Trial Discussion Thread #39 - 14.05.14 Day 32

[Viper]

ok, that's it;I give up. Exactly how do you do the thumbnail thing?

There is a paperclip icon above your new message or new reply. Just click on it and a new page opens that prompts you to select the saved image that you want. After you do that look right and click upload. When that is done close that new page. The image that you wanted to attach is now part of your new post.

 

[ColonelMustard]

Actually Annemarie's ex- husband was scheduled to be the first witness today. Weird coincidence!

Barry Bateman @barrybateman
#OscarTrial Roux’s next witness is Oscar’s orthopaedic surgeon Dr Gerry Versfeld, the ex-husband of Annemarie [no-last-name]. BB

So, let me get this straight. Oscar’s orthopaedic surgeon is the expert witness who would have testified about fight or flight ?

Hmmm, maybe it does fit. Nothing would surprise me./

 

[AlwaysShocked]

Pfft. This guy could off himself or anyone that he lays blame upon at any moment. Hope Uncle Arnold has all of his guns locked away and an armed guard at OPs bedroom door. Did OP really say that he wakes up to nightmares of smelling Reeva's blood and then hides in the cabinets of his room? I would not spend two seconds in that house much less sleep there.

What part of "he's dangerous" is there that anyone does not understand? How often do we see a psychiatrist make a statement like this from the witness stand while testifying for the DEFENSE?

This has to be a highly, highly unusual event. I would think it happened for a reason. It went beyond this psychiatrist giving a report on OP's attitudes and disorders at the time of the shooting, that's for sure.

Did Roux read her report ahead of time? Did Roux know what she would be saying on the witness stand?

 

[ColonelMustard]

Good afternoon everyone! I've read the thread and watched this morning's proceedings on YouTube. I've several links open for perusal (Tks to those who provided).


Any other doodlers out there?

Yip, I draw grapes, tiny little grapes, all over the paper.

 

[vansleuths]

I'm looking forward to that happening because, at the moment, the psychological thing is swamping everything and it's as if the facts and evidence of the case have been forgotten about (I know they haven't been .. at least I dearly hope not :scared .. just that, to me, they are the most important things about this case, not some made up* mental condition (GAD) which OP clearly does not suffer from.

* I don't mean the condition itself is made up, I mean it's been made up that OP suffers from it.

BIB....with all due respect, you have just shown your bias.

How can you say he doesn't suffer from GAD? I'm assuming your not a professionally qualified psychiatrist, you haven't tested him and you haven't interviewed him.

 

[alioop]

What part of "he's dangerous" is there that anyone does not understand? How often do we see a psychiatrist make a statement like this from the witness stand while testifying for the DEFENSE?

This has to be a highly, highly unusual event. I would think it happened for a reason. It went beyond this psychiatrist giving a report on OP's attitudes and disorders at the time of the shooting, that's for sure.

Did Roux read her report ahead of time? Did Roux know what she would be saying on the witness stand?

I agree, dangerous means exactly what it is. However I don't think it was in her report, it was just part of her oral evidence. I don't think Roux had any idea she would say this.

 

[anagrammy]

I'm not an askee either, but...The only real debate about Arias trial was whether she should get the death penalty or LWOP.

But....there were lots and lots of debates and differences about what exactly happened the night/day of Travis' murder.

I was here during the Arias trial and it was very different from this Pistorius trial because we had access to all the evidence PLUS we could see the witnesses and note their body language.

Sleuthers performed amazing deeds of analysis with computer enhancements of photos and side-by-side comparisons, and the wounds! Speculation about the wounds and how they were inflicted, detective work based on the gas cans alone ran into the hundreds of posts.

Here we really have nothing to sleuth about, we are just spectators with (learned on the part of some) opinions.

 

[ColonelMustard]

I'll be over on the Dewani thread as well . I just cannot believe how he was allowed his camper van ,Appalled me at the time when i read it .Treat everyone the same is the only fair system and it is terrible to see favouritism and exceptions.

My guess is that it was part of the terms under which the uk agreed to his extradition.

BK?

 

[AlwaysShocked]

alioop, do you think Roux would have ever allowed her near the witness stand had he known she would make the "he's dangerous" statement?

 

[Viper]

BIB....with all due respect, you have just shown your bias.

How can you say he doesn't suffer from GAD? I'm assuming your not a professionally qualified psychiatrist, you haven't tested him and you haven't interviewed him.

With respect Van, this is a web forum so people are allowed to show bias.

Regarding GAD, man that term has taken on a whole new meaning since Dr. V diagnosed OP, huh? It is anxiety, worrying, about at least three things for at least 4-5 days of the week, for at least six months. I'm still waiting for links about other victims of GAD that have shot four bullets at their girlfriend, who was in a locked closet.

 

[DILLIGAF]

why Judge must commit Oscar for psychiatric assessment - YouTube
why Judge must commit Oscar for psychiatric assessment
Christopher Navavie Greenland Christopher Navavie Greenland
Published on May 14, 2014
Bongani Bingwa and Judge Chris N Greenland discuss why Oscar must be committed for psychiatric assessment.

Greenland raised a great point when he criticised the defence for not having Oscar go through a comprehensive psyche assessment shortly after he was charged.
I'm amazed that Prof V was only brought into this two weeks ago and can only think it is because the DT is getting desperate after OP's poor showing on the stand. :dunno:
They really do need to clearly state what the defence is. Greenland says it looks like the defence is "semi sane automatism". That covers a few bases I guess. :juggle:

 

[Harmony 2]

There is a parallel discussion going on with many off topic posts regarding the Jodi Arias case. Please discuss that case in the Arias sidebar at the designated area. thanks

 

[Viper]

I agree, dangerous means exactly what it is. However I don't think it was in her report, it was just part of her oral evidence. I don't think Roux had any idea she would say this.

BIB. Yea, I know. Mr. Nel got it out of her. :fireworks:

 

[alioop]

alioop, do you think Roux would have ever allowed her near the witness stand had he known she would make the "he's dangerous" statement?

Absolutely not!

 

[ColonelMustard]

Please know, as a homicide survivor myself, I am not defending OP in any way, shape or form. I think he has a multitude of things going on with him, not the least being narcissistic. I just floated the possibility of PTSD out there because it is something I am very familiar with as I have it. JMV

Zuri, I'm sorry to hear that you have faced such a horrific experience and honor your courage in sharing that here,

As time goes on, if you ever feel like sharing ONLY the nature of your connection with the event (no further details requested), I would find it very valuable to know your perspective even while reading your unrelated posts.

If not NO problem!!!!

I'm not sure that makes any sense but those I have known and worked with who have, for example, been a sibling living in a different city had very different perspectives from siblings living together. Another person I worked with was a passenger in a cab during which time the cabbie was killed.

Anyway, if I have tread in unwelcome territory, please forgive me.

Holding you gently in my heart...

 

[Zuri]

I don't know if you said it all but you said some good stuff, especially about Reeva Steenkamp. Others may have noted my obsession with the CNN coverage of this and their approach re this is particularly galling. They ALWAYS concentrate in their post-proceedings wrap-ups on the Pistorius family, how they are coping, how yet again they rushed to comfort Oscar ad nauseum. Maybe at the start they paid some lip service to June Steenkamp but not any longer, at least not that I've seen. OP's family are out in force to support him but her family and friends are also there day in and day out and it's like they don't exist for all the attention they are given. Perhaps they prefer it that way and if so then good, but it does make me annoyed to see all this concentration on the Pistorius' while the dead woman's mother sits there stoically and listens over and over to how her daughter died as being there and going through that is the only thing left that she can do for her while meanwhile Curnow and Phelps are getting ready to file their next 'poor Oscar' report. A holes.

Thank you for pointing this out. So many times, the TRUE victim is forgotten and the victim's family is an afterthought. I watched the documentary on Reeva and the interviews with her parents. My heart broke for them. Her father was so distraught, and her mother so stoic, but a pillar of strength. IMO, Reeva deserves better. JMV

 

[Harmony 2]

A new thread was created and is ready for posting. This thread will close in 10 minutes...

Trial Discussion Thread #40 - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

 

[vansleuths]

I'm thinking about this psych eval. It would be very hard to fool a team of doctors over the course of 30 days. OPs preparation by Roux then must be to just answer the questions honestly, but don't say you intended to kill anyone. That's it. Whatever underlying issue(s) OP has is going to come out from this evaluation. Given that Dr. V has already said that OP represents a danger, I wonder how long it will be before they tell OP it is probably best that he does the remainder of his evaluation sleeping at the facility? :smile:

And, since this is related to the crime of murder, I can just imagine OP being dissected by the doctors asking him hundreds of questions using his testimony, or information provided by the prosecution team. Oh that will not be pleasant for OP, no...

Since this is an independent evaluation, can the PT provide information or would the court simply provide OP's trial testimony in its entirety and let the doctors make what they want with it?

 

[DILLIGAF]

I'm finding it hard to believe that Oscar will be out on bail while undergoing a 30 day psychiatric evaluation.

Ditto. The best way for the psychiatrists to detect whether OP is a malingerer is to have him under 24hr observation. It's very difficult to fake symptoms all day every day.

 

[Harmony 2]

A new thread was created and is ready for posting. This thread is now closed...

Trial Discussion Thread #40 - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

:drumroll: