Trial Discussion Thread #38 - 14.05.13 Day 31

[Val1]

I don't think it was how that sounds. This has been discussed before. He was accompanied by Brig. Gerard Labuschagne, who has subsequently been sitting on the prosecution bench at times during the trial. It was suggested that OP's aunt Micki asked GL, who was or had been her colleague, to look after him on the night of the shooting, and that is as far as it went.

Still seems pretty suspect when a police officer comes up to the admitted killer and introduces themself as a friend of his family and says he will look after him...when was the last time you heard of an admitted killer getting that kind of kid gloves treatment? To me that says there was already family knowledge that OP was a powder keg.

 

[BritsKate]

That could be that the next witness will testify as to how Oscar's disability would affect his flight or fight response. Which Roux seems to indicate will likely be tied to Oscar's GAD thus causing Nel to call for another 78 referral.

In my opinion Nel would have done better to ask for an independent psych evaluation of Oscar rather than a section 78 referral as the 78 referral has the clause about "know the rightness or wrongness of his or her actions" I think it is going to be a tough bill to sell that Oscar does not know that he acted wrongly, he knows that killing Reeva was wrong, he even stated under cross examination that he didn't want to kill anybody. (And yes I know that 95% of you believe that he with malice intended to kill Reeva but that is not what is being addressed in this post).

BBM

I'm fairly confident he couldn't simply ask nicely, hence the necessity of pursuing the application. Normally, such a request is made by the defence because it usually goes towards mitigation and most often before trial. This application is so unusual for so many reasons. However, important to remember the State (opposing attorney) is making the application, we're midtrial, and the accused has a bevy of constitutional rights the court will bend itself over backwards not to violate. Further, a whole host of appellate grounds they'll strive to limit.

So, I'm thinking this was the most ethically sound way legally to pursue something like this. Happy to be proven wrong if you can find a link - I looked myself but there were about 10 million pages just of Oscar and Nel.

Oh...and back to paragraph one - a few legal experts were pointing out how bizarre it was for the defence to fight this because normally, usually, it could often only work in their client's favor. That's very telling to me.

All JMO

 

[Greater Than]

Hi there Myvice. Interesting post and snipped by me for relevance.

BBM - I agree. He seems driven by anger and frustration rather than anxiety and vulnerability. Although he said it's not his 'personality' to walk away from danger, I don't think that charging towards a dangerous situation (when he himself could have been killed by the 'intruder' coming out of the toilet) indicates he felt vulnerable at that point (or at any point). On the contrary, he's aggressive and seems to enjoy courting danger (speeding, shooting guns in restaurants etc) which really doesn't sound the kind of thing an anxious and vulnerable person would do. It's more likely that people felt anxious and vulnerable around him.

BIB - IMO this testimony evidence is exactly what brought upon the next DT witness regarding OP's fight vs flight response.

Any guesses on when this next witness first met OP? I'm going with no more than 7 days ago.

 

[Val1]

thanks for the info. v helpful.

bbm
she did know who this was.
holmes.
and she gave the report date: 18 feb 2013

maybe it was done by the police just after the arrest. i believe op was taken to hospital at that time. surely this report is of some interest now, not so?

That was the day before OP's bail hearing and 4 days after he had been taken to the medical centre iirc.

 

[ColonelMustard]

Iirc, Roux had said something about his next witness was to do with the "other" aspect of the fight or flight response, which in my mind can only mean OP's physical limitations(notwithstanding his prowess as an olympic athlete...), and how that would have impacted OP psychologically in conjunction with OP's "personality" disorder(GAD).

So in that sense, then yes I think a full assessment is in order and should this be denied on what this Dr. testified to(OP being more dangerous than the average person when under stress), any further evidence that points to OP being psychologically disturbed should then cement one.

That bring up an interesting question. As the trial proceeds, especially if it is reopened, if there is new cause, can Nel make this psych application again?

 

[minor4th]

I listened to most of the testimony and argument today. I do not think the judge is going to refer OP. What would it accomplish? Nothing but a delay in the proceedings. I don't even think it's proper for Nel to bring this motion, as the burden is on the accused to establish that he has a mental condition that reduces his responsibility - and he is not claiming that.

 

[ColonelMustard]

Ha, Easter is gone and so is the rabbit... even the chocolate eggs have disappeared. I think OP's version has collapsed the rabbit hole under the weight of all the defence's own witness's testimony for many of us.

None of the chocolate eggs in my neighborhood have disappeared. They just went on sale.

 

[aoibhinn]

The next witness called by Roux will comment on the effects of the 'fright, flight or fight' (as it's more correctly termed) response as it relates to GAD or any chronic anxiety disorder, in relation to Oscar's actions on the night.

A person suffering from a chronic anxiety disorder is perpetually in this fight or flight mode. It is not a response to a specific fear trigger. It's a state of general worry (abnormal).
The rest of us have a normal response to fear. The fight or flight response is one of our most basic survival instincts (normal).

Two examples to illustrate the possible defence stance on this:
Normal response
You are in a loving relationship with a partner. One evening, out of the blue, your partner throws a completely irrational wobbler, blaming you for something. You are frightened. You run or remove yourself from the situation (flight). You throw pots or attack their wardrobe with a sharp pair of scissors (fight).

Abnormal response
Your partner has been very aggressive toward you for some time. As a result, you have developed a chronic anxiety disorder. You are always on edge. Your partner yells at you all the time, perhaps uses violence. You accept it wordlessly and retreat asap (flight). One evening, you've had enough. Your partner attacks you, verbally or physically. You react with unusual violence (fight). Your response in this instance is not rational. Effectively, you've been broken.

Now, relate it back to Oscar. Oscar suffers from GAD. He is in a constant state of flight or fight. As his defence will have it, when faced by a threat, he is more prone that the normal individual to overreact. He shoots Reeva.

But let's have a look at his history, as we've been presented with it in court.

• Oscar has had weapon training. I assume part of this covers home invasion. Home invasion, rule #1 - do not run at your attacker, waving a gun. Escape, if possible. He even passed the test. He already had the knowledge and tools for this situation. It should lessen his potential to react irrationally.

• Oscar has already entered his home in combat mode, once that we know of. He didn't shoot the washing machine for making a noise.

• Oscar partakes in risk-taking behaviours. His fight or flight response should tell him to avoid risky situations. His GAD could make him more cautious in all aspects of life as it's a generalized anxiety disorder. His huse shuld have been intruder-safe. Alarms, no broken windows, no ladders laying about, properly trained guard dogs.

• Oscar feels more powerful on his legs and he competes on them (fights). His legs were next to the window. His automatic, primal 'fight response' should dictate he put them on.

• Oscar is in 'fight' mode. He races down the hall and shoots at the bathroom door, primal response. Except he doesn't. He thinks about plenty things before he shoots.

I'm sure there's more to add to the list. I just put in the first things that came to mind.

 

[jay-jay]

Changing the subject completely .. (well, not totally I suppose because this is something I was wondering from what Dr V brought up again earlier today with regard to OP using the cricket bat as additional security because the bedroom door didn't lock properly) .. how was that cricket bat positioned by that door that would make it difficult for someone to get through that door? I can't visualise it myself .. it doesn't make sense to me. He says he laid it between the door and the sunglasses cabinet and that the cricket bat was only 2cm short of the door so it would've prevented entry from outside the door. I can't see it myself, it doesn't sound like much of a preventative/security measure to me .. quite flimsy in fact, if you actually did have a real intruder in the house trying to get into the bedroom.

 

[minor4th]

IMO Vorster's testimony was added simply to Bolster OP's claim that he thought there was a dangerous intruder in the toilet, It's to assist the court in reaching a conclusion that OP's version is possibly true (in the main). The GAD testimony was not offered to excuse the act or get a reduced sentence - it was to explain how OP's mental state led him to believe there was an intruder in the bathroom.

 

[Greater Than]

I'm sickened by the way OP's mother's issues have come out in this. Yes, I'm sure alive or dead she would want to help her son but it still leaves a nasty taste in my mouth.

Disgusting, isn't it? Reminds me of the incest claim in the Casey Anthony trial. Proof that a murderer will stop at nothing to avoid a conviction.

 

[ColonelMustard]

.. and don't forget how he 'helped' Reeva with her contracts .. yes, I'm sure he knew more than she did :facepalm: .. he was probably more of a hindrance than a help (and quite possibly the cause the argument that night, who knows ..)

My guess is that Reeva instigated his input on her contracts - as well as on many other things. I'm not saying she couldn't have benefited from his input, nor that her intentions were nefarious. Rather, that she was actively working to create connections with him and had already begun applying thin layers of mortar to their relationship. Nothing wrong with that;she wanted the guy. Just found out too late what he was all about.

By the way, this testimony made my toes curl:


"Ozzie, it's time for you to come brush your teeth, now."


WTF?? This woman is 30 years old and law school graduate! No kidding she reminded him of his mother!

 

[Val1]

I listened to most of the testimony and argument today. I do not think the judge is going to refer OP. What would it accomplish? Nothing but a delay in the proceedings. I don't even think it's proper for Nel to bring this motion, as the burden is on the accused to establish that he has a mental condition that reduces his responsibility - and he is not claiming that.

The Dr that the defence called did.... and opened the door.

 

[Budgie]

Is this in relation to OP washing his hands, face and possibly his chest before he was tested for it at the scene?

http://www.ask.com/question/how-long-does-gunpowder-residue-stay-on-your-hands

Hi Val....

No it's relating to what Oscar did when he went back to the bedroom.

He testified that he went up and over the bed ( without his prosthetics on) after the shooting searching for Reeva. He then searched the floor on the balcony side of the bed and using his left hand searched along the curtains, and with the gun in right hand used the bed to steady himself.

Was forensic testing ever done of the bed?

Sorry to take this off OP's mental health for a bit.
This has been bugging me ever since OP took the stand.

Cheers

 

[Hatfield]

That OP was not the most impressive witness is an epic understatement.
I've listened to his complete testimony 4 times now and, in doing so, have learned two things.

1. I have no life
2. He's the poster child for how not to testify on the stand if you're the accused.

Since I missed a lot of it could you briefly describe a few key things he messed up on that really hurt his own case?

JMO
One of the things I noticed was that he was very confusing in his answers.
Another thing was that he threw in some lawyer speak terms that was obvious coaching by his lawyers. I think the judge will pick up that instead of just answering the questions honestly, he tried to tailor his testimony to make him seem not guilty about anything. I dont know how to explain it well what he was doing. His answers to everything sounded contrived or manipulated instead of just trying to answer honestly.

 

[Cherwell]

Still seems pretty suspect when a police officer comes up to the admitted killer and introduces themself as a friend of his family and says he will look after him...when was the last time you heard of an admitted killer getting that kind of kid gloves treatment? To me that says there was already family knowledge that OP was a powder keg.

I think it's quite natural when you consider the context. OP's aunt is a criminal profiler, she has apparently worked with Labuschagne who is a police psychologist. She was obviously concerned for her nephew and was in a position to ask someone to keep an eye on him. Bear in mind the situation wouldn't have been clear at that very early stage.

 

[Fuskier]

http://www.health24.com/Mental-Health/Disorders/Generalised-Anxiety-Disorder-20120721-2
Generalised Anxiety Disorder
Everybody worries at times. But in the case of Generalised Anxiety Disorder (GAD), an Anxiety Disorder, the person’s worries are much more than normal day-to-day anxiety ... This article is written in everyday language and is very readable. It may be helpful to those WS who requested more info re GAD.

 

[jay-jay]

My guess is that Reeva instigated his input on her contracts - as well as on many other things. I'm not saying she couldn't have benefited from his input, nor that her intentions were nefarious. Rather, that she was actively working to create connections with him and had already begun applying thin layers of mortar to their relationship. Nothing wrong with that;she wanted the guy. Just found out too late what he was all about.

By the way, this testimony made my toes curl:


"Ozzie, it's time for you to come brush your teeth, now."


WTF?? This woman is 30 years old and law school graduate! No kidding she reminded him of his mother!

.. but then again, we don't actually know if she said that .. that's only what OP is telling us she said.

 

[DebinGA]

A psych evaluation like Dr. Vorster's is of very limited value unless she's aware of OP's trial testimony and the evidence that contradicts it, which apparently she isn't. Making an assessment of OP based on his self-interested account of himself is worthless imo.

 

[soozieqtips]

I listened to most of the testimony and argument today. I do not think the judge is going to refer OP. What would it accomplish? Nothing but a delay in the proceedings. I don't even think it's proper for Nel to bring this motion,
as the burden is on the accused to establish that he has a mental condition that reduces his responsibility - and he is not claiming that.

BBM - yes, but apparently the accused didn't know he had a mental condition until the good Doctor informed him.

How can the accused establish a condition he doesn't know he has?