Judge's Order re: OP's Mental Health Eval Thread #42

[BritsKate]

Wow! Thanks so much for this valuable insight, I had no idea regarding antisocial... my father's girlfriend then closer to antisocial IMHO :floorlaugh: just due to manipulation and learned emotion that she seemed to exhibit (?)
In your opinion, where would you put OP on the spectrum?

Just opinion, a lot more narcissistic than anything else. This doesn't preclude him being comorbid with other cluster B's but that's what is most apparent to me.

One of my favourite quotes: 'Not all abusers are narcissists, but all narcissists are abusive.' In my experience, it's very accurate because abuse comes in a great many forms and most narcissists learn to be very skilled at things like emotional blackmail and gaslighting with those who love them - when those don't work, some will (at least) threaten physical violence, suicide, self-harm, etc. They learn what manipulators and abuses work to get them what they want and use it.

So...I'd put Oscar smack dab in the middle. Many narcissists, while psychologically abusive in terms of manipulative and crazy-making tactics, aren't inherently prone to violence (with the exception of a narcissistic rage) but the worst of the worst narcissists are usually much more brutal (often APD/NPD comorbid) and I don't believe Oscar fits that side of the spectrum. (With antisocial, such a diagnosis requires evidence of conduct disorder in adolescence.) Oscar was able to maintain friendships, a public image and a successful career - all of which are much more difficult for someone severely narcissistic (or more APD than NPD of a comorbid dx).

For comparison, the only defendant to successfully argue a defence using narcissistic personality disorder (Brian Blackwell) literally hammered and stabbed his elderly parents, up to 50 times, to death. Oscar used a weapon that afforded him a hands-off approach and what's more - possibly never looked at his victim when he was killing her. Blackwell's crimes are a good example of the most tragic outcome of a narcissistic rage.

I believe most families know there is 'something' wrong (like Casey Anthony's parents) by late teens, early 20s but often are unaware of what and unknowingly enable a cluster B disorder. Again, it's so easy to think it's something else, anything else, when it's someone you love. It's really tough to come to grips with the fact that you love someone capable of hurting others.

All JMO

 

[CriLondon]

you're onto something....Something clearly wrong there. Are the sources of the images legit? I also found this one clearly showing cross of two paths D and C from our friend Lisasalinger:

http://juror13lw.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/301.png

???

i have private messaged you.
:goodpost:

I borrowed this one from Viper but i had seen it somewhere else , the one you posted Viper's explained it's an "upgrade" on the trajectory extensions but the original is in the trial files:

 

[Emz73]

Yes, it does make sense. I think it is to see justice done on behalf of the victim and also because they had several reputable witnesses who came forward saying they had heard a woman screaming - I don't think they would have felt right just ignoring that, so whilst it might have been easier just to go with culpable homicide, or murder of an intruder I think they chose to cover all the bases.

I think a further problem is that several people who were very keen to support OP misinterpreted the charges right at the start. I believe the charge was along the lines of

OP is charged with the deliberate shooting of a person, 'namely Reeva Steenkamp'.

His supporters then started to argue that if the PT did not prove he had known it was Reeva, he could be found not guilty.

I don't believe this was ever the case.

I think the charge meant that OP was charged with the deliberate shooting of whoever was in the toilet - it happened to be Reeva, hence the 'namely Rs' bit, but actually the charge covers either as I understand it.

So if we think back, Nel has done his best to show that OP must have shot Reeva knowingly due to the ear witness testimony about her screams, but he has also taken great pains to get OP to admit that he shot deliberately at the 'intruder' because this would also be murder even if he was believed about not knowing it was Reeva.

Does that make any sense at all? I'm kind of tir
ed too I am afraid.

Yes made sense thank you. I was worrying then that if they couldn't prove he knew it was Reeva that he'd be let off!! You must be right that the PT are covering all basis. So wish something more would come out! I've always had this feeling that OP will loose his temper and make a slip. It's there I'm sure, underneath all that sobbing. There's a rage there. Hopefully being quizzed for 20 odd days will push him.

 

[BritsKate]

Thanks! So why isn't the PT focusing more on proving OP intended to shoot the intruder? Isn't that easier than proving he knew Reeva was behind the door. Or is it the point of getting the truth? For Reeva etc.
If the PT can't prove OP knew it was Reeva, can they change it to he intended to shot the intruder?

Does any of that make sense?!! I'm tired

Prosecutors always, always try to make their case for the highest charge because it often leads to the lengthiest sentence. If the prosecutor (or judge) felt there wasn't enough evidence to warrant a charge of murder with premeditation, we'd see a trial more along the lines of simply establishing intent to kill (anyone, to include an intruder) without the screams and possible argument overheard - and implications by the State that Reeva ran and locked herself away from Oscar.

Nel's covered the ground with evidence to support each possible charge. Personally, I believe he's proven premeditation and direct intent (dolus directus, he intended to kill Reeva) but even if he hasn't and one believes Oscar intended to kill an intruder, it's still murder unless Oscar convinces the court of his claim for putative self-defence.

 

[BatGunKick]

Just opinion, a lot more narcissistic than anything else. This doesn't preclude him being comorbid with other cluster B's but that's what is most apparent to me.

One of my favourite quotes: 'Not all abusers are narcissists, but all narcissists are abusive.' In my experience, it's very accurate because abuse comes in a great many forms and most narcissists learn to be very skilled at things like emotional blackmail and gaslighting with those who love them - when those don't work, some will (at least) threaten physical violence, suicide, self-harm, etc. They learn what manipulators and abuses work to get them what they want and use it.

So...I'd put Oscar smack dab in the middle. Many narcissists, while psychologically abusive in terms of manipulative and crazy-making tactics, aren't inherently prone to violence (with the exception of a narcissistic rage) but the worst of the worst narcissists are usually much more brutal (often APD/NPD comorbid) and I don't believe Oscar fits that side of the spectrum. (With antisocial, such a diagnosis requires evidence of conduct disorder in adolescence.) Oscar was able to maintain friendships, a public image and a successful career - all of which are much more difficult for someone severely narcissistic (or more APD than NPD of a comorbid dx).

For comparison, the only defendant to successfully argue a defence using narcissistic personality disorder (Brian Blackwell) literally hammered and stabbed his elderly parents, up to 50 times, to death. Oscar used a weapon that afforded him a hands-off approach and what's more - possibly never looked at his victim when he was killing her. Blackwell's crimes are a good example of the most tragic outcome of a narcissistic rage.

I believe most families know there is 'something' wrong (like Casey Anthony's parents) by late teens, early 20s but often are unaware of what and unknowingly enable a cluster B disorder. Again, it's so easy to think it's something else, anything else, when it's someone you love. It's really tough to come to grips with the fact that you love someone capable of hurting others.

All JMO

This is gold as far as insight goes - thank you for such detailed input... I really think you're right, especially the BIB. Oscar's sister looks like she knows what he's like, constantly praying for him to keep his cool? ...the family must have had few red flags over the years? Looking forward to hearing your input once the assessment is public! :clap: PS. Your take on Reeva's personality to stay in the relationship when she was witness to his outbursts and wary of him? Do NPD individuals routinely partner with her personality type?

 

[CriLondon]

Prosecutors always, always try to make their case for the highest charge because it often leads to the lengthiest sentence. If the prosecutor (or judge) felt there wasn't enough evidence to warrant a charge of murder with premeditation, we'd see a trial more along the lines of simply establishing intent to kill (anyone, to include an intruder) without the screams and possible argument overheard - and implications by the State that Reeva ran and locked herself away from Oscar.

Nel's covered the ground with evidence to support each possible charge. Personally, I believe he's proven premeditation and direct intent (dolus directus, he intended to kill Reeva) but even if he hasn't and one believes Oscar intended to kill an intruder, it's still murder unless Oscar convinces the court of his claim for putative self-defence.

rbbm -At the very least , i believe , murder - dolus eventualis has been proved as per OP's testimony. And i have a honest feeling that those of Johnson/Burger and Van der Mewre will give the judge the basis to prove your belief of dolus directus correct. And mine for that matter.

 

[CriLondon]

you're onto something....Something clearly wrong there. Are the sources of the images legit?

rsbm



IF this photo truly represents the actual bullet trajectories would D be able to reach E?


From then on we can start a complete different reasoning than what we were told so far.
What do you think?

 

[Cherwell]

Could someone please remind me of the order of the bullet holes ABCD, as they are not marked on the photos and I have forgotten.
Thanks.

 

[CriLondon]

Could someone please remind me of the order of the bullet holes ABCD, as they are not marked on the photos and I have forgotten.

If you look at the picture the post above yours , from the top down: DCBA
D being the first from the top that shortly after crosses the trajectory of C.

Edit: If you were to look at the door from the inside it would be left to right : DCBA

 

[Viper]

Could someone please remind me of the order of the bullet holes ABCD, as they are not marked on the photos and I have forgotten.
Thanks.

Bullet hole A was fired first. The others follow in alphabetical order, B 2nd, C 3rd, and D 4th. Attached is a photo of the outside (bathroom) side of the door with the shots labeled A-D, left to right.

Bullet A hit her in the hip, B missed, C and D hit her in the arm and head, respectfully.

 

[Greater Than]

rsbm



IF this photo truly represents the actual bullet trajectories would D be able to reach E?

View attachment 43811
From then on we can start a complete different reasoning than what we were told so far.
What do you think?

D was the shot to the head. B is the one that missed and lines up with E.

The state's ballistics expert with 20 years experience testified to the order of the shots. What makes you question his analysis?

 

[CriLondon]

Bullet hole A was fired first. The others follow in alphabetical order, B 2nd, C 3rd, and D 4th. Attached is a photo of the outside (bathroom) side of the door with the shots labeled A-D, left to right.

Bullet A hit her in the hip, B missed, C and D hit her in the arm and head, respectfully.

Leaving aside sequence of shots for the time being , would you agree that trajectory of bullet D on this picture:

and this picture:

seem consistent with trajectory of bullet D in this picture:


but NOT this picture:

OR even more clearly in this picture:

 

[BritsKate]

This is gold as far as insight goes - thank you for such detailed input... I really think you're right, especially the BIB. Oscar's sister looks like she knows what he's like, constantly praying for him to keep his cool? ...the family must have had few red flags over the years? Looking forward to hearing your input once the assessment is public! :clap: PS. Your take on Reeva's personality to stay in the relationship when she was witness to his outbursts and wary of him? Do NPD individuals routinely partner with her personality type?

The red flags experienced by many families are so benign it's easy to chalk it up to something else (stealing money from an elderly relative; always having to be the centre of attention; being wholly selfish; promiscuity; drug use, etc). We all know a few teens capable of those types of behaviours who aren't disordered. As teens, antisocial's behaviour is usually much more severe though (could possibly include animal cruelty, arson, physical violence, objection to authority, criminal activity, near constant behavioural problems exhibited on every plane of their existence - at school, work, church, home, etc.)

I most certainly believe that abusive personalities and narcissists alike both typically target a certain 'type' of person. Usually, I think these people are often compassionate, trusting (sometimes naive), loyal (to sometimes a fault and their detriment) and very sensitive to what they perceive as victimisation. IME, someone narcissistic is very capable of making themselves appear to be a victim and manipulate people by playing that up. Women who are young or have little relationship experience are more likely, I believe, to find herself in an abusive relationship with an abuser or narcissist - but practically anyone (to include one domestic violence case I know of in which the victim was herself a psychologist) can be taken in by a charming, persuasive, highly skilled manipulator. For some women I've known, it's literally just being in the wrong place at the wrong time. (Like meeting 'Mr. Right' after losing their job or a loved one.)

Less commonly, sometimes someone who is disordered will attract another disordered. For obvious reasons, this brings out the worst in both - like Karla Homolka and Paul Bernardo (Canadian serial killing couple responsible for the rape and murder of Karla's little sister, among other women.)

MOO

 

[Suthrnqt]

I can see that. Many people who have a cluster B disorder are comorbid with other disorders too and all cluster B's are resistant to treatment. There's been some successful progress in CBT with treating borderline (imo, they're the cluster B that are much more self-abusive than abusive to others.)


<snipped>

All MOO

Please pardon errors as posted via Tapatalk with a less than stellar user.

Respectfully snipped and BBM

As a borderline, I resemble that remark. :blushing: I have come a long way with Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT). In fact, I actually lead a DBT group.

 

[Greater Than]

Thanks! So why isn't the PT focusing more on proving OP intended to shoot the intruder? Isn't that easier than proving he knew Reeva was behind the door. Or is it the point of getting the truth? For Reeva etc.
If the PT can't prove OP knew it was Reeva, can they change it to he intended to shot the intruder?

Does any of that make sense?!! I'm tired

That's not the state's case. Their case is that he got into an argument with Reeva, she fled to the toilet, and he gunned her down while she was standing on the other side arguing with him.

If he is found guilty if a lesser change then so be it. But the state will always attempt to prove the highest charge they think the accused is guilty of.

 

[Viper]

Leaving aside sequence of shots for the time being , would you agree that trajectory of bullet D on this picture:
View attachment 43813
and this picture:
View attachment 43814
seem consistent with trajectory of bullet D in this picture:
View attachment 43817

but NOT this picture:
View attachment 43816
OR even more clearly in this picture:
View attachment 43815

I really have no idea what you mean or what you are getting at. Someone else will have to answer these questions.

 

[CriLondon]

D was the shot to the head. B is the one that missed and lines up with E.

The state's ballistics expert with 20 years experience testified to the order of the shots. What makes you question his analysis?

These two pictures are making me , not question the analysis , but on which trajectory D was the analysis done on , for they're clearly very different trajectories:

 

[Val1]

Again, who keeps tigers?!! No real grasp of reality and another "macho" vibe. :naughty: Been wondering if he would be a flight risk to Mozambique - but maybe Canada now? :websleuther:

He'd be better off going to one of the countries that SA doesn't have an extradition treaty with... I'm sure one of his dear uncles or perhaps even his estranged father could arrange some kind of connecting flight from Mozambique? It's not like they can't afford it.

http://www.justice.gov.za/ilr/mla.html

 

[BatGunKick]

The red flags experienced by many families are so benign it's easy to chalk it up to something else (stealing money from an elderly relative; always having to be the centre of attention; being wholly selfish; promiscuity; drug use, etc). We all know a few teens capable of those types of behaviours who aren't disordered. As teens, antisocial's behaviour is usually much more severe though (could possibly include animal cruelty, arson, physical violence, objection to authority, criminal activity, near constant behavioural problems exhibited on every plane of their existence - at school, work, church, home, etc.)

I most certainly believe that abusive personalities and narcissists alike both typically target a certain 'type' of person. Usually, I think these people are often compassionate, trusting (sometimes naive), loyal (to sometimes a fault and their detriment) and very sensitive to what they perceive as victimisation. IME, someone narcissistic is very capable of making themselves appear to be a victim and manipulate people by playing that up. Women who are young or have little relationship experience are more likely, I believe, to find herself in an abusive relationship with an abuser or narcissist - but practically anyone (to include one domestic violence case I know of in which the victim was herself a psychologist) can be taken in by a charming, persuasive, highly skilled manipulator. For some women I've known, it's literally just being in the wrong place at the wrong time. (Like meeting 'Mr. Right' after losing their job or a loved one.)

Less commonly, sometimes someone who is disordered will attract another disordered. For obvious reasons, this brings out the worst in both - like Karla Homolka and Paul Bernardo (Canadian serial killing couple responsible for the rape and murder of Karla's little sister, among other women.)

MOO

This is the most interesting post BritsKate! I read it twice, and everything clicks now - RS seems to have been loyal to a fault, like you say - falling for an NPD role of "victim" and perhaps feeling bad for him as she was so compassionate... also elements of wrong timing, OP going through a career slump after track loss and RS gaining star power. What an awful, awful recipe for tragedy. I really hope that the psyche evaluation brings these factors under the microscope for scrutiny.

 

[Greater Than]

These two pictures are making me , not question the analysis , but on which trajectory D was the analysis done on , for they're clearly very different trajectories:
View attachment 43818

View attachment 43819

There are so many pictures of the door from so many different angles, but if you want to see the trajectory of the bullet that reaches E (which is B, not D) I'd suggest watching Wolmarans' testimony that Mangena rebutted with the lasers and aerosol spray. It clearly shows bullet hole B lining up with E.