Judge's Order re: OP's Mental Health Eval

[PPKik]

Hi minor,

I'm going off the evidence to date.
5 witnesses heard Reeva screaming.

The defence has not removed this testimony one iota so it must be true.
If it's true then OP heard her as well but he still shot her 4 times through the door............3 hitting and killing her.

Premeditated/execution take your pick.

For him to be still out on bail after all this evidence is a disgrace it really is.

The witnesses said they heard a woman screaming. No one ever identified Reeva. In fact, didn't one ear witness say she heard the screams coming from the street?

I am not convinced that most of the ear witness testimony is accurate and reliable. Ms Burger heard screams fade out after the last shot. I don't need to comment on that unlikelihood or impossibility of that. Her husband's testimony was not so convincing either and seemed hostile and confused.

The Stipps are another matter, but Mrs. Stipp heard gunshots at 3:02am with a clock 3-4 minutes fast. The defense's ballistic and sound "experts" imo, were worse than useless and didn't shed any light on anything for me. I don't know when bat sounds could ever be mistaken for gunshots, no matter who is testifying.

That leaves me with many questions. When someone's life or freedom is on the line, I believe that all important questions and discrepancies need to be answered. I find a lot in this case, although many don't. I wish someone could adequately explain the many unanswered questions and perhaps some view points might change.

The post up thread by FromGermany further convinces me that OP's psychological problems run far deeper than we know. Does this excuse him? No. It may explain some of his actions that are incomprehensible to those of us who are not disabled, and do not live in one of the most violent and crime-ridden countries in the world.

 

[lithgow1]

I won't watch Robyn the Reporter. She's not reporting objectively. Another poster mentioned that s/he thinks Robyn may be doing this to get the big interviews with either Oscar or his family after the trial. I sure agree with that!

It's actually the senior law lecturer showing the bias in that clip but I agree with you and CTC re Ms Curnow displaying one as well.

 

[G.bng]

So does this mean he might be observed longer than 3 days? TIA

From my experience, "Mental State Evaluations" (MSE) and/or "Mental State Evaluations at time of Offence" (MSO or MSE-offence), rather than "observation" (that would be for those with really severe behavioural issues, outbursts, etc.) it will be several, very often just 3, intensive interviews going over his past history, his version of what occurred from a day or two before to a day or two after (and not always as some prefer to to keep the case to a minimum so as not to risk compromising the right to silence), and his present state. The rest of the evaluation will be forensic psychology investigative work studying his past psychiatric and criminal history, interviews with family, friends, social workers and any others considered appropriate, studying the case papers, witness statements, OP's statements, presumably watching his testimony and behaviour in court, etc. etc. etc. so a lot of the evaluation process will be on the basis of paper. But then they may do things differently in SA so who knows! ;-)

 

[G.bng]

I doubt he'd have been granted bail AT ALL, pre and during trial, if he was that much of a liability .

My point too exactly, he wouldn't have been. And the law is not capricious, or it shouldn't be, and he has done nothing in this year and a few for Masipa to revoke it.

 

[JuneBug67]

The thought that OP should be angry, even if his story is true, is pathetic.

The dumbass shot four times through a toilet door two minutes after his girlfriend was awake in bed beside him, asking him whether he was able to sleep.

Of course people have a right to be angry about anything. Only a total douche bag would be angry at anybody after killing somebody the way OP killed Reeva.

It is not hard for me to understand that if one was innocent of a deliberate and premeditated murder but had to face those charges it would be a profoundly difficult thing. If I somehow in some alternate universe accidentally shot a person I cared about I would be angry at cops like Botha leaking my 'guilt' to the media and at prosecutors' selective recounting of my life and their wrong and bombastic accusations. It's only human, and being ground up in the machines of justice is hard if they've got it wrong in some real and important way. To me this is about empathy among other things. You are either broadly capable of it, or you're not. You don't have to like Oscar or be any less angry about Reeva's death to get that he might reasonably be angry too.

 

[JuneBug67]

Can you name one time/place/incident in this whole trial when Pistorius has manned up and accepted responsbility for anything? He's just p'ed off because his 'life has been put on hold'. Reeva Steenkamp's life has been terminated, not put on hold, and he doesn't even seem to think he should have to explain his actions.

There have been several. He took responsibility for Reeva's death more than once. He spoke directly to the Steenkamps. I simply cannot agree that Oscar's remorse is limited to the affect on his life. I don't think that is a reasonable reading of his emotions at all. This isn't a movie. He's not reading a script and we're not an audience that gets the big emotional pay off when he stands up and 'takes responsibility'. He's a flawed, mixed bag of a human like most of us and he's defending himself in a criminal trial. He may be grossly overcharged for the actuality of the facts and that's not going to bring out the best in anybody.

 

[Chelly]

He could just have a leaky plunger in the tank, where it never stops draining. I've had trouble with that myself, thankfully one of my sons is almost finished his plumber's apprenticeship, I'm hoping he will take on replacing my shower stall next...

Someone who can't sleep due to a small, blue LED light probably wouldn't be able to sleep if water in his toilet is constantly running. I bet that sort of noise would not be tolerated by OP and would be repaired ASAP.

 

[Zuri]

The witnesses said they heard a woman screaming. No one ever identified Reeva. In fact, didn't one ear witness say she heard the screams coming from the street?

I am not convinced that most of the ear witness testimony is accurate and reliable. Ms Burger heard screams fade out after the last shot. I don't need to comment on that unlikelihood or impossibility of that. Her husband's testimony was not so convincing either and seemed hostile and confused.

The Stipps are another matter, but Mrs. Stipp heard gunshots at 3:02am with a clock 3-4 minutes fast. The defense's ballistic and sound "experts" imo, were worse than useless and didn't shed any light on anything for me. I don't know when bat sounds could ever be mistaken for gunshots, no matter who is testifying.

That leaves me with many questions. When someone's life or freedom is on the line, I believe that all important questions and discrepancies need to be answered. I find a lot in this case, although many don't. I wish someone could adequately explain the many unanswered questions and perhaps some view points might change.

The post up thread by FromGermany further convinces me that OP's psychological problems run far deeper than we know. Does this excuse him? No. It may explain some of his actions that are incomprehensible to those of us who are not disabled, and do not live in one of the most violent and crime-ridden countries in the world.

Perhaps the discrepancy with the sounds of screaming, shots, bangs heard by neighbors has to do with most of the witnesses being asleep when they occurred. The sleeping brain most likely would take several seconds or longer to process what was heard. ITA, the witnesses screaming in court was ridiculous. The fight, flight, freeze reflexes of the autonomic nervous system are reactive/primitive and cannot be duplicated on a whim. IMO

 

[Simply Caustic]

I've not followed this case closely, and I've tried to scan the past several pages for the answer I'm looking for: Anyone willing to help? ...
When could/would a verdict be expected in this case? Thanks everyone.

Via Kindle, like a true Amazon junkie

 

[Chelly]

I've not followed this case closely, and I've tried to scan the past several pages for the answer I'm looking for: Anyone willing to help? ...
When could/would a verdict be expected in this case? Thanks everyone.

Via Kindle, like a true Amazon junkie

I read somewhere that the judge will take nearly a month after trial wraps up to render a verdict.

 

[Zuri]

Something that I don't understand: Why did Aimee and Carice mess with Reeva's belongings? Isn't that considered obstruction? TIA

 

[Val1]

From memory, most commentators said that granting bail for such a serious charge required showing special circumstances or similar wording. His fairly extensive sworn statement at the time (offered in lieu of actually taking the stand) was one way of him getting bail - apparantly most people just enter a plea and an application. You are probably right about the quality of his defence - Roux lacerated Det Botha at that hearing and that probably helped OP a lot.

However, I think you are mistaken about the perceived weakness of the state's case - the presiding judge had many issues with OP's version and they are mainly the 'oddities' we've been debating ever since. He also applied very strict bail conditions and Pistorius, despite saying at the time he would comply with anything the court imposed re bail, was appealing against them within months.

bbm - Less than months.. it was only a couple of weeks.

http://www.iol.co.za/news/crime-courts/dejected-oscar-s-first-night-home-1.1475865
February 24 2013 at 10:45am

“Oscar understands the seriousness of the matter and is responsible, committed and respectful of the law. He will adhere to all the restrictions of the bail.”

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/lawyers-for-oscar-pistorius-file-appeal-against-bail-conditions-1.1321451
Mar 11, 2013 4:20 AM ET

Lawyers for Oscar Pistorius have filed an appeal in a South African court against bail restrictions imposed on the Olympian, who is charged with murdering his girlfriend, according to papers released by the Pistorius family on Monday.

http://espn.go.com/olympics/trackandfield/story/_/id/9106990/judge-eases-oscar-pistorius-bail-restrictions
March 28, 2013, 12:50 PM ET

Oscar Pistorius bail limits eased

 

[toevlugsoord]

I've not followed this case closely, and I've tried to scan the past several pages for the answer I'm looking for: Anyone willing to help? ...
When could/would a verdict be expected in this case? Thanks everyone.

Via Kindle, like a true Amazon junkie

It's understood to have originally been perhaps by July sometime but we'll find out tomorrow how much that will be delayed due to the psychiatric evaluation he will undergo.

 

[vansleuths]

One could perhaps start with that impression, until you see just where those bullets were aimed on the inside, don't forget that entire toilet room was only about 4 feet square, with the actual toilet taking up much of the room.

BIB Was this picture with the bullet paths extended with red lines presented in court or was this something that was just done by one of the sleuths on this forum? That's really damming!

 

[Cherwell]

The witnesses said they heard a woman screaming. No one ever identified Reeva.

✄
Since nobody else has been identified as screaming, it seems reasonable to conclude that it was the person who was shot four times that night.

In fact, didn't one ear witness say she heard the screams coming from the street?

✄
I believe Mrs Stipp said that the screaming got louder, as though it was someone coming closer along the street. (Or words to that effect.) But nobody was coming along the street, or the Stipps would have seen them.

I am not convinced that most of the ear witness testimony is accurate and reliable. Ms Burger heard screams fade out after the last shot. I don't need to comment on that unlikelihood or impossibility of that.

✄
I will, though.
Professor Saayman corroborated this when he stated that screaming is an involuntary act, and that Reeva would almost certainly have screamed when shot even in the head.

 

[Really?]

lol ...

I do like you minor..Really, going back to Arias days........including the leonard Cohen reference in minor forth.

cheers

 

[lithgow1]

There have been several. He took responsibility for Reeva's death more than once. He spoke directly to the Steenkamps. I simply cannot agree that Oscar's remorse is limited to the affect on his life. I don't think that is a reasonable reading of his emotions at all. This isn't a movie. He's not reading a script and we're not an audience that gets the big emotional pay off when he stands up and 'takes responsibility'. He's a flawed, mixed bag of a human like most of us and he's defending himself in a criminal trial. He may be grossly overcharged for the actuality of the facts and that's not going to bring out the best in anybody.

IIRC he only really took responsibility for ending her life when pressed to by the prosecution and as for speaking to the Steenkamps if it's the very public apology at the start of his evidence in chief that you're referring to IMO that was more self-serving than sincere, but I know we will see that differently. I also don't see how he is 'grossly overcharged' when his actions that night ended up with someone dead - he may not have meant to kill her, but he meant to kill someone.

I've never insinuated that this was a movie and if you'd read my earlier post tonight to Gryffindor you'd see that I expressed reservations about the whole televising of trials, though you may have been making a general comment. If it was more pointed than that then it's way off the mark.

As for us all being flawed human beings, yes of course we are but since I've not killed anyone or even fired a gun in a crowded restaurant IMO he's way ahead of me in the flawed human stakes at this point in time.

 

[Really?]

BIB Was this picture with the bullet paths extended with red lines presented in court or was this something that was just done by one of the sleuths on this forum? That's really damming!

Yeah, right.....damning indeed..."he aimed and fired IMO....seeing her all the while
Through the crack in the door he made with the Cricket bat......

 

[Val1]

BIB Was this picture with the bullet paths extended with red lines presented in court or was this something that was just done by one of the sleuths on this forum? That's really damming!

I believe it's in one of the many books of pics in evidence, although I don't recall it specifically. What I did witness was the judge and her assessors coming down from the bench and witnessing in person, Mangena spraying stuff to show just where the lasers showed the bullet trajectories were within that small cubicle(same as the pic does).

 

[PPKik]

✄
Since nobody else has been identified as screaming, it seems reasonable to conclude that it was the person who was shot four times that night.

It may seem reasonable but it is not any kind of proof, which you need to convict a person of murder.

✄
I believe Mrs Stipp said that the screaming got louder, as though it was someone coming closer along the street. (Or words to that effect.) But nobody was coming along the street, or the Stipps would have seen them.

Well, perhaps nobody was coming down the street, but to be fair, how would any of us know? Thank you for identifying Mrs. Stipp. She seemed like a pretty honest and reliable witness, except for her time being way off, and, of course, the screaming from the street, which, if it was from the street, it was not Reeva she heard. Also, her screaming recollection doesn't fit with Burger's does it?


✄

I will, though.
Professor Saayman corroborated this when he stated that screaming is an involuntary act, and that Reeva would almost certainly have screamed when shot even in the head.

Did Professor Saayman simply make a statement, or corroborate another statement? Saying that someone could scream after their hip was destroyed, their right arm was destroyed, and the back of their head was destroyed is quite incredible. Also, the toilet window was closed and the toilet door was closed. Are we really to believe that a woman mortally wounded in that many places could "involuntarily" scream (facing away from the closed window) so loud that Burger could hear her screams?