Discussion between the verdict and sentencing

[beach]

Oscar Pistorius: South Africa gears up for its 'trial of the century'

(CNN) -- He was one of South Africa's favorite sons, an amputee track star who defied all the odds and sprinted into the hearts of millions during the 2012 Summer Olympics in London. She was a staggering beauty with the brains to match, a law graduate and model whose star was on the rise.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/01/world/africa/oscar-pistorius-trial-preview/



Pistorius channel goes on air in South Africa

http://m.apnews.com/ap/db_306483/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=Ip4glGHn
Watch live: Oscar Pistorius murder trial
Follow events from Pretoria as paralympic athlete Oscar Pistorius appears in court accused of murdering his girlfriend, the model Reeva Steenkamp.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor.../Watch-live-Oscar-Pistorius-murder-trial.html


Links:

Full Indictment-4 Counts-107 Witnesses

http://www.scribd.com/embeds/185695...=1&view_mode=scroll&show_recommendations=true

http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/LIVE-UPDATES-Pistorius-broadcast-trial-ruling-20140225

http://www.channel24.co.za/TV/News/DStvs-Oscar-Pretorius-trial-TV-channel-wont-be-tabloid-20140228


Twitter:

https://twitter.com/oscartrial199

https://twitter.com/GeraldImrayAP

https://twitter.com/Debora_Patta

Live Streaming:

http://www.wildabouttrial.com/one_off/oscar-pistorius-trial-live-stream/

http://mybroadband.co.za/news/internet/97919-oscar-pistorius-murder-trial-live-streaming.html

http://www.702.co.za/shows/oscar_stream.asp

http://www.mediaite.com/online/watch-live-here-oscar-pistorius-murder-trial-day-9/

http://whoopwhoop.tv/pistorius2.htm

Live News Feed

http://cnnworldlive.cnn.com/Event/Oscar_Pistorius_trial_4

Trial Video Archive:

http://www.wildabouttrial.com/one_off/oscar-pistorius-trial-archive/

_________________________________________

Thread #1 Thread #2 Thread #3 Thread #4 Thread #5 Thread #6 Thread #7 Thread #8 Thread #9 Thread #10 Thread #11 Thread #12 Thread #13 Thread #14 Thread #15 Thread #16 Thread #17 Thread #18 Thread #19 Thread #20 Thread #21 Thread #22 Thread #23 Thread #24 Thread #25 Thread #26 Thread #27 Thread #28 Thread #29 Thread #30 Thread #31 Thread #32 Thread #33 Thread #34 Thread #35 Thread #36 Thread #37 Thread #38 Thread #39 Thread #40 Thread #41 Thread #42 Thread #43 Thread #44 Thread#45 Thread #46 Thread #47 Thread #48 Thread #49 Thread #50 Thread #51 Thread #52

 

[beach]

2nd Warning:
Any more snarky, personal attacks and there will be a few members not posting for 3 days. I rarely issue TOs during verdict watches because I like to permit those following for months to be able to follow & post. However, you guys have options. Scroll & roll, use the ignore feature or sign off for a while. If you CHOOSE to continue to respond rudely, Time Outs will be issued starting now.

*This post falls at random*

 

[Harmony 2]

There are a few new members who have joined the Pistorius forum. We are glad you are here! We look forward to your input and contributions.

Continue discussion here...

 

[thewagesofsin]

Not much left to discuss. Perhaps the judge could sit in a room that small and not reasonably expect to get hit and killed but would anyone else do it? Let alone take that gamble four times??


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk and I have large thumbs.

 

[AW2B]

I responded to a post on the last page of the old thread..so I'm posting my response here:

Not only did Masipa talk about the bathroom window, amazingly, it even formed part of the basis for believing OP.
As I mentioned in my previous post, there didn’t seem to be much that she didn’t believe about his story.

"Evidence shows that at time he fired shots at toilet door, Mr Pistorius believed the deceased was in the bedroom, the judge says. This belief was communicated to a number of people shortly after the incident, she added.
The judge said there is "nothing in the evidence to suggest that Mr Pistorius' belief was not genuinely entertained". She cites reasons including the bathroom window being open, and the toilet door being shut.
"In the present case in his own version, the accused suspected that an intruder had entered through the bathroom window. He… [said] he genuinely, though erroneously, believed that his life and that of the deceased was in danger," the judge said.
"In the present case the accused is the only person who can say what his state of mind was when he fired the shots that killed the deceased," the judge said."
http://www.deccanchronicle.com/1409...ct-judge-thokozile-masipa-reading-her-verdict

Thanks for correcting me. You're right it's amazing how she misused that piece of evidence to make it in favor of Pistorius. She forgot that the fact the window was open had nothing to do with intruders as there were no intruders. So Milady Masipa..could it be that he staged the scene by opening the window to fit his story and fool people like you?? Or could it be that he was not paranoid at all and slept with windows open?? Her reasoning ability leaves a lot to be desired...AMAZING!

 

[thewagesofsin]

This is the last trial I'll follow again for a long time. Justice is for the rich.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk and I have large thumbs.

 

[Suthrnqt]

I just love that new thread smell. Thanks mods for all you do.

 

[vanatos]

When even judge greenland is angry, that shows your doing something wrong.

 

[Jake18]

Cherwell - I've only got a few minutes so I probably won't do this justice (ha ha) but this is in response to your comment about the appeal likely being rigged as well...

I've been thinking about this and it seems unlikely that OP would go to all of the acting lessons/crying/puking nonsense if the verdict had been a foregone conclusion. Maybe Uncle Arnie ensured that the judge allocation was non random - this superficially looked very non biased because she was black, female and had a public reputation for "harsh" sentences. However, in legal circles she may have also been known for making decisions that were at least partially emotionally based, maybe because of her social work background.

So... OP's DT devoted most of their time not to their "experts" who all appeared mid trial, pretty much, but to how best present him as seemingly remorseful, devastated and genuinely grieving. This resulted, as we saw, in a verdict that seemed to have been chosen first which was then supported by the appropriate aspects of HIS testimony.

Of course, she wasn't meant to have made a legal mistake.

All IMO

 

[AW2B]

I'm not sure if this was posted already..but just in case:

Chris Greenland, a retired South African high court judge, said this was a serious inconsistency.
He told MailOnline: 'I am utterly bemused that this mistake was made.
'I can't wrap my head around it. I have never seen a judge make such a big mistake especially when she had so much time to arrive at a judgement.
'It's inexplicable.
'She has misinterpreted herself with regard to the law because she herself said previously that Oscar Pistorius's defence was that he was not guilty of murder because he killed her by mistake thinking that he was shooting at an intruder.
'Now, during her verdict, she made a statement that was inconsistent because she found that he had not foreseen that he would kill the human being on the other side of the door.
'That was erroneous - she had already set out the law.
'It was a fundamental mistake.'
He believes the state would have a strong case on appeal.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-cleared-murdering-lover-Reeva-Steenkamp.html

 

[Fuskier]

FYI Australian Newscorp article:

http://www.news.com.au/entertainmen...ery-wrong-about-that/story-fna50uae-122705907

Oscar Pistorius Set to Write Book. We Think There’s Something Very Wrong About That
33 MINUTES AGO SEPTEMBER 15, 2014 2:05PM

"...This doesn’t seem even halfway right... Reeva Steenkamp never got to have her say. Oscar Pistorius had his say in court and elsewhere. The world really doesn’t need to hear any more from him in any arena, whether in print, on an athletics track, or anywhere."...

 

[JudgeJudi]

Here’s a gem from Masipa’s judgment. She goes through what Berger and Johnson said and concludes, “In my opinion it is absurd to conclude that the evidence of witnesses must be rejected in its entirety merely because the witnesses described the events in exactly the same way”.

She immediately goes on to say … wait for it … “In any event, contradictions do not automatically lead to the rejection of the witnesses’ evidence as not every error negatively affects his credibility. Before determining the credibility of a witness, who contradicted himself or herself, a court has to evaluate all the facts taking into account the nature of the contradictions, their number, their importance and bearing on the rest of the evidence”.

How then can she choose to believe everything of importance that OP said when he was caught out over and over and over either lying or tailoring his evidence. This just totally defies belief IMO. She herself said he gave his evidence in chief in a straight forward manner but only had difficulties during cross-examination.

I’m suffering a typist’s equivalent of road rage at the moment.

 

[JudgeJudi]

FYI Australian Newscorp article:

http://www.news.com.au/entertainmen...ery-wrong-about-that/story-fna50uae-122705907

Oscar Pistorius Set to Write Book. We Think There’s Something Very Wrong About That
33 MINUTES AGO SEPTEMBER 15, 2014 2:05PM

"...This doesn’t seem even halfway right... Reeva Steenkamp never got to have her say. Oscar Pistorius had his say in court and elsewhere. The world really doesn’t need to hear any more from him in any arena, whether in print, on an athletics track, or anywhere."...

This link isn't working for me in Oz.

 

[eimajjjj]

Isn't a judge obliged to say why she discarded each and every piece of evidence? Of course there will be a couple of inconsistencies regarding witness testimony but when the fundamental part of four witnesses involve a woman screaming, guess what, there was most likely a woman screaming. And Masipa said herself that not all inconsistencies or even lies in the case of OP render their testimony invalid.

I want to know her reasoning regarding bail inconsistencies, the duvet, the fans, the trail of blood, the alarm, the evading of security, and why an evasive and lying witness's story is accepted when it goes against the evidence, reason, common sense and is validated because they cried after the crime.

ETA: from some of the bizarre contradictions she makes along with her chastising of OP in places it seems like she's already written multiple reasons why OP is guilty: witnesses SHOULD he accepted even though they're inconsistent or identical in places, accused was evasive and lied, it was obvious that he knew he could kill someone in the bathroom and so on. Then it seems she does a complete U-turn and starts filling the judgement up with contradictory, illogical and lacklustre reasoning to reflect a new opinion. And I know there's argument over Eventualis but I'm still having a hard time getting over premeditated!!

 

[saraomar]

I cannot express what I feel in words.......
My friend was shot to death by her husband who claimed she was the devil and was told to kill her(he claimed temporary insanity). I come from a 3rd world country(pakistan), but I live overseas. Her husband/killer's death sentence was appealed and overturned to life in prison, and he has been rotting in jail since then. So there is still some justice there.

OP had his faculties intact completely.......

I cannot fathom what this judge is and was thinking, but this I can tell you.....

OP has been let off the hook for murder (ridiculous reasons and misapplication of law)
OP has been let off the hook for ammo possession (unbelievable! So collect all the ammo u want)
OP has only been found guilty of Tasha's ONLY coz roux admitted it (if he hadn't he would have got off)
OP has been granted bail
OP will be given a suspended sentence no doubt about it

I don't think state will appeal, they feel it won't come to anything!

Sadly, judge masipa has reduced REEVA to something she used to fight against.....just a statistic of male on female violence!

Nothing more will come of this and don't expect anything on 13 oct, it's already been decided.

 

[Suthrnqt]

FYI Australian Newscorp article:

http://www.news.com.au/entertainmen...ery-wrong-about-that/story-fna50uae-122705907

Oscar Pistorius Set to Write Book. We Think There’s Something Very Wrong About That
33 MINUTES AGO SEPTEMBER 15, 2014 2:05PM

"...This doesn’t seem even halfway right... Reeva Steenkamp never got to have her say. Oscar Pistorius had his say in court and elsewhere. The world really doesn’t need to hear any more from him in any arena, whether in print, on an athletics track, or anywhere."...

Are there not laws in SA that prevent this?? How can he profit from killing Reeva? ~smh~

 

[PrimeSuspect]

I would like to know Masipa's reasoning. Sorry I'm rehashing again. Ok, Masipa says Reeva took the phone for lighting the way to the bathroom. OP never noticed any light except the tiny blue LED light.
Masipa accept's OP's version that Reeva went to the toilet. OK, if you someone goes to the toilet, aren't they suppose to relieve themselves?

So.... OP hears bathroom window sliding open, this is Reeva opening it. OP gets his gun from his holster, quickly/slowly creeps along corridor to bathroom, HE DID NOT HEAR toilet roll movement, HE DID NOT HEAR tinkling sounds, HE DID NOT HEAR toilet flushing.

OP is shouting, screaming call the police, get the **** out of my house!! Reeva DOES NOT CALL the police. OP HEARS magazine rack move!

How the hell did Masipa believe his story?!

-------------------------
@ Viper, I agree 100% with your comment in last thread.

Quote Originally Posted by turaj

Maybe they are dating...frankly nothing in that family would surprise me.

:floorlaugh: :floorlaugh:

 

[JudgeJudi]

What I found particularly galling was when Masipa was going through Prof Saayman’s testimony and said, after talking about the shot to the head, “In my view this means the deceased would have been unable to shout or scream, at least not in the manner described by those witnesses who were adamant that they had heard a woman scream repeatedly”, but conveniently omitted to refer to Saayman’s testimony that he would have been surprised if she hadn’t screamed after the shot to the hip.

If she threw out the testimony of all the ear witnesses as being unreliable, why does she then choose to include the time that OP was heard to call help from those same ear witnesses.

Why didn’t she mention that it would have been impossible to strike the door in the same quick succession as a gun?

 

[Fuskier]

Hi Judgejudi, we are with you about the rage; many others around the world appear to have it too. Might have something to do with perceived gross injustice in this case. Further, the link was copied from a www.news.com.au article printed earlier today. I don't know why it doesn't work.

 

[PrimeSuspect]

What I found particularly galling was when Masipa was going through Prof Saayman’s testimony and said, after talking about the shot to the head, “In my view this means the deceased would have been unable to shout or scream, at least not in the manner described by those witnesses who were adamant that they had heard a woman scream repeatedly”, but conveniently omitted to refer to Saayman’s testimony that he would have been surprised if she hadn’t screamed after the shot to the hip.

If she threw out the testimony of all the ear witnesses as being unreliable, why does she then choose to include the time that OP was heard to call help from those same ear witnesses.

Why didn’t she mention that it would have been impossible to strike the door in the same quick succession as a gun?

and lets not forget the appalling re-enactment of the shooting and bat door strikes. All done in an open field, the gun couldn't shoot in succession, so they gave up??!! The recording where the crickets were loudest??!!

J.Masipa didn't visit the crime scene, to walk around the bedroom, out to the balcony, walk along the corridor into the toilet cubicle and shut the
door, get a feel of the enclosed space!! Why not, I ask?!!


On the food contents in Steenkamp's stomach, Masipa said the court could not rely on gastric emptying because it was not "an exact science" and the evidence was inconclusive.

Before starting her judgment Masipa said she would not give an exhaustive "rehash" of evidence. Why the hell not? Grrrrrrrrr.

http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/Oscar_Pistorius/Oscar-breathes-a-sigh-of-relief-20140911