Search results

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.

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...

imo it's a loss for the defence, and they DID offer a new defence just by calling Prof V as a witness. Roux will be kicking himself as the defence cannot now pick and choose who will do the assessment and they have NO control over what Oscar will say to those assessing him. Oscar is a...

- To dismiss GAD or any other mental disorder as a mitigating factor. - Prevent a possible appeal on the grounds of diminished responsibility.

You would think it was in his interest, but OP does not come across as someone who would voluntarily submit himself to a psych evaluation. I really think Roux made a big mistake in introducing Prof V at this stage. He obviously did not foresee how damaging her evidence would be. Roux also...

Does anyone have an idea which defence Roux is actually putting forward? 1. Putative self defence? 2. Automatism? 3. Diminished responsibility? It appears that the DT is casting a wide net in the hope that one defence will stick. In other words, "tailoring" it's defensive argument.

Nel hasn't just boxed Roux into a corner, he's put him on the canvas and now Roux is staggering around the ring praying for the bell. This is a win/win for the PT regardless of the Judge's ruling imho.

Same here Margaret. People often ask me if I need a stiff drink, thinking I have the DTs.

Bit In Bold I think Colonel.

He could if he was kneeling.

I don't think Nel was the least bit flustered. He was quite brilliant imho. Roux on the other hand.......?

Agreed. With the parole officer, the psychiatrist and other DT witnesses conducting investigations, doing interviews and providing reports AFTER OP has testified, it appears that the DT is conducting its defence on the fly. Truly amazing to me.

Bad plan imo. :facepalm:

On top of that, why phone Stander for help lifting Reeva when Frank is downstairs in his room off the kitchen? IMHO he called Stander for a different reason, one we can only speculate about.

I think they would like to introduce 'scream' evidence but I doubt they will. The prosecutions' ear witnesses are convinced it was a woman screaming and would not be moved from that conviction in cross examination. OP said he couldn't replicate his screams because he said he'd never screamed...

Cheers soozie. I'll go back and have a read of that day's thread.

:ohwow: What a find HFH!! Freudian slip maybe? An accidental truth from OP? OP may well have been screaming at Reeva, but it wasn't to "get down and call the police" Quite the opposite. Was Reeva going to call the police to report an assault? OP shot her to prevent that call?

Thanks for welcome crasshopper. Thanks for the link, it clears up the issue a little for me. :cheers: Just on the tailoring part. Woolie did admit to revising/editing his report, re correct English etc, but did he actually admit to tailoring his evidence to suit OP's version? I don't...

Hi all. Long time lurker, first time poster here.:peace: Just on Wolmerans. I don't get the impression that he's tailored his evidence and he has come across as fairly honest imho. He didn't do the DT any favours by saying anything could have happened behind the door for example. He has...