std.

A lesson in court etiquette from Judge Masipa, when your phone goes off: "You just standup and apologize immediately," she said

I wish she would have acted like my 2nd grade teacher.

"Come up here right now and give me that and then go stand in the corner" :floorlaugh:

 

[zwiebel]

Does Nel get access to full copies of those psych reports? Because if not, it doesn't seem right - that defense can introduce written evidence in open court, selectively quote the bits that suit them, then that's it. I know the judge has copies though, at least.

 

[Hatfield]

IIRC, only 5% of the SA population are legal gun owners, so legal + illegal owners is still very small. ST testified that OP always carries his gun, except for sleeping when it's within arm's reach. ST testified to OP's leaving his car and pointing his gun at a driver he thought was following them. ST/DF testified to OP's dangerous shot out the sunroof [Sept. 2012]. DF/KL testified to OP's shooting the gun inside Tashas [Dec. 2012]. It's not OP that's vulnerable, it's anyone who's near him when he's awake, including people his reckless driving could have killed.

JMO
His childlike jubilation and what I perceived as careless handling of his firearms on the gun-range video helped me to realize he is not the type of person I would want to ever be near when he has a weapon.

I see people like him at the gun range I go to and I leave immediately.

 

[Viper]

Here is the twitter link to the tweets posted upthread. This journo seems to have posted the most about the report, before the ban. She is now talking about if anyone retweets them, are they breaking the judge's order.

This ban can only apply in SA though, surely? It's not global?

https://mobile.twitter.com/karynmaughan/tweets

I wonder if a Press association will motion (or whatever) the judge to rescind the ban....

Awesome stuff Zwiebel! Thank you. As a courtesy, here is a non-mobile version link to the one that you kindly provided:

https://twitter.com/karynmaughan

Thanks again.

 

[Hatfield]

I don't think visibility is the issue here. IMO this expert's testimony is more intended to going towards showing the reasons why a disabled person might feel more vulnerable and consequently the whys for their reactions, if they find themselves in a situation of perceived danger, confrontation, etc.

This could, and I AM NOT SAYING IT WILL, count towards the "reasonable person" criteria Masipa uses if coming to a culpable homicide verdict, since although, as Prof. Grant notes in a couple of his posts, SA law has to date been reluctant to take into account disability as a part of the "reasonable person" criteria, in most modern democratic countries including the UK as the witness has referred to, this is changing as disability rights and promoting the understanding of disability becomes ever more prominent.
JMOSNNFS,I,OR

Re BBM
I sure hope the judge doesn't lose sight of what I believe this whole case resides on. What would a "reasonable" person do if they just heard noises and thought someone broke into their house and hid in that bathroom.

Disability or no disability, a "reasonable person" in my opinion would not go running towards that bathroom door to blindly shoot through the door at them when they cannot be certain the person is really an intruder.

-It could have been a relative coming for unexpected visit thinking he wasnt home and came right in.
-It could have been the neighbors drunken kid coming into the wrong house (has happened in US).
-It could have been an elderly senile person coming to wrong house.
-It could have been a transient trying to use bathroom.
-It could have been "Reeva" (it was)

IMO, a reasonable person would not have done what he did. They would have either run out the front door and get away OR have the weapon ready and ask the person to identify themselves while standing at a safe distance to be able to shoot them if they needed to.

That is what a reasonable person would do if we want to believe his story. But IMO, the witness hearing female screaming and arguining tells me his story is false to begin with.

IMO, OP loses this case either way. I just hope the judge does not lose sight of what a reasonable person would do in that situation if she wants to believe OPs story.

 

[DebinGA]

"His style of conflict resolution is to talk through the situation or remove himself from the situation"

How might OP react if the other party in the conflict wants to end the conversation and tries to leave before OP has finished all he wants to say? Does the report mention how OP handles rejection or criticism?

 

[jay-jay]

I don't understand what you don't understand about the concept of what a trial is. OP is innocent until proven guilty. That 20 regular posters here think he is guilty doesn't make him so. Repeating speculations and opinions does not magically convert them into facts, and that includes whether or not the two had a fight that night.

This is a sluething forum, and as such, many of us have been over and over and over the various pieces of evidence put forward (photographic, witnesses testimonies, etc, etc) and we have come to the conclusion that this is the only possible scenario based on the information that has been provided to us. People here are not just condemning OP willy nilly .. they are basing their opinion on a whole range of things, mainly inconsistencies and lies which have emitted from the mouth of Pistorius himself, and can come to no other conclusion but that OP and Reeva argued that night and he shot her intentionally in a fit of pique. This forum isn't a courtroom, it's a discussion forum, and as such most of us have been taking each piece of evidence or testimony and examining it, and believe it or not, we are not just dismissing it because we want OP to be guilty (just for the hell of it) but simply because it is either irrelevant to the case or it is inconsistent with the version of events that OP has provided. I have no wish to see an innocent person jailed, but I've yet to see how OP can possibly be innocent <<-- if you have some way of knowing, or proving, that then I'd be happy to listen.

 

[vansleuths]

I don't think visibility is the issue here. IMO this expert's testimony is more intended to going towards showing the reasons why a disabled person might feel more vulnerable and consequently the whys for their reactions, if they find themselves in a situation of perceived danger, confrontation, etc.

This could, and I AM NOT SAYING IT WILL, count towards the "reasonable person" criteria Masipa uses if coming to a culpable homicide verdict, since although, as Prof. Grant notes in a couple of his posts, SA law has to date been reluctant to take into account disability as a part of the "reasonable person" criteria, in most modern democratic countries including the UK as the witness has referred to, this is changing as disability rights and promoting the understanding of disability becomes ever more prominent.
JMOSNNFS,I,OR

I know you are not inferring this, but if the court would accept that it is reasonable for a disabled person to shoot 4 bullets through a locked bathroom door because he had a fright, I don't think I'd want to hang out with anyone that has a disability.

It would set way to broad of a precedent. Let's hope it doesn't come to this.

 

[Feynman]

Who really uses the word "aforementioned" when speaking?

John Houseman in The Paper Chase for example. Note the hilarious resemblance:

http://www.nndb.com/people/686/000042560/

But when you think about it, it has fewer syllables than "previously mentioned". Henceforth I shall utilize the aforementioned "aforementioned".

 

[cottonweaver]

Awesome stuff Zwiebel! Thank you. As a courtesy, here is a non-mobile version link to the one that you kindly provided:

https://twitter.com/karynmaughan

Thanks again.

Maughan's tweets worth a look.
eg. Panel interviewed 16 people incl. ex Jenna Edkins (one who became a staunch supporter and got into a twitter war with STaylor when ST posted the "last lies you'll tell" comments. JE dated him off/on for 5 years)

eg. Report says OP been exposed to crime directly/indirectly all his life!!! I am really finding this report hard to believe even though it does what it needs to for PTeam. Did the panel review facts or just go off interviews- no crimes reported against him.

eg. Report says OP never reacted to offers from glamorous models because he was suspicious they were after his fame. Esquire cover girl Reeva not a glamorous model?!! And what about the other Russian model - or is that just a rumour? see link below.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...icky-Miles-Samantha-Taylor-Russian-model.html
In any case Melissa Rom ex was/is also described as a model see below
http://fabwags.com/melissa-rom-oscar-pistorius-ex-girlfriend/
Can't the panel use/allowed to refer to published articles etc in mags, internet etc.?

eg. Report:"His style of conflict resolution is to talk through the situation or remove himself from the situation"

etc etc.
:banghead:

 

[MsMarple]

D: I have also observed Mr P to be hypervigilant....scanning room rapidly in dining room, even in his room....scanning for portential threat with an end to potentially remove onesefl from harm's way.

rbbm

Apologies if this has already been discussed as I'm still on page 24, lol.

So which is it, OP moves towards the threat or looks to remove himself from the threat? :waitasec:

This trial is turning into A Tale of Two Oscar's...

 

[Feynman]

That report was helpful for the defense. Roux and OP never claimed diminished capacity or mental defect that would render him unable to understand what he was doing or appreciate right from wrong.

Dr MV called it GAD, but the report calls it vulnerability, especially when on his stumps. That was the whole point of the doctor's testimony - to explain that Oscar felt threatened and vulnerable to harm because of past incidents and his disability.

In addition, you've now got a report from psychiatrists and psychologists who evaluated him for 30 days and find that he does not have a rage or anger problem and that his emotions and grieving behaviors are sincere.

I have to disagree. The report said it's not GAD, so adios Dr. Vorster -- she's gone. And I do think the DT was trying to implant some kind of "diminished responsibility" meme into the proceedings (the other memes - remember double tap? - didn't seem to be working too well). The "I didn't intend to shoot at anyone, I shot out of fear" business has been tarnished, since his "fear" is not that of a mentally disordered person, but is likely within average limits, and given the shooter's expertise with guns, this special pleading looks weaker.

 

[MsMarple]

Oscar's testimony about his vulnerability when on his stumps nagged at me from the beginning; I couldn't reconcile it with him bringing in fans or jumping onto the bed then feeling around the floor and curtains while keeping his gun pointed at the hallway, not falling over from the gun's recoil yet managing to fire a tight grouping, etc..

The defense witnesses really brought into focus how absurd OP's claims really are and convinced me that he either lied through his teeth or had his prosthetics on.

So, thank you, defense witnesses, for clearing that up! :clap:

 

[TorisMom003]

@karynmaughan: #OP report: "He admits that he went through a period where he made the wrong choice of friends and often acted in way he wasn't proud of"" OP means that the friends he had did not side with him nor cover for him and instead told the truth about his behavior and his thinking that the law does not apply to him.

"@karynmaughan: #OP report reveals how fame affected #OscarPistorius: "Unsurprisingly, he lost his way somewhat" @eNCAnews" What this means is that the fame and money went to his head making him think that he was above the law and could do what he wanted to whomever he wanted and get away with it.

"@karynmaughan: #OP report: "Ms Steenkamp shared his views on religion and would often listen to his 'Hillsong' music while driving in her car" @eNCAnews" Except of course for the "B@tch don't kill my vibe" song. Reeva did not approve of that song at all and let it be known.

"@karynmaughan: #OP report states that his relationship with Reeva was "probably only the second one where he felt trust, security and real companionship"" And yet Reeva did not feel security in her relationship with OP. As it turns out, she had very good reason to feel the way she did.

"@karynmaughan: #OP report: His experience was that many girls wanted to be with him because of his fame..that made his suspicious of the motives of woman" OP, after his fame came to him, made sure to date only "acceptable" women, ie models. OP also wanted only women that "understood" the "pressures" he had to deal with while not giving two sh@ts about their own.

"@karynmaughan: #OP psych report states: "He was often approached by beautiful women like models but never reacted to their offers" @eNCAnews" Except of course if he was lonely, felt like getting revenge on a "cheating" girlfriend or needed a beautiful woman on his arm at some event.

There are more tweets of the report out on journalists feeds. I could say more thoughts about assessment but will wait til I' m actually meant to be having free time - lol

Just sayin' having some Simon Gittany déjà vu...

"@CharlduPlessc: #OscarTrial Interesting tidbit from the psych assessment is that OP reports being single."

Thank you for this KT! Much appreciated! I posted my "rebuttal" to some of the things in blue. It's a shame that the panel did not investigate OP's claims instead of taking him at his word.

MOO

 

[TorisMom003]

If OP's stumps are that uncomfortable to walk or stand on, then how can he not only walk but run with his prosthetics on? Is there a ton of extra padding under his stump in the prosthetics to prevent the pain? Or is this another lie from OP's camp to try and get him off of the murder charges?

 

[Duchy]

THE Andrea Bocelli? Now DT is name dropping.

Never heard of him lol:blushing:

 

[geevee]

I couldn't tell at the end of today's session, did Oldwage finish with the witness or just point out the time to Her Honor before asking for the banning of publication of the report contents?

 

[Marfa Lights]

A trial isn't about compassion for the victim. Objective analysis of evidence absent mockery and emotionalism does not exclude compassion for victims or their surviving loved ones.

Nor should it be one big pity party for the perpetrator as this trial is rapidly becoming-- and yes, he is the perpetrator, not just the "accused"-- let's not forget he is the self-confessed killer. Innocent until proven guilty does not really apply here. He is unquestionably guilty of killing Reeva. It only remains for Judge Masipa and the assessors to reason why.

Actions have consequences, intended or not, and regardless of how sympathetic a character you find him, Oscar needs to be held accountable for his "mistake" that night. Objective analysis does not exclude one's capacity for reason or the ability to remain skeptical in the face of false and misleading evidence. When the defense piles it on this thick, mockery and various emotions, such as disgust, are time-honored responses from the gallery.

 

[Interested Bystander]

Judge Christopher Greenland has uploaded three more videos within the last 24 hours. If you are interested you can find them here:-

Sound of Screams
sound of scream screams - YouTube

Oscar Not Insane at Time of Killing
oscar not insane at time of killing - YouTube

Oscar was not Insane
oscar was not insane - YouTube

 

[Giles]

I couldn't tell at the end of today's session, did Oldwage finish with the witness or just point out the time to Her Honor before asking for the banning of publication of the report contents?

I don't think he's finished with the witness yet. So, well have to endure more of him tomorrow.