Discussion between the verdict and sentencing

UK viewers - BBC3 now!!!

cottonweaver said:

Mr Fossil & Lithgow - agreed - what a coincidence....

In a similar vein, watching uncle Arnie give his highly inapt press conf in front of judges bench I also thought : bet he's been told to try and appear more humble, tone it down by his PR Burgess. That was the first time I have not seen the steely glint in the eye, fighting talk,smirks, hard stares from him and Madame Lois.

Bet they had been thinking ,-on the 12th 13th- that they were already onto the image rehab phase now the CH was in the bag. Hence the mis-timed book stories, PR statements etc.

After this backlash , they may need to think gain about their PR strategy.

Click to expand...

I thought it was in really bad taste giving a speech like that after the Verdict, Oscar's PR should have reminded Uncle Arnold and Aunt Lois that Oscar has been found Guilty of Culpable Homicide -unlawfully and negligently killing Reeva (homicide = murder in USA as far as I know btw) - Oscar's version was not believed by the Judge, she said he was a very poor witness and used an unreasonable amount of force by firing shots at that toilet door killing another human being-what she did Rule was that the State had not proved their case or enough for her to charge Oscar with Dolus Eventualis ( except the jury is still out on that one, as the State MAY Appeal , but given their limited funds and small Prosecution Team compared to Oscar's £5,000 a day large Defence Team ............I just don't know if they will be able to Appeal, hope so ,everything crossed the State can Appeal) ..................

Uncle Arnold and Aunt Loise perhaps seeking sympathy of the Judge already..........before she's even given Oscar a sentence - I think they could have least have waited to speak to media until AFTER the sentencing. Meanwhile, the Steenkamps and friends were still leaving the gallery distraught over the Verdict and their seats still warm when they gave this spectacle to the press , like they have more power and persuasion of the Justice System than they actually do -bad taste and premature I felt, cringeworthy actually.

Sherbert said:

UK viewers - BBC3 now!!!

Click to expand...

thanks, watching now !
Heartbreaking seeing Reeva's father breaking down as he talks about her...... I hope they get to tell the Judge the impact that Reeva's death has had on their lives,and Oscar sees them in that Court room, and it influences the Judge's sentence, he should pay for what he's done taking a life.

Sherbert said:

UK viewers - BBC3 now!!!

Click to expand...

Thanks. Watching it now.

"Detectives immediately thought there'd been a fight, because of blood in the bedroom and smashed in bath panels".

sleuth-d- said:

thank you, so:

he made one call to silverwoods security [no answer]
one call to 10111 [out of order?]

shots

second call to security [got through] - i assume then that this is the 3:15:51 call. not the first one.

you have dr stipp's phone records too?... knowing the time of the 10111 call [or the first call to security] would really pin down the shots time. or would there be no record of these calls?

Click to expand...

@ mr fossil

further to my post above... from the judges timeline...

"6. 03:15:51, the duration was 16 seconds, Dr Stipp telephoned the
Silver Lakes security.

10. 03:17 Dr Stipp attempted to make a call to 10111.
11. 03:17 second sounds were heard. These were cricket bat striking
against the door."

in evidence dr stipp clearly states the 10111 call comes before the call that got through to security. [@3:15:51]
so #10 and #11 are incorrect assumptions. which would seem to be elementary mistakes - unless masipa has telephone evidence that shows otherwise.

soozieqtips said:

BIB - a show which he continued on the stand. It's unbelievable that Masipa accepted his post-killing conduct as 'evidence' he couldn't have murdered Reeva. I've lost count of the times (here in the UK) where partners have been murdered, and their loved ones appear on TV, sobbing and distraught and appealing for witnesses - and then later it turns out they were the murderer! How could Masipa have been so dangerously naive?

Click to expand...

Very good point and one that I'd not thought of in specific terms in the 'plethora' of aspects of this verdict to be shaking one's head and thinking FFS over. But you are so right - remember the (white) woman in America whose two children were supposedly taken by a (black) car jacker and after her many tearful TV appearances it emerged that she had murdered/drowned them as they were an obstacle to her new romance (!). The depths people can sink to never ceases to sadden me. And she is just one example. As you say people's fake tears and appearance of being distraught when all the time they were the killers - and knew it of course - occurs again and again. I too am amazed that she saw his tears and pleading to god as any kind of evidence of innocence. She's not a stupid woman I wouldn't think so what on Earth can be going on with that? I have friends who are social workers and they are well aware of all the tricks and deceptions their clients are capable of so I don't think her former job provides any easy answer to how she could be so gullible.

Mr Fossil said:

Thank you.

The SAPS / NPA have many of my findings (but unfortunately post-trial) and I'm sure if there's anything in there that can be used it will be. There would be so much more I could do with a little more data! That said, I'm sure they can figure the bits I'm missing if it looks to be important to achieving justice.

I shall continue to work on it, regardless of whether it can be used or not. I firmly believe there is more evidence in the data coupled with the testimony.

Click to expand...

Is it possible to get it into the hands of Nel as well?? I guess the NPA will pass it along to him, but how I wish that we had a directly line to Nel, or that he at least reads some of the posts here on WS!

The BBC 3 programme is very hard to watch. Barry Steenkamp keeps breaking down and crying when he remembers how Reeva suffered. He said something I relate to (having had my mother murdered many years ago) - that you can never know how it feels until it happens to you. It's true. It's something you honestly never get over, the violence, the brutality, your loved one dying alone, and the feeling of isolation, that nobody really knows the trauma you're going through, and continue to go through. But Masipa didn't factor any of that into her interpretation of the evidence. It's Reeva's family who have been 'punished twice', not OP.

RSBM

lithgow1 said:

As you say people's fake tears and appearance of being distraught when all the time they were the killers - and knew it of course - occurs again and again. I too am amazed that she saw his tears and pleading to god as any kind of evidence of innocence. She's not a stupid woman I wouldn't think so what on Earth can be going on with that? I have friends who are social workers and they are well aware of all the tricks and deceptions their clients are capable of so I don't think her former job provides any easy answer to how she could be so gullible.

Click to expand...

With you on that Lithgow.
Here in UK, it's a known strategy of suspicious detectives - get the copiously grieving family (suspected perps) onto the TV as fast as possible to cry the fake tears - then we bug them ( wires) !!!

Unfortunately the BBC3 prog seems like a repeat - got it on in the background - not an awful lot of new footage as yet. maybe later on
Barry's tears still heart breaking to see.

So Sorry Soozie - did not know this. Lost for words on that....

Another great article from the Guardian. Apologies if someone has linked to it before - I don't remember seeing it but these threads do zip along at quite a pace....

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/co...us-verdict-matters-reeva-steenkamp?CMP=twt_gu

The final paragraph sums up my view perfectly:

Pistorius may have been found guilty of culpable homicide. But that’s repellently inadequate, because it means that his own grotesque claims to victimhood have been to a large extent believed. A rambling and senseless tale, in which a man makes one incredible mistake after another, until his girlfriend is dead, has trumped the irrefutable fact of the bullet-riddled body of a woman who died as she cowered behind a door she had locked. He killed her. If these facts don’t point to murder, what does?

Click to expand...

cottonweaver said:

So Sorry Soozie - did not know this. Lost for words on that....

Click to expand...

Thank you cotton :smile:

It was over 30 years ago, which is how I know it never goes away! I feel so sad for Reeva' family and for all the memories OP has taken from their future.

Just listening to one of the State witnesses who, when quizzed by Oldwage on her 'assumption' that it was a woman who was screaming, replied "From my recollection, I am 100% sure it was a woman screaming". She didn't waver for a second, and yet Masipa just dismissed hers (and others evidence) as irrelevant. Still reeling!

soozieqtips said:

Thank you cotton :smile:

It was over 30 years ago, which is how I know it never goes away! I feel so sad for Reeva' family and for all the memories OP has taken from their future.

Just listening to one of the State witnesses who, when quizzed by Oldwage on her 'assumption' that it was a woman who was screaming, replied "From my recollection, I am 100% sure it was a woman screaming". She didn't waver for a second, and yet Masipa just dismissed hers (and others evidence) as irrelevant. Still reeling!

Click to expand...

Soozie - when Judge Masipa said she was discounting the ear witness testimony altogether, my jaw literally dropped and my brain refused to accept that I had heard that for quite a few moments. I just could NOT believe it.

Watching this programme makes me so mad that this **** got away with murder.

Does anyone know why OP is estranged from his father? maybe his father has distance himself from OP because he knows he (OP) is a sick sadistic person or some other information? Just pure speculation of course, nothing based in fact here! Also, I wonder about Aimee's distress in court. I bet she knows OP is guilty and was so emotional because she was scared that the truth would come out?

Mr Fossil said:

Thank you.

The SAPS / NPA have many of my findings (but unfortunately post-trial) and I'm sure if there's anything in there that can be used it will be. There would be so much more I could do with a little more data! That said, I'm sure they can figure the bits I'm missing if it looks to be important to achieving justice.

I shall continue to work on it, regardless of whether it can be used or not. I firmly believe there is more evidence in the data coupled with the testimony.

Click to expand...

Mr Fossil, all I can say is "chapeau" for the prescious work you are doing. I really admire your competences.

Mr Fossil said:

No, she picked up that trick from Roux

Click to expand...

Maybe Roux wrote the verdict!

akp said:

What do people feel about Oscar's attempt to `resuscitate' Reeva?
To me, it was more of an attempt to make absolutely sure that she can not disclose her killer's identity to others (Stander, Stipp) before she is dead. I know, this is speculation, but Oscar's action after the shooting (calling Stander, calling Netcare but God knows conveying what - no one could have told him to move her body if given the right information, telling Baba that everything was fine) together with this novel resuscitation technique lead me to believe that this speculation is more reasonable than the Judge's conclusion on the same facts that he could not have intended to kill Reeva.

Click to expand...

It was about as genuine as everything else he did after he killed her...he knew she was beyond gone.

CRAZY LIKE A FOX?

Today I play devil’s advocate. I present my defense of Masipa’s shocking verdict. Read on.


Masipa is well aware of the Pistorius family’s wealth, power and connections.

I believe she may also be crazy like a fox.

Is it really possible that a judge like Masipa - with her sterling reputation, personal background and strong judicial history defending women - could make such a colossal mess of this verdict?

What are the chances she would get clear, well-settled points of criminal law 100% wrong and present such hideous, abbreviated, blatantly selective, emotional “reasoning”?

Was she (an experienced judge in rape and murder trials, who hands down harsh sentences) really incapable of seeing Nel’s damning “mosaic”?

Why, suddenly, with this one case, was she seemingly overcome with sympathy and kindness towards a woman killer? (Given her history, it’s highly illogical.)

Why would she ignore crucial state facts and evidence on a wholesale level, instead overtly cherry-picking highly specific, dubious "facts" to support her pro-OP conclusion?

Why would she toss clear rationale, all logical inference out the window, as well as most of the State’s case, including multiple, highly credible ear witnesses and strong forensic experts? Instead, she offered an irrational, contradictory, piecemeal, highly selective, cut-and-paste explanation, strikingly in favor of OP’s “remorse”, etc. (We all know that remorse is no proof of innocence; abusers are notorious for “remorse” after their atrocities. Remorse is what comes into play at sentence mitigation, not in reaching a verdict.)

Her convoluted “logic” was patently illogical from beginning to end.
It’s almost as if she deliberately went over the top, screwing it all up, thereby guaranteeing that the State will appeal.

Acquitting OP of all charges was never a viable option on any level for any reason (the cold facts of his action demanded this minimum verdict to pass the smell test).

I believe Masipa will likely hand down a suspended prison sentence, perhaps with hefty fines. This would guarantee that the delighted Roux would not appeal. However, it would guarantee that Nel will absolutely appeal (no doubt he and his team are already hard at work on said appeal as we speak).

Together, her bizarre, inexplicable verdict and even worse sentence would catapult this case to the next stage.

If the shocked and outraged law commentary by most of the SA legal community is anything to go by, Masipa’s verdict and sentence will be overturned by the Appeals Court.

Masipa’s strategy:

The chances of her CH verdict being overturned and reduced to acquittal are virtually ZERO.
However, the chances that her CH verdict will be upgraded to dolus eventualis and her suspended prison sentence upgraded to actual prison are extremely high. If events go according to her plan, the giddy OP better enjoy his “victory” while he can because when the State’s appeal hits, there’s only one direction left for him ... down.

Here’s the beauty of Masipa’s “madness”.

Had she declared a verdict of dolus eventualis (which the best and brightest, trained legal minds fully expected), Defense would have automatically appealed. This would have left open the (remote) possibility that the Appeals Court would reduce it to CH, along with a mere slap on the hand. This potential scenario would be 100% unacceptable to Masipa’s legal and moral senses.

Masipa wants to insure that OP gets convicted of murder, gets actual prison and it all sticks.

She gave Roux an easy “win”, caught Defense in her judicial trap and will allow the Appeals Court to drop the hammer on the stunned OP.

Why do I think Masipa is crazy like a fox? If only one or two legal pundits had condemned her verdict, that would be chalked up to mere opinion. But most ALL of them?!! The very fact that the vast majority of the SA legal community (as well as the public) is shocked and outraged by her verdict very strongly indicates that her verdict is profoundly wrong on multiple levels and cannot stand.

The very real danger to OP is not only that her ruling and sentence will very likely be overturned and upgraded by the higher court - it’s all but virtually guaranteed (seriously, what are the chances that the Appeals judges will be as equally “f##ked up” as Masipa? And should this case ever get to the Supreme Court, what of those judges? Would they also be as inexplicably insane in their reasoning and legal interpretation to reach the same conclusion as Masipa? IMHO, highly doubtful).

This was no ‘ordinary’ murder trial; this was no ordinary SA defendant. Masipa knows exactly what’s at stake. She knew exactly what was coming her way with her CH verdict. By ‘throwing herself on her sword’ and allowing herself to become a legal laughingstock, the object of wholesale ridicule and condemnation from most every corner, she may also have become a quiet, very wily hero.

The trap is set.

Did Masipa get it “wrong”?

Perhaps she got it very right.

Looking back Masipa must have been gutted when it turned out Oscar didn't have GAD, it would have given her an even easier way of being soft on him.