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

[BabaJ]

.

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?


✄


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?

To my recollection, the Stipps' house is across the street and opposite the bathroom/toilet window. There was a discussion that if Reeva was running from the bedroom (which was on the other side of the house) to the bathroom, her screaming would be heard by the Stipps as more loud. Also, it should be taken into consideration that the level of noise that each neighbour heard would depend on a lot of factors such as distance from the OP house, the location of the neighbour house with respect to the bathroom/bedroom, background noise and many other factors.

To my recollection, Professor Saayman said it is likely she screamed throughout the shooting and it would be strange if she did not scream. Also, he mentioned that there was a possibility that there could have also been screaming immediately when and after she was shot in the head.

Of course all of the above to my recollection only and IMOO:seeya:

 

[Trooper]

as it happens, and its unfortunate for Oscar.. his defence team has so far been unable to eradicate the Screaming Woman. merely saying, ( and hoping ) that witnesses are mistaken is hardly a rebuttal of such a claim. A solid rebuttal would have unarguable proof that , say, Mrs Burger , for example, was in Capetown that night , hooting it up at ZeeZee's nightclub and here is the receipt for her drinks.. or that Mrs VanDerMewre was currently under long and intensive treatment at Westkoppies herself for a long standing delusional state, and here is the hospital registrar with the dates of her inpatient sessions ..

or.. say. Mrs Stipp.. Roux could have rebutted her argument with a detailed and documented trail of Mrs Stipp's long stays at Durban with a bookie from Simonstown and here are the receipts from her train journey that night, and the motel accommodation signature.. I am sure you get my drift..

Merely saying, and hoping everyone else will join in saying that they are mistaken, with no empirical evidence of this mistake is absurd.. as Judge Masipa will make plain to Oscar.

 

[JudgeJudi]

He hasn't been found guilty of committing murder yet, either.

But he did kill Reeva who was standing behind a locked door. According to him she never uttered a word and the only thing he heard was "wood moving". While a verdict has not yet been handed down, you may be interested to know …

“Intent can occur in three forms: dolus directus, dolus indirectus and dolus eventualis. Intent in the form of dolus eventualis or legal intention, which is present when the perpetrator objectively foresees the possibility of his act causing death and persists regardless of the consequences, suffices to find someone guilty of murder.

The South African Court of Appeal held that mens rea in the form of dolus eventualis is an elastic concept. It can range from bordering on negligence (culpa) on the one hand to dolus directus on the other. However, the test always remains whether the accused person subjectively foresaw the possibility of the death of the deceased and associated himself therewith.

http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/D/DolusEventualis.aspx

 

[BatGunKick]

Morning BGK :seeya:

.. once again, I think this is one of those really quite distasteful things that he did, but in his own mind he did it to 'help' the dog. He had run it over in the first place, but how many of us could just go out and shot an animal dead like that in order to 'help' it? We would be more likely to try and rush it straight to a vet. It might well be the case that 'putting it out of it's misery' there and then is more kind from the perspective of the animal itself, but it's not a normal human reaction (imo).

ETA: .. forgot to say that all of this was done in front of the dog owner, and without their consent, apparently.

Moooorning!! :seeya:
No words. I have no words. when I grew up there was a kid in our area who used to squash tadpoles between his fingers for fun. Needles to say my parents stopped me seeing him. Years later, at 12yrs old he attacked his cousin with a hockey stick and bit a chunk out of her neck. No lies. Then, in his twenties he attacked her mother (his aunt) with a golf club because she wouldn't let him do something trivial like watch a movie. She was left blind and paralyzed down the left side of her body. He faced an attempted murder charge here, but was also sent for evaluation (he was deprived from oxygen at birth so they suspected cognitive impairment) - but they declared (wrongfully IMO) that he was fit to stand trial and he then served 10 years. He is now out and about, when really he should be in a facility 24/7. Sorry, got side-tracked, point being that lack of empathy for animals in particular, is a big alarm bell wrapped in a neon sign.

 

[JudgeJudi]

<Respectfully snipped>

My inner jury is still out on the whole televising thing. I have found watching this very interesting and informative and yes, entertaining, but I'm not sure if that's what it should be about. I understand the 'making the law accessible' argument but otherwise can't really see any other benefit. And I agree that had OP not been famous it wouldn't have been televised at all but they do say fame is a double-edged sword and it seems he is finding that out now.

Yep, and he's about to fall on his own sword one way or another.

 

[Trooper]

Here's a little gem about our Oscar.

"You can't hold up a gold medal in one hand and a pistol in another," said Ari Seirlis, chief executive of the lobby and advocacy group, QuadPara Association of South Africa. "We chose not to say a word, but then Oscar started the debate [and] said to the world 'I feel vulnerable because of my disability'. "And we're saying he didn't earn the right to use that as an excuse; when he earned the gold, he took away his right to use that excuse."

In many ways, people with disabled are considered a homogeneous group. Had he met the income and asset thresholds, Pistorius, one of the fastest men on the planet, would have qualified for the same state disability grant as a quadriplegic with little or no mobility.

The day before he shot Reeva Steenkamp, Seirlis said, Pistorius phoned him for help with the paperwork that would allow him to import a Maclaren sports car without paying the usual duty (which is waived for vehicles modified for use by disabled people). But now Seirlis uses phrases such as "scraping the bottom of the barrel" about Pistorius.

"We feel he has downgraded the view that people have of us in order to try and get himself some leeway with the judge and the assessors," Seirlis said.

http://mg.co.za/article/2014-04-10-oscar-pistorius-tests-new-limits-of-disability

What a guy. uke:

a real prince, ey.. the month before this order for the MacLaren, he put in an order with Renns , the gun dealer for R48,000.00 rands worth of weaponry. For fun.

 

[BatGunKick]

From the second link:

"The fact that Pistorius had been diagnosed with an anxiety disorder begs the question, who approved the medical certificate rendering Pistorius fit to own a gun?

To the best of my knowledge, people with any mental condition are definitely not allowed to own guns – for their own safety and that of those around them. The courts need to look into this matter urgently in view of the high number of fatal killings with guns in this country. "


Not for the first time someone rushes into print without actually knowing the facts. And it's a doctor. (a GP, I've checked)

AGREED, could not have said it better, :clap:

 

[JudgeJudi]

<Respectfully snipped>

“After Sheila’s death, he inherited money somewhere, which he spent on foreign trips and on women,” another family member said.

Meanwhile, Henke’s acquaintances in Port Alfred told City Press he is a “party animal” with an eye for young women. An elderly man who said he often met Henke at the bar in Ferryman’s Hotel said: “He is noisy after a couple of drinks and has a short temper.”

http://www.citypress.co.za/news/oscars-absent-father/

Interesting IMO, I didn't know before.

Like OP, his father also had a fascination with guns.

“And even his father Henke’s own embarrassing gun past has become tabloid fodder. In the early 1970s, he reportedly shot himself in the testicles while cleaning a revolver in the presence of a woman who went on to become Miss World. He wasn’t badly injured, but Henke’s friends still shake their heads. “You don’t hold your pistol between your legs when you’re cleaning it,” said one university chum.”

http://www.macleans.ca/news/world/oscar-pistorius-from-the-podium-to-purgatory/

 

[Trooper]

BIB- I chuckled for 2min solid. :floorlaugh:

Just an aside, BGK... how many people in South Africa , and in Pretoria to be specific, would mistake a cricket bat sound for the sound of gunfire??

Knowing that the SA news each night has cricket reports, . knowing how just about every school ground I've seen in SA has a cricket pitch, knowing that gunfire is not unusual. .. and even seeing Judge Masipa and the assessors picking up the cricket bat of Oscars, the Laser with the Herschelle Gibbs signature .. ( poor Herschelle. even accidentally he can get dragged into scandal) .. and looking very confident as they did with the bat.. what's the chances of that particular perspective taking flight??

 

[BatGunKick]

I believe OP knew exactly what he was doing and the ‘intruder’ theory was thought up on the spur of THAT moment and he has stuck with it and has had to make it ‘fit’ ever since despite all the evidence to the contrary.

I think he fantasized about going into stealth mode and dealing with an intruder, hence the "zombie-stopper" remarks. He may have outlined a full scenario of what would happen if a real intruder ever broke in - and played it out in his head as a daydream of sorts about getting to use his weapons etc. Not sure if he thought of the intruder aspect when he did it, but afterwards I think it was right there at the forefront of his mind to take from fantasy to reality, and become his version.

 

[MsMarple]

I don't know that these circumstances are normal, so I don't really have anything to compare it to. But on the bail issue, I think the judge granted bail because of weaknesses he perceived in the state's case. As far as outpatient evaluation, my guess is because Masipa knows that GAD is something that requires involuntary commitment for inpatient services.

I don't see either of those decisions as really abnormal.

FWIW, here's a synopsis of the original bail hearing. I don't have the actual transcript so I don't know what Nair's exact words were but from this article his comments about the prosecution's case seemed to be related to OP being a flight risk.

Nair also declined to downgrade the Schedule 6 charge to Schedule 5.

I recall reading that sometimes bail is granted if the accused remaining in custody causes a financial hardship on the family but I have no link for it. It doesn't apply to OP of course, but there may be leniency shown to an “average” person in some circumstances, though I think OP's status and (as pointed out earlier) high-priced lawyer made a difference.



http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/feb/22/oscar-pistorious-bail-judge-reasons

These were the judge's main reasons:
• He did not think Pistorius was a flight risk.
• He did not think the prosecution had shown that Pistorius had a propensity for violence.
• He did not think the prosecution had shown there would be public outrage if he were released on bail.
• He did not think the prosecution's case was so strong that Pistorius's only reasonable reaction were he released would be to flee.

But the judge also pointed out holes in Pistorius's story that may prove important when the case comes to trial:

• Why did he not ascertain Steenkamp's whereabouts?
• Why did he not verify who was in the toilet?
• Why did Steenkamp not scream back from the toilet?
• Why did the deceased and the accused not escape through the bedroom door rather than venture into the toilet?
• Why would the accused venture into danger knowing the intruder was in the toilet, leaving himself open to attack? He returned to the dangerous area. What if the intruder was waiting for him?

And he said he had difficulty with the defence's version of why the accused slept on the other side of the bed from usual that night.

MOO

 

[BatGunKick]

As it seems unlikely that OP will be able to jump the waiting time for either an inpatient bed or as an outpatient, what I am waiting to hear tomorrow is re his bail situation. I can't comprehend that the Judge will allow his bail to be extended. This is for 2 reasons. Dr V stated that he was dangerous and the majority of the evidence has been presented. On that evidence, I believe OP will be convicted of the gun offences and the murder of Reeva. His credibility is zilch, zero.
So he is a flight risk, a suicide risk and a risk to others.
I know nothing about SA law other than what I have learned from being on the forum, but surely these general principles of bail would in these changed circumstances be cause to be asked to be revoked by the State?

Just remembering when Oscar and his uncle went to Mozambique shortly after the bail hearing for a quick 'getaway'. Is it possible they made plans there for a 'worse case scenario' in the future?

 

[Trooper]

I think he fantasized about going into stealth mode and dealing with an intruder, hence the "zombie-stopper" remarks. He may have outlined a full scenario of what would happen if a real intruder ever broke in - and played it out in his head as a daydream of sorts about getting to use his weapons etc. Not sure if he thought of the intruder aspect when he did it, but afterwards I think it was right there at the forefront of his mind to take from fantasy to reality, and become his version.

I so agree with this , BGK... I think watermelons were just not doing it for him.. he was longing to shoot at someone. . not just something.. that gunfiring episode in the sunroof car on the drive back from the Vaal River.. his over the top rage about the quite foreseeable event of the car being stopped for speeding and leaving his gun on the seat in full view. He wanted a confrontation..


Samantha Taylor testified that he had woken her up a few times with the same old story of the bathroom noise, the imagined intruder, etc.. it was a default position.. the story flew with Samantha, why not the SAPS being taken in by it?

 

[CriLondon]

Guys , sorry about this , but i really can't get it out of my head ...perhaps someone can clear it up for me.

This is assuming , for argument's sake , that Bat-Gun-kick theory is true.

The more i look at picture on post 197 , the more i think about how D seems to be taken from a different position than A/B/C , the more i think about the sequence of the shots : bang , pause , bang bang bang ....with all this in your mind and that picture in your eyes can we really say that A was the first shot? How so?
Sorry, but it really seems to make much more sense to me if it went this way:

First shot is D and missed
RS ducks scared , OP moves and repositions (don't ask me how , yet) and this is the pause between shots
Then OP shots C then B then A , quickly , right to left , to ensure he hits her because he can't see her as she ducked away from the broken panel (another reason first shot could be D, he saw her there and she realized and ducked).

Am I losing the plot ??

 

[BatGunKick]

I'm good thanks!

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/may/24/oscar-pistorius-end-of-rainbow

Here's the bit in the article about the dog:

A couple of years ago, two journalist friends of mine spent an afternoon with Oscar Pistorius. For much of the time, they recall, Oscar was quiet and self-contained. And then, apropos of nothing, he told a story. He was driving on the outskirts of a black township, he said, when a dog ran under his wheels. In his rear-view mirror, he watched as it dragged itself off the road by its front legs, its hind legs useless to it now. Its back was clearly broken. He stopped and got out of his car to find that the dog's owner had come out on to the street, shouting, cursing, gesticulating. What to do? Oscar grabbed his gun, shot the dog through the back of the head and drove off.

That's right OP, blame it on the dog. In all seriousness though - I am so angry and upset reading this, I, I can't.

 

[BatGunKick]

Just an aside, BGK... how many people in South Africa , and in Pretoria to be specific, would mistake a cricket bat sound for the sound of gunfire??

Knowing that the SA news each night has cricket reports, . knowing how just about every school ground I've seen in SA has a cricket pitch, knowing that gunfire is not unusual. .. and even seeing Judge Masipa and the assessors picking up the cricket bat of Oscars, the Laser with the Herschelle Gibbs signature .. ( poor Herschelle. even accidentally he can get dragged into scandal) .. and looking very confident as they did with the bat.. what's the chances of that particular perspective taking flight??

hmmm... lol. I'm purely speculating and in no way an expert, but I think the difference is that cricket ball on bat and cricket bat on wood door sound different. But, I'm also female and don't own a cricket bat so couldn't tell you what it sounds like hitting things firsthand. Most people here in SA are familiar with gunshots, car backfires and cricket whacks and can tell the difference. I will say this - I think the sounds were admittedly amplified by the DT... in reality a gunshot is louder than a cricket bat. Even if it creates some doubt, none of that will matter though if Judge Masipa and her assessors decide that Michele Burger is a credible witness (by far the PT's strongest IMO). The screams leading up to the gunshots and the blood spatter lining up from duvet to carpet with jeans on top, I think are going to be the two issues to clinch it.

 

[BatGunKick]

So.... according to this, under South African law, it's institution or prison tomorrow for Oscar:
http://www.theweek.co.uk/world-news...storius-denies-sinister-remark-reeva-s-friend

 

[BatGunKick]

Guys , sorry about this , but i really can't get it out of my head ...perhaps someone can clear it up for me.

This is assuming , for argument's sake , that Bat-Gun-kick theory is true.

The more i look at picture on post 197 , the more i think about how D seems to be taken from a different position than A/B/C , the more i think about the sequence of the shots : bang , pause , bang bang bang ....with all this in your mind and that picture in your eyes can we really say that A was the first shot? How so?
Sorry, but it really seems to make much more sense to me if it went this way:

First shot is D and missed
RS ducks scared , OP moves and repositions (don't ask me how , yet) and this is the pause between shots
Then OP shots C then B then A , quickly , right to left , to ensure he hits her because he can't see her as she ducked away from the broken panel (another reason first shot could be D, he saw her there and she realized and ducked).

Am I losing the plot ??

i see what you're saying... i want to give this some more thought, but now already 4:41am here and i want to be up in a few hours for the judgement so will reply later fftobed:
reply later

 

[BatGunKick]

I so agree with this , BGK... I think watermelons were just not doing it for him.. he was longing to shoot at someone. . not just something.. that gunfiring episode in the sunroof car on the drive back from the Vaal River.. his over the top rage about the quite foreseeable event of the car being stopped for speeding and leaving his gun on the seat in full view. He wanted a confrontation..


Samantha Taylor testified that he had woken her up a few times with the same old story of the bathroom noise, the imagined intruder, etc.. it was a default position.. the story flew with Samantha, why not the SAPS being taken in by it?

agree 100%... didn't she even say that OP asked her "did you hear that?" (ie. the NORMAL reaction when you hear a noise)
sigh, fftobed: more tomorrow! yawn. I need to get 3 and a half hours sleep before the judgement. x

 

[CriLondon]

i see what you're saying... i want to give this some more thought, but now already 4:41am here and i want to be up in a few hours for the judgement so will reply later fftobed:
reply later

Actually me too but i can't sleep!! Haha

How about , instead:

First shot is D and HITS RS in the hip
RS falls , OP repositions quickly , that's the pause between the shots
Then OP still fires C/B/A

Sounds a bit better than my previous post , but i still see D being first, crucially!