Oscar Pistorius - Discussion Thread #62 ~ the appeal~

[Deleted member 102539]

http://panteres.com/2015/07/21/jan-ullrich-trial-for-alcohol-driving-court-rejects-from-deal/

Jan- Ullrich – trial for alcohol driving: Court rejects from Deal

The District Court of the Canton of Thurgau has surprisingly rejected a coordinated between prosecution and defense penalties.

The President of the District Court accused the prosecutor’s office with considerable neglect. For example, some reports were not credible, while others have not been adequately addressed, Pascal Schmid said. According to recent findings Ullrich said to have been faster than originally anticipated. In addition, he may not only alcohol but also Valium in blood.

Prosecution and defense argued Ullrich showed remorse after the accident credible and support the investigation. A suspended prison sentence was also appropriate because the married father of two small children would otherwise be’ torn from his family environment,’ said Ullrich’s lawyer.

Judge Schmid said it was, while recognizing that Ullrich showed deep remorse. But this should not lead us to him otherwise treated as other defendants in similar cases.

-.-.-.-.-.-

..... in other words: NO promi bonus!

Not only in SA re Oscar there seems to be a good chance to get an Celebrity bonus. Reassuring, if it doesn't work always, IMO.

 

[Deleted member 102539]

http://www.politicsweb.co.za/politi...il&utm_term=0_a86f25db99-ed63824405-140194665

Text of email from Paul Hoffman to ANC Secretary General, Gwede Mantashe, July 20 2015

Subject: Corruption or defeating the ends of justice complaint against the President and the Minister of Justice.

The affidavit attached supports charges of contravening section 9 of PRECCA or alternatively defeating the ends of justice against the President and the Minister of Justice. We have caused an investigation docket to be opened and have suggested to the SAPS officer commanding the Ocean View police station that the matter ought to be handled by the Hawks due to its nature and the amount of money involved which is over R17,3 million.

Text of the affidavit submitted by Paul Hoffman to the Ocean View Police Station, July 20 2015

3. On 14 May 2015 the President of the Republic of South Africa and the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services concluded a written agreement with the then National Director of Public Prosecutions ('the NDPP'), Mr Mxolisi Nxasana ('Nxasana'), in terms of which the NDPP agreed to resign his post with effect from 1 June 2015 and the President and the Minister agreed that he would, in return, receive payment of the sum of R17 357 233,00 'in full and final settlement of all claims of whatsoever nature arising out of his employment ...'.

10. It has been reported in the media that the NDPP had reacted positively to a request late last year from the then head of the Hawks unit, Mr Anwar Dramat, and the independent police investigating director, Mr Robert McBride, to review decisions taken by the KwaZulu-Natal Director of Prosecutions to withdraw charges against Mr Thoshan Panday, a business person linked to the President's son, Edward, and a relative, Debo Mzobe. It was further reported that pursuant to this request Nxasana had appointed Adv Gerrie Nel to reconsider the Panday investigation.

14. The only inference to be drawn is that the President and the Minister wished to secure Nxasana's resignation for reasons that he had issued instructions regarding investigations and prosecutions, or anticipated doing so, which would cause discomfort or embarrassment to the President or persons close to him. As such, the settlement agreement with Nxasana was concluded with a corrupt intention and s 9 of the Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Act 12 of 2004 has been contravened by the President and the Minister.

21. I request that the matter be investigated without delay.

-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-

http://www.timeslive.co.za/local/20...lub-fracas-after-insulting-zuma-family-report

Mortimer, according to The Juice, said Pistorius “was going on about how influential his family is and how connected they are".

‘‘He even pulled out his phone to show me pictures of armoured cars. He said: ‘My family owns SANDF. Zuma works for us. I’ll piss on Zuma’,” Mortimer allegedly said.

Mortimer is apparently a close friend of President Jacob Zuma’s son, Duduzane.

 

[Interested Bystander]

:wave: Hi IB. You're a month early. The back door? Ha, if they have a VIP exit I'm sure he'd use that. Don't forget he's "special".

I wonder why the terms of his release won't be published. I wasn't aware that these were special. :waitasec: , Oh, but of course, he is "special".

One imagines he won't be able to get a gun licence.
Won't be allowed to possess a firearm (notwithstanding the fact that Uncle Arnold would own many. Can he prevent OP from getting hold of one? I very much doubt that because his rhino horns were stolen from a large walk-in safe at work. I'd be surprised if people own safes like that in their homes. Funny we never heard more about those horns. Apparently they had "good leads".
No alcohol. What goes on behind closed doors is another matter. It will be interesting to know if they do spot checks.
No socialising (at clubs etc), but plenty of room at the mansion for parties.
Apparently training is questionable as he's no longer a professional athlete and has no sponsors.

Even if he breaks one or more of the conditions, he gets a couple of warnings before he returns to prison. But then again ...

:grouphug: to all the gang.

Oops thanks JJ. I will go back to sleep for a month.

 

[aftermath]

http://www.politicsweb.co.za/politi...il&utm_term=0_a86f25db99-ed63824405-140194665

Text of email from Paul Hoffman to ANC Secretary General, Gwede Mantashe, July 20 2015

Subject: Corruption or defeating the ends of justice complaint against the President and the Minister of Justice.

The affidavit attached supports charges of contravening section 9 of PRECCA or alternatively defeating the ends of justice against the President and the Minister of Justice. We have caused an investigation docket to be opened and have suggested to the SAPS officer commanding the Ocean View police station that the matter ought to be handled by the Hawks due to its nature and the amount of money involved which is over R17,3 million.

Text of the affidavit submitted by Paul Hoffman to the Ocean View Police Station, July 20 2015

3. On 14 May 2015 the President of the Republic of South Africa and the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services concluded a written agreement with the then National Director of Public Prosecutions ('the NDPP'), Mr Mxolisi Nxasana ('Nxasana'), in terms of which the NDPP agreed to resign his post with effect from 1 June 2015 and the President and the Minister agreed that he would, in return, receive payment of the sum of R17 357 233,00 'in full and final settlement of all claims of whatsoever nature arising out of his employment ...'.

10. It has been reported in the media that the NDPP had reacted positively to a request late last year from the then head of the Hawks unit, Mr Anwar Dramat, and the independent police investigating director, Mr Robert McBride, to review decisions taken by the KwaZulu-Natal Director of Prosecutions to withdraw charges against Mr Thoshan Panday, a business person linked to the President's son, Edward, and a relative, Debo Mzobe. It was further reported that pursuant to this request Nxasana had appointed Adv Gerrie Nel to reconsider the Panday investigation.

14. The only inference to be drawn is that the President and the Minister wished to secure Nxasana's resignation for reasons that he had issued instructions regarding investigations and prosecutions, or anticipated doing so, which would cause discomfort or embarrassment to the President or persons close to him. As such, the settlement agreement with Nxasana was concluded with a corrupt intention and s 9 of the Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Act 12 of 2004 has been contravened by the President and the Minister.

21. I request that the matter be investigated without delay.

-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-

http://www.timeslive.co.za/local/20...lub-fracas-after-insulting-zuma-family-report

Mortimer, according to The Juice, said Pistorius “was going on about how influential his family is and how connected they are".

‘‘He even pulled out his phone to show me pictures of armoured cars. He said: ‘My family owns SANDF. Zuma works for us. I’ll piss on Zuma’,” Mortimer allegedly said.

Mortimer is apparently a close friend of President Jacob Zuma’s son, Duduzane.

Jared Mortimer is also apparently a friend of Mikey Schultz and Marc Batchelor. ..

 

[cottonweaver]

Following on from the OP is special theme from Page 32.

Remember this?

"In a case shrouded in many mysteries, one of the biggest is how Oscar Pistorius obtained a licence for the 9-millimetre semi-automatic pistol that killed his girlfriend.....
Gun-control advocates say the Olympic hero should have been denied a licence for the handgun when he applied in 2010 because he had already spent a night in jail for allegedly assaulting a woman at a party a year earlier.........."

"Even after the handgun licence was issued, they say, it should have been later revoked because of his involvement in other incidents, including an alleged threat to break another man’s legs in November..."

"Mr. Pistorius was denied a gun licence when he first applied in 2008 – the reasons were not disclosed. But he appealed the decision and was granted a licence in 2010."
Article then goes on to outline licence regulations asking why Op got his. Links cases of bribery for gun licences- examples from the circles OP used to move in, eg. Schultz. "

Ends with infamous OP quote. "
He once boasted on Twitter that he had a “96% headshot over 300m from 50 shots” at a shooting range. “Bam!” he added."

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...or-gun-that-killed-girlfriend/article8995608/

(Woman at the party- the bizarre Cassidy Memmory case that started with an assault charge, was fought off with a counter suit and then settled out of court but went on for years. CM was an ex Silver Lakes resident.

http://ewn.co.za/2014/02/12/EWN-exclusive-Oscar-Pistorius-Taylor-Memmory-reach-settlement

 

[cottonweaver]

Maybe specialist interest and it's an old one but someone may not have read it......

Not trial evidence based, it's an analysis of the Oscar Reeva reln. in several parts by a Port Elizabeth based clinical psychologist.
"This series traces the love story of Oscar Pistorius and Reeva Steenkamp, from the perspective of what is known about intimate-partner violence and the relationships in which it occurs."

here's one part, April 14 so at the outset of trial.

http://mype.co.za/new/study-oscar-reeva-and-intimate-partner-violence-part-3/35271/2014/04

 

[Deleted member 102539]

http://www.biznews.com/undictated/2...ces-more-like-oscar-pistorius-than-elon-musk/

Culture shock – Why SA produces more like Oscar Pistorius than Elon Musk

But the elder Musk remains outspoken about a culture where young South African boys are too often taught physical force overcomes brainpower. And as long as that remains entrenched, he says, the culture will produce more like Oscar Pistorius than Elon Musk.

Johannesburg – The prominence of a jock or rugby culture in some South African schools led people to behave like former Paralympian Oscar Pistorius, the father of SA born inventor and entrepreneur Elon Musk has said.

“It is about whether they can play rugby or not,” Errol Musk told News24, following comments he recently made about Elon once being beaten up so badly in Grade 8 that he did not immediately recognise him.

“If boys grow up like that, they end up being like Oscar Pistorius who shoots his girlfriend, and shoots out of a car and at a restaurant. It starts at schools.”

He said that while the education system catered for pupils who wanted to learn, a few bad apples often caused problems for the others.


“I laid a charge of assault, but the Randburg police declined to prosecute, saying it was just ‘skoolseuns wat rondspeel’ [schoolboys that are playing around]. The school itself was non-committal.”


Errol Musk told News24 on Wednesday that this incident was “way past bullying”.

“South Africa is seen as having a jock culture. It might produce intellectual people, but it is not an intellectual culture.”


Elon is the founder, chief executive and chief technology officer of aerospace company SpaceX, as well as the chief executive of electric motorcar company Tesla Motors.

He was also one of the founders of online payment system PayPal.

 

[GR_Turner]

Maybe specialist interest and it's an old one but someone may not have read it......

Not trial evidence based, it's an analysis of the Oscar Reeva reln. in several parts by a Port Elizabeth based clinical psychologist.
"This series traces the love story of Oscar Pistorius and Reeva Steenkamp, from the perspective of what is known about intimate-partner violence and the relationships in which it occurs."

here's one part, April 14 so at the outset of trial.

http://mype.co.za/new/study-oscar-reeva-and-intimate-partner-violence-part-3/35271/2014/04

I think the author spends the entire article saying OP is guilty of murder whilst near the start stating "This is not to take a position on what happened that early Valentine’s morning, which is a matter for the court." Typical of the kind of these kinds of articles. They want to have their cake and eat it by saying they make no judgement about guilt and then proceeding in every single other line to say otherwise. No wonder so many people (who haven't really followed all the evidence properly) think he's guilty.

 

[GR_Turner]

Following on from the OP is special theme from Page 32.

Remember this?

"In a case shrouded in many mysteries, one of the biggest is how Oscar Pistorius obtained a licence for the 9-millimetre semi-automatic pistol that killed his girlfriend.....
Gun-control advocates say the Olympic hero should have been denied a licence for the handgun when he applied in 2010 because he had already spent a night in jail for allegedly assaulting a woman at a party a year earlier.........."

"Even after the handgun licence was issued, they say, it should have been later revoked because of his involvement in other incidents, including an alleged threat to break another man’s legs in November..."

"Mr. Pistorius was denied a gun licence when he first applied in 2008 – the reasons were not disclosed. But he appealed the decision and was granted a licence in 2010."
Article then goes on to outline licence regulations asking why Op got his. Links cases of bribery for gun licences- examples from the circles OP used to move in, eg. Schultz. "

Ends with infamous OP quote. "
He once boasted on Twitter that he had a “96% headshot over 300m from 50 shots” at a shooting range. “Bam!” he added."

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...or-gun-that-killed-girlfriend/article8995608/

(Woman at the party- the bizarre Cassidy Memmory case that started with an assault charge, was fought off with a counter suit and then settled out of court but went on for years. CM was an ex Silver Lakes resident.

http://ewn.co.za/2014/02/12/EWN-exclusive-Oscar-Pistorius-Taylor-Memmory-reach-settlement

What was OP's relationship to Schultz exactly though? I'm not aware that he knew him at all.

 

[Deleted member 102539]

Following on from the OP is special theme from Page 32.

Remember this?

"In a case shrouded in many mysteries, one of the biggest is how Oscar Pistorius obtained a licence for the 9-millimetre semi-automatic pistol that killed his girlfriend.....
Gun-control advocates say the Olympic hero should have been denied a licence for the handgun when he applied in 2010 because he had already spent a night in jail for allegedly assaulting a woman at a party a year earlier.........."

"Even after the handgun licence was issued, they say, it should have been later revoked because of his involvement in other incidents, including an alleged threat to break another man’s legs in November..."

"Mr. Pistorius was denied a gun licence when he first applied in 2008 – the reasons were not disclosed. But he appealed the decision and was granted a licence in 2010."
Article then goes on to outline licence regulations asking why Op got his. Links cases of bribery for gun licences- examples from the circles OP used to move in, eg. Schultz. "

Ends with infamous OP quote. "
He once boasted on Twitter that he had a “96% headshot over 300m from 50 shots” at a shooting range. “Bam!” he added."

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...or-gun-that-killed-girlfriend/article8995608/

(Woman at the party- the bizarre Cassidy Memmory case that started with an assault charge, was fought off with a counter suit and then settled out of court but went on for years. CM was an ex Silver Lakes resident.

http://ewn.co.za/2014/02/12/EWN-exclusive-Oscar-Pistorius-Taylor-Memmory-reach-settlement

bbm red
He will always attempt an appeal, no matter against what (ie sports too). I think, he now urgently has to learn, that he doesn't always win and he has no right to always win. He is only a little praying hypocrite, not God.

 

[seattlechiquita]

So I just read OP is being released next month. Disgust doesn't cut it.

 

[mirage1]

Gr Turner, are you just playing devils advocate for fun or something? The evidence of intent to murder Reeva is beyond dispute. Surely you are aware that the crime scene photos contradict OP's story? That means hes lying, and his version must be thrown out. Thats it, all over, no need to proceed further and debating about screams etc.

It's not just a single instance, there are multiple pieces of photo evidence which prove OP was lying. Another key point was, the magazine rack in the toilet. It was found at the back of the toilet behind reevas body yet Oscar insists it was near the door, because for his version to be true it must have been there to make it possible for reeva to move it, and create the 'wood noise' OP claims triggered him to start firing.

In reality the EVIDENCE shows it was not possible for reeva to be standing where she was shot and move the magazine rack. These are crucial aspects of his story shot to pieces , which mean he is lying and guilty. Not sure what you are arguing about for so many pages.

 

[aftermath]

So I just read OP is being released next month. Disgust doesn't cut it.

That's disgust at the original verdict and sentence though, isn't it? Because given what he was actually convicted of and sentenced for, and since he appears to have behaved and cooperated well in prison, being released under house arrest conditions after serving a specified proportion of the sentence, is wholly in-keeping with the process in SA. It would be more disgusting if -in spite of the detail of his conviction and sentence, and in spite of having served the legally set minimum amount of time, and despite having been well behaved- Pistorius were not considered for release under house arrest, due to public pressure...

 

[aftermath]

Gr Turner, are you just playing devils advocate for fun or something? The evidence of intent to murder Reeva is beyond dispute. Surely you are aware that the crime scene photos contradict OP's story? That means hes lying, and his version must be thrown out. Thats it, all over, no need to proceed further and debating about screams etc.

It's not just a single instance, there are multiple pieces of photo evidence which prove OP was lying. Another key point was, the magazine rack in the toilet. It was found at the back of the toilet behind reevas body yet Oscar insists it was near the door, because for his version to be true it must have been there to make it possible for reeva to move it, and create the 'wood noise' OP claims triggered him to start firing.

In reality the EVIDENCE shows it was not possible for reeva to be standing where she was shot and move the magazine rack. These are crucial aspects of his story shot to pieces , which mean he is lying and guilty. Not sure what you are arguing about for so many pages.

The evidence of intent to murder Reeva is not beyond dispute at all... what actual evidence is there that he specifically intended to unlawfully kill her?

As for the magazine rack-his 'version' mentioned a wood noise. Nel insisted he speculated on the cause of this noise- he resisted but Nel pushed. He guessed the magazine rack...

It could just as easily have been the door itself being leaned against.

If wrong, his memory of the location of the magazine rack could be one of at least three things:
- a deliberately constructed lie to help (how??)to cover murder
- a deliberately constructed lie to explain the noise he genuinely believed he heard but could not explain
- a misremembered detail, symptomatic of a mind trying to remember and make sense of what happened. If he genuinely heard a noise- his mind/memory might fill the narrative gap (ie what was the noise he heard?) with a logical guess - the rack- which then relocates itself in the (unreliable) stressed memory
..

 

[GR_Turner]

Gr Turner, are you just playing devils advocate for fun or something? The evidence of intent to murder Reeva is beyond dispute. Surely you are aware that the crime scene photos contradict OP's story? That means hes lying, and his version must be thrown out. Thats it, all over, no need to proceed further and debating about screams etc.

It's not just a single instance, there are multiple pieces of photo evidence which prove OP was lying. Another key point was, the magazine rack in the toilet. It was found at the back of the toilet behind reevas body yet Oscar insists it was near the door, because for his version to be true it must have been there to make it possible for reeva to move it, and create the 'wood noise' OP claims triggered him to start firing.

In reality the EVIDENCE shows it was not possible for reeva to be standing where she was shot and move the magazine rack. These are crucial aspects of his story shot to pieces , which mean he is lying and guilty. Not sure what you are arguing about for so many pages.

Aftermath has explained why the rack evidence doesn't prove guilt. Do you think the police told the truth about who was on the scene before the photos were taken?

 

[mirage1]

Do you think the police told the truth about who was on the scene before the photos were taken?

Why wouldn't I? You can't just throw around police corruption so lightly, otherwise no case would ever stick. Your question is a red herring.

 

[mirage1]

The evidence of intent to murder Reeva is not beyond dispute at all... what actual evidence is there that he specifically intended to unlawfully kill her?

With respect to the evidence, His version cannot be reasonably possibly true, which = guilt.

As for the magazine rack-his 'version' mentioned a wood noise. Nel insisted he speculated on the cause of this noise- he resisted but Nel pushed. He guessed the magazine rack...

It could just as easily have been the door itself being leaned against.

If wrong, his memory of the location of the magazine rack could be one of at least three things:
- a deliberately constructed lie to help (how??)to cover murder
- a deliberately constructed lie to explain the noise he genuinely believed he heard but could not explain
- a misremembered detail, symptomatic of a mind trying to remember and make sense of what happened. If he genuinely heard a noise- his mind/memory might fill the narrative gap (ie what was the noise he heard?) with a logical guess - the rack- which then relocates itself in the (unreliable) stressed memory

You are missing the point. The 'noise' was the trigger for him to shoot, so for his version to be true there MUST be some noise that startled him, which is why he is making one up. You could say he really did hear a noise but is mistaken what it was, but there is a big problem with that. What could have made such a noise? The door was locked so it could not have been the door, although from memory I think he 1st said that and claimed it was the wood frame that is too small for the door, or something. That is why he NEEDS the magazine rack to be at the front of the toilet and he INSISTED it was despite evidence showing it could NEVER have been there. This is not some trivial side issue, its the core it proves he is lying.

 

[aftermath]

With respect to the evidence, His version cannot be reasonably possibly true, which = guilt.


You are missing the point. The 'noise' was the trigger for him to shoot, so for his version to be true there MUST be some noise that startled him, which is why he is making one up. You could say he really did hear a noise but is mistaken what it was, but there is a big problem with that. What could have made such a noise? The door was locked so it could not have been the door, although from memory I think he 1st said that and claimed it was the wood frame that is too small for the door, or something. That is why he NEEDS the magazine rack to be at the front of the toilet and he INSISTED it was despite evidence showing it could NEVER have been there. This is not some trivial side issue, its the core it proves he is lying.

What evidence places his intent to murder Reeva beyond doubt?

Re the wood sound, I don't think I am missing the point. The sound that he heard could have been the noise of the door creaking as she leaned against it. Locked or not, doors can make noises. Under cross, he said he didn't know what the noise was but Nel wouldn't accept that answer and pushed him to speculate- which he did. As I said in my earlier post, the 'memory' of the magazine rack's location could be mistaken or even a lie, but that still wouldn't prove intent to unlawfully kill...

 

[mirage1]

What evidence places his intent to murder Reeva beyond doubt?

Re the wood sound, I don't think I am missing the point. The sound that he heard could have been the noise of the door creaking as she leaned against it. Locked or not, doors can make noises. Under cross, he said he didn't know what the noise was but Nel wouldn't accept that answer and pushed him to speculate- which he did. As I said in my earlier post, the 'memory' of the magazine rack's location could be mistaken or even a lie, but that still wouldn't prove intent to unlawfully kill...

I don't think you can just claim you heard a mystery sound without giving evidence to support it. Did the defence introduce any evidence that the door could creak if leaned against? If there was no noise, that means he simply opened fire without any justification at a person in the toilet, which is unlawful.

The crime scene photos of the duvet, curtains and fans, prove Oscars story was not possible. What else is there to discuss?

 

[aftermath]

I don't think you can just claim you heard a mystery sound without giving evidence to support it. Did the defence introduce any evidence that the door could creak if leaned against? If there was no noise, that means he simply opened fire without any justification at a person in the toilet, which is unlawful.

The crime scene photos of the duvet, curtains and fans, prove Oscars story was not possible. What else is there to discuss?

As you mentioned- Pistorius also said the door/door frame made a noise. Not sure if this was ever countered. As wolmarans said- there is no way of knowing for sure what happened in that cubicle- it is all best guesswork. So for Pistorius to have been wrong about the magazine rack being the source of the noise isn't beyond the realms of possibility. What if he heard an entirely different noise and misinterpreted it in his panic?(also not beyond the realms of possibility, IMO) I don't think much can ultimately hinge on the wood noise, as the prosecution can't prove he didn't hear something... Also- why create such a specific lie as to describe a 'wood moving' noise, when he could have been vaguer in saying what he heard?

The photos of the duvet, fans, curtains etc don't prove he intended to kill reeva. There are explanations ( for what we see in the photos,) that are reasonably possibly true