Discussion Thread #60 - 14.9.12 ~ the appeal~

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
L2L said:
Strange that the few Scots' comments to this article have been all pro OP and anti University action! Can't understand it!
Click to expand...

Although I find the whole concept of honorary degrees a joke, I believe that once bestowed on someone, it is a bigger joke to strip it away.
 
L2L said:
Strange that the few Scots' comments to this article have been all pro OP and anti University action! Can't understand it!
Click to expand...
I'm glad it was taken away from him. Killers don't deserve to have Honorary Degrees linked to their name. If paedophile Jimmy Saville had been alive when the story of his antics broke, he'd have been rightfully stripped of his knighthood. Killers and/or paedophiles having anything 'honorary' attached to their name after their sick crimes against innocent people have come to light is bizarre.
 
AJ, it can be helpful to play Devil's Advocate, but I cannot agree that only a prejudiced mind or a bully would conclude that Roxanne's conduct in Court was unprofessional.

In rolling her eyes, etc whilst Nel was addressing the Court, her conduct was discourteous and demonstrated a lack of judgement on her part. Lawyers are expected to display professional courtesy towards each other and to behave in such a manner as not to bring their profession into disrepute. IMO, Roxanne's behaviour was immature and did not reflect well on her or on the legal profession. And, moreover, as Nel is a very senior advocate, whereas Roxanne is a junior, her conduct was all the more disrespectful.

Having said this, I feel that there may be some mileage in an argument that it was the superficial similarities between Roxanne and Reeva that made her conduct all the more distasteful.

Regarding Oldwadge, his manner was insufferably ponderous and pompous. Who could argue otherwise? :)
 
Sherbert said:
AJ, it can be helpful to play Devil's Advocate, but I cannot agree that only a prejudiced mind or a bully would conclude that Roxanne's conduct in Court was unprofessional.

In rolling her eyes, etc whilst Nel was addressing the Court, her conduct was discourteous and demonstrated a lack of judgement on her part. Lawyers are expected to display professional courtesy towards each other and to behave in such a manner as not to bring their profession into disrepute. IMO, Roxanne's behaviour was immature and did not reflect well on her or on the legal profession. And, moreover, as Nel is a very senior advocate, whereas Roxanne is a junior, her conduct was all the more disrespectful.

Having said this, I feel that there may be some mileage in an argument that it was the superficial similarities between Roxanne and Reeva that made her conduct all the more distasteful.

Regarding Oldwadge, his manner was insufferably ponderous and pompous. Who could argue otherwise? :)
Click to expand...

Thanks Sherbert. :)

I will not challenge nor argue it is certainly discourteous, probably unbecoming, possibly even unprofessional for an officer of the Court to roll their eyes in the courtroom.

However, most if not all of the individuals on both sides (PT and DT) did so as well at one time or another… Hence, I cannot agree all these individuals brought the legal profession into disrepute.

Surely it can be argued Roxanne momentarily demonstrated a lack of maturity and/or a lapse in judgement which had absolutely no consequences… I will certainly concede this… but who hasn't at that age ?

Where I take exception is that Roxanne is deserving of being publicly and anonymously demeaned by people who know absolutely nothing of her simply because she was working as a paralegal on the DT and rolled her eyes… I consider these personal attacks as a form of bullying…. I suspect those who have suffered from teasing, name calling, humiliation, etc, at the hands of others would agree with me.

Think how many tragedies have occurred in recent years from this type of abusive conduct on Facebook and Twitter.

What is particularly ironical here is that the very people who are demeaning Roxanne are doing it in loving memory of Reeva… but Reeva was a strong advocate in anti-bullying campaigns… I wonder what Reeva would say to them !!

As for Oldwadge… yes, yes, his mannerisms were annoying… maybe he's just that way naturally… or maybe he puts on a show to give himself gravitas… either way that doesn't make him a bad person or fair game for personal attacks… does it ?
 
soozieqtips said:
BIB - is that even in dispute? The subject of the original post was Roxanne herself if you recall. She also gave out misleading information the day OP was sentenced by stating he would be out in 10 months... and failing to point out he would actually only be 'eligible' for release in 10 months.

No idea why you seem so angry that Reeva has been praised and admired? Why on earth does that annoy you??? Because she wanted to be a model instead of an attorney? Does that demean her in your eyes? The loathing and bitterness currently appears to be originating from you, for some reason.
Click to expand...

BiB… Why are you flipping the subject upside down ?

I wrote : "For some reason, Reeva gets nothing but high praise and admiration whereas Roxanne gets nothing but criticism and disrespect."

I never said or even suggested I objected to Reeva being praised or admired… I said I objected to Roxanne being demeaned for no reason.

As for the whole model/attorney argument, I believe you misread what I wrote :

I wrote : "Reeva was on her way to become an attorney… BUT she also leveraged her looks and media exposure into a career as a model and participation in reality TV shows"

Meaning she was still studying to become an attorney but was paying the bills with modeling… nothing wrong with that, it's even quite commendable… and if Reeva had decided to become a full time model and abandon her Law studies, I also would not have any problem with that.
 
Aaanyway .. back to the topic .. what's the latest on the appeal, anyone know when anything is going to happen?
 
jay-jay said:
Aaanyway .. back to the topic .. what's the latest on the appeal, anyone know when anything is going to happen?
Click to expand...

Stephen Tuson, an adjunct professor of law at the University of the Witwatersrand in Johannesburg said the appeals process will be less public and OP won’t be present.

“Five appellate judges will consider the record and the arguments on why the conviction or acquittal was wrong or right,” he said by phone. “It’s a very dry, pretty academic exercise, based on the typed record. It’s on paper. They will advance arguments, they will draw support for these arguments from the record.”

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...secutor-starts-appeal-of-pistorius-conviction

While this article was only published 4 hours ago, I believe it’s a reprint from an earlier point in time. There’s nothing else worth reading in it.

We have to remember that the judges have thousands of pages to read as well as performing their other duties. In my opinion we won’t get a date until they’ve read all the transcript and this is likely to take many months. SA lawyers feel we’ll be looking at a date in September at the earliest.

I don't know whether Tuson knows for a fact that there'll be 5 judges (because it can be 3), but I certainly hope so. Five heads are better than one regarding this case. Appeals Court judges are extremely senior and only the very best will be appointed to this court. They won't be swayed by side issues. The decision they have to make is an important one for future cases, and as we all know, this is a very prevalent crime in SA.
 
Judgejudi said:
Stephen Tuson, an adjunct professor of law at the University of the Witwatersrand in Johannesburg said the appeals process will be less public and OP won’t be present.

“Five appellate judges will consider the record and the arguments on why the conviction or acquittal was wrong or right,” he said by phone. “It’s a very dry, pretty academic exercise, based on the typed record. It’s on paper. They will advance arguments, they will draw support for these arguments from the record.”

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...secutor-starts-appeal-of-pistorius-conviction

While this article was only published 4 hours ago, I believe it’s a reprint from an earlier point in time. There’s nothing else worth reading in it.

We have to remember that the judges have thousands of pages to read as well as performing their other duties. In my opinion we won’t get a date until they’ve read all the transcript and this is likely to take many months. SA lawyers feel we’ll be looking at a date in September at the earliest.

I don't know whether Tuson knows for a fact that there'll be 5 judges (because it can be 3), but I certainly hope so. Five heads are better than one regarding this case. Appeals Court judges are extremely senior and only the very best will be appointed to this court. They won't be swayed by side issues. The decision they have to make is an important one for future cases, and as we all know, this is a very prevalent crime in SA.
Click to expand...

The preponderant issue of Dolus E vs CH will of course be determinant for OP (and future cases) but it will require much reading, analysis and debate to resolve… from what I understood, the facts of the case cannot be challenged : i.e. no matter how many times OP changed his version, what Masipa believed in the end are the facts of the matter (OP was the only person who screamed, ear-winesses only heard OP screaming, the DT timeline, etc.)… therefore, the question is : does those "facts" meet the criteria of Dolus E ?… or do they exceed the criteria of CH ?

I am very curious to hear the Appellate Judges on the the possession issue which seems pretty straightforward (at least to me) : Masipa got it wrong

I assume there will be no live TV feed in the Appellate Court… but do we know if reporters are allowed in to take notes and/or live-tweet the proceedings ?
 
M
AJ_DS said:
The preponderant issue of Dolus E vs CH will of course be determinant for OP (and future cases) but it will require much reading, analysis and debate to resolve… from what I understood, the facts of the case cannot be challenged : i.e. no matter how many times OP changed his version, what Masipa believed in the end are the facts of the matter (OP was the only person who screamed, ear-winesses only heard OP screaming, the DT timeline, etc.)… therefore, the question is : does those "facts" meet the criteria of Dolus E ?… or do they exceed the criteria of CH ?

I am very curious to hear the Appellate Judges on the the possession issue which seems pretty straightforward (at least to me) : Masipa got it wrong

I assume there will be no live TV feed in the Appellate Court… but do we know if reporters are allowed in to take notes and/or live-tweet the proceedings ?
Click to expand...

Unless I'm much mistaken, the State doesn't have leave to appeal the possession verdict.
 
AJ_DS said:
Really ????

Nel did ask for it didn't he ?… If so, did Masipa deny it ?

Thanks
Click to expand...

Yes, Masipa refused the application. I was expecting the NPA to seek leave from the Supreme Court, but it looks like they decided not to. I imagine they must be out of time for that, by now.
 
Sherbert said:
Yes, Masipa refused the application. I was expecting the NPA to seek leave from the Supreme Court, but it looks like they decided not to. I imagine they must be out of time for that, by now.
Click to expand...

Thanks…

There must be a reason the NPA dropped the matter… but it seems to me it would have been an additional opportunity to demonstrate Masipa's "incompetence" in OP's case…

… plus I believe resolving the possession issue would have benefited a country plagued by gun violence… as it stands now, one can simply say "it's not mine"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 67 more.
Total: 4,191 (members: 68, guests: 4,123)

Online statistics

Members online
68
Guests online
4,123
Total visitors
4,191
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
600,828
Messages
18,114,181
Members
230,990
Latest member
DeeKay
Back
Top