"Although the untruthful evidence of an accused is of importance when a court determines the guilt or otherwise of an accused, caution must be exercised and courts ought to avoid attaching too much weight to such untruthfulness. ...that because an accused is untruthful he is therefore probably guilty, must be guarded against, as a false statement does not always justify the most extreme conclusion.”
- Judge Masipa"
This one excerpt epitomizes why Masipa’s verdict is a massive FAIL on all counts*.
WHICH “untruths” ... the big ones or the little ones?
I did not intend to murder Reeva Steenkamp.
The blue LED light bothered me.
Which of Oscar’s lies carried any “weight” at all?
How many LIES from Oscar were acceptable without consequences - 2, 10, 100?
How many LIES would he have to tell before she concluded he was guilty of murder?
This open-ended analysis (rationale) of Oscar’s “untruthfulness” - all dressed up in legalese - is breathtaking in its calculation. Masipa knows he’s a liar - she explicitly references it repeatedly in her verdict ... she’s just not sure how many lies he’s told altogether. Her blanket declaration covers them all.
Is it normal procedure for judges to minimize a murder defendant’s multiple lies? Seriously, how is that not outright BIAS?!!
“Untruthfulness” by an accused should simply be ignored? What then, should a judge base their verdict on? How does one come to a verdict of not guilty if every word out of the accused’s mouth is a presumed LIE, given a free pass? Where’s the judicial line? When does the truth start counting?
If the accused’s lies don’t matter and the State’s truths don’t matter ... where the hell does that leave justice?
I’ll tell you.
This was never about justice, never mind the truth.
Corrupt, biased, pre-ordained fraud was the end-game all along.
No rule of law involved.
Straight-up rule of the rich and powerful.
Did Masipa similarly rationalize and promote the testimonies of FIVE highly-credible, independent State witnesses, who all closely corroborated each other’s stories - and had zero reason to lie (unlike Oscar)? NO. She summarily declared them “mistaken” and “unreliable”.
If I didn’t know any better, I’d swear this verdict was written by the Defense ... with Oscar hanging over their shoulders, handing them notes.
As Nel so astutely observed, it’s all about OSCAR, OSCAR, OSCAR.
* Defense threw the Court a bone with Tasha’s.