Oscar Pistorius - Discussion Thread #64 ~ the appeal~

[Interested Bystander]

Hang on in there Bystander.
I can't assure you on the Civil Law "specialty"- never heard of that etc.
Yes, if he is given release on 18th Sept, that wouldn't be a great omen for Appeal's chances of success but at least by then there will be appraisals of the quality of the Defence's rebuttal.

All I can offer, doesn't really help, is what i pasted in an earlier post - many months ago- there may be more in the article but can't go back to check it.
Re SCA judges:
"Some of our biggest judicial personalities are there - people like the SCA Judge President Lex Mpati (all intellectual dignity), Judge Mahomed Navsa (aggressive erudition itself), or Judge Azhar Cachalia .......... The sight of these judges, or any of their colleagues, being broadcast around the world would be one of the best adverts we could produce for our country."

http://www.dailymaverick.co.za/opinionista/2014-10-27-the-pistorius-appeal-bring-it-on/#.Va5IEipVikp

Thank you for that Cottonweaver. I don't know how but I must have missed it earlier. Made me feel more positive. I do hope the Appeal is televised.

 

[mrjitty]

I am sure Roux could have arranged for that.

It was rumoured that the defence offered to plead guilty to CH

However seeing as how the prosecution decided to indict on Murder the defence did not realistically have this option

It's interesting that the defence did not really offer any coherent defence to CH in the alternative.

For instance there were not really any great efforts by Roux to show how the mistake might have been reasonable.

 

[mrjitty]

I have just had a quick look at the SAFFLI Rolls for 2015 so far for this year and it seems that the SCA deals mainly with Civil Law and I didn't see much in the way of criminal appeals. I hope they are up to speed on Criminal Law :scared:. Perhaps they are busy swatting up as I speak LOL!

http://www.saflii.org/za/other/ZASCARolls/recent.html
.

Civil law is the vast majority of law practised in any country.

And of course they will be up to speed.

At Appeal Court level, it is more about legal reasoning and policy.

 

[mrjitty]

ignore list does not work very well on this site when the ignored people get quoted all the time

 

[mrjitty]

Do you really want everyone who followed the trial very closely to believe what you wrote above portrays the right picture of Lundgren's EIC and cross? Here is that day's proceedings, summarised fairly accurately by Lisa in her blog:
https://juror13lw.wordpress.com/201...ay-27-may-8-lundgren-van-schalkwyk-wolmarans/
See what it tells you about Lundgren's evidence.

This was a great example of Turnip Juicing by the judge

Of course the correct handling of the evidence was to find that in all probability, Reeva ate much later than 7

In other words an evidential point that showed the accused was lying

 

[JudgeJudi]

I have just had a quick look at the SAFFLI Rolls for 2015 so far for this year and it seems that the SCA deals mainly with Civil Law and I didn't see much in the way of criminal appeals. I hope they are up to speed on Criminal Law :scared:. Perhaps they are busy swatting up as I speak LOL!

http://www.saflii.org/za/other/ZASCARolls/recent.html
.

It gets even better if you look at criminal matters making it to the Constitutional Court. There are virtually none. If OP loses in the forthcoming appeal, will the DT advise him to appeal to the Con Court? Will he be able to afford it? I'm just amazed that we've heard nothing from the DT or the family. Have the family been told it's unlikely he'll be released before the appeal? Have they been told the State has a very strong case? I don't like all this suspense.

 

[cottonweaver]

Never heard of "Turnip juicing" MrJitty but I can guess it's meaning

Here's a manglewurzle from the Defence's Heads.

"

133.7 In cross-examination, Mr Nel put it to the Accused that whilst the Deceased was eating, they were arguing and that was the argument that Mrs Van der Merwe heard (Record 1796, lines 22- 26 and 1797, lines 1-2 and 1942, lines 3-5). This does not make sense as this would mean that the Accused and the Deceased must have had dinner at about 02:00, which is inconsistent with any possible version proffered by Professor Saayman’s evidence. "

Now as Saayman said +/- 2hrs, with 1-2 hours leeway either side, for gastric emptying, there is no inconsistency with S's expert testimony. *
Plus the way in which he throughout the heads prefers to focus on the couple eating together.

*(In anticipation - I appreciate science of gastric emptying is "controversial" ie. not 100% reliable, but for me it's part of the mosaic, even when it can't be proved to 100% reliability)

 

[cottonweaver]

Basket of musty old parsnips, cleverly arranged?

"133.2 On the State’s contention, the Accused and Deceased would then have waited 7 hours (until 01:00) to have dinner.
133.3 The Accused is a professional athlete and the Deceased was a model. It does not make sense that they would not have had dinner at a reasonable time when the food was ready, but would have waited for 7 hours to have dinner at approximately 01:00.
133.4 On the State’s contention, after deciding not to have dinner when the food was prepared and ready, the Accused and Deceased must either have left the food in the kitchen or taken it upstairs to eat at a later.
133.5 The Accused and Deceased went upstairs to the main bedroom at around approximately 20:00 (Record 1461, lines 7-8) where they had a hot drink. The mugs on the two bedside tables support the version of the Accused in this regard (Photo 74 and 56) (Record 1463, lines 10-12).
133.6 On the State’s contention, the Accused and the Deceased must then have returned to the kitchen to have dinner at ± 01:00, as none of the photographs of the main bedroom depict any plates, cutlery or crockery in the main bedroom (save for the mugs). The aforegoing makes no logical sense.

 

[JudgeJudi]

I just read on Sky News that the review board could take weeks or months to make its decision.

The above also appeared here:

http://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0827/723877-oscar-pistorius/

and the family have confirmed the review board will meet on 18 September but no further comment.

 

[Viper]

I don't know why anyone that actually watched the trial would believe that the nurse's testimony was superior to that of Dr. Saymann's.

To start with the DT tried to get Dr. Botha to counter Dr. Saymann, but he failed miserably, Nel literally tore him apart! So some days later they brought in the nurse. At one point Nel, with the consultation of a doctor, pointed out to the nurse how far off her calculations were because she did not understand the formula that she was using. She was pitiful and she should have been in some other courtroom commenting on anesthesia, not on issues of pathology.

Dr. Saymann is a doctor of medicine with a specialty in pathology, he has performed thousands of autopsies and thus has the expertise to comment with authority on Reeva!s autopsy, which he personally conducted. The real tell here is that the DT also had a pathologist in attendance, Dr. Perumal, but he refused to testify for the DT on their position! Ha!

The other tell is that the DT applied more than 20 pages of argument to this matter in their trial court HOA. This is a very big issue of weakness, one of many that if considered as a whole picture point to a verdict of guilty of premeditated murder.

 

[cottonweaver]

It gets even better if you look at criminal matters making it to the Constitutional Court. There are virtually none. If OP loses in the forthcoming appeal, will the DT advise him to appeal to the Con Court? Will he be able to afford it? I'm just amazed that we've heard nothing from the DT or the family. Have the family been told it's unlikely he'll be released before the appeal? Have they been told the State has a very strong case? I don't like all this suspense.

From your link JJ- which I have managed to open - it says "including 3 judges on the review panel"

Oh dear, Oscar always thought the lawyers were his best friend ( to get him out of trouble/fight off complaints etc) , whilst he had no respect for the SAPS.
I think he's going to dislike judges/law just as much after this is all over.

(I can't help it -in the unlikely event of CS release I have a mental image now of him and Masipa attempting a flight to Mozamb in a crop spray plane. They could hunker down there together. :blushing


http://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0827/723877-oscar-pistorius/

 

[aftermath]

I don't know why anyone that actually watched the trial would believe that the nurse's testimony was superior to that of Dr. Saymann's.

To start with the DT tried to get Dr. Botha to counter Dr. Saymann, but he failed miserably, Nel literally tore him apart! So some days later they brought in the nurse. At one point Nel, with the consultation of a doctor, pointed out to the nurse how far off her calculations were because she did not understand the formula that she was using. She was pitiful and she should have been in some other courtroom commenting on anesthesia, not on issues of pathology.

Dr. Saymann is a doctor of medicine with a specialty in pathology, he has performed thousands of autopsies and thus has the expertise to comment with authority on Reeva!s autopsy, which he personally conducted. The real tell here is that the DT also had a pathologist in attendance, Dr. Perumal, but he refused to testify for the DT on their position! Ha!

The other tell is that the DT applied more than 20 pages of argument to this matter in their trial court HOA. This is a very big issue of weakness, one of many that if considered as a whole picture point to a verdict of guilty of premeditated murder.

She really isn't a nurse. Professor Christina Lundgren. She is easily found via Google.

 

[Viper]

She really isn't a nurse. Professor Christina Lundgren. She is easily found via Google.

That is not the point. The point is she was just the only person that Roux could find who was willing to risk her professional reputation, in exchange for money, by speaking against the known science in the effort to discredit the expert and correct testimony of Dr. Saayman. And in the end she had to admit that she could not say that any of Dr. Saayman's evidence was incorrect.

To emphasis the point, she has never performed an autopsy, never determined a deceased's time or cause of death, never examined a deceased's stomach content for answers. She is the equivalent of Roux putting on an orthodontist (teeth) to refute a pathologist, after all orthodontists administer anesthesia in their office/clinic and they follow the same rule: Has the patient eaten anything in the past six (6) hours? If so the case is canceled because there may still be food in the stomach and there is a risk of asphyxiation if the food is regurgitated. Six (6) hours. That is what she knows. Here the autopsy did not begin until at least 11:45 and there was still identifiable food in Reeva's stomach. Murder.

 

[aftermath]

That is not the point. The point is she was just the only person that Roux could find who was willing to risk her professional reputation, in exchange for money, by speaking against the known science in the effort to discredit the expert and correct testimony of Dr. Saayman. And in the end she had to admit that she could not say that any of Dr. Saayman's evidence was incorrect.

To emphasis the point, she has never performed an autopsy, never determined a deceased's time or cause of death, never examined a deceased's stomach content for answers. She is the equivalent of Roux putting on an orthodontist (teeth) to refute a pathologist, after all orthodontists administer anesthesia in their office/clinic and they follow the same rule: Has the patient eaten anything in the past six (6) hours? If so the case is canceled because there may still be food in the stomach and there is a risk of asphyxiation if the food is regurgitated. Six (6) hours. That is what she knows. Here the autopsy did not begin until at least 11:45 and there was still identifiable food in Reeva's stomach. Murder.

Actually it is the point. Otherwise why make such a point of repeatedly referring to her as a nurse in contrast to Dr Saayman?

And what a professional reputation to risk...

 

[Viper]

And what a professional reputation to risk...

Reputation? An expert on clinical anesthesia agrees to give expert testimony in a murder trial on the findings related to gastric emptying, including post mortem, against the medical pathologist's evidence? She acted out the role of Hired Gun for money, just like Dixon (Forensic Geologist), LOL, the two have no credibility after this fiasco and they acted against the interest of the court by pretending to be experts on matters that they clearly are not. She should have refused the money, like this reputable doctor did:

"Private forensic pathologist Reggie Perumal — who joined Pistorius’s hand-picked team soon after Reeva Steenkamp was killed on Valentine’s Day morning 2013 — will not take the stand, amid suggestions his post-mortem findings support key parts of the prosecution’s case.

"http://mobile.news.com.au/world/top-pathologist-hired-by-oscar-pistorius-wont-testify-in-new-blow-to-defence-after-brutal-crossexamination/story-fndir2ev-1226888814355

 

[Trotterly]

Do you really want everyone who followed the trial very closely to believe what you wrote above portrays the right picture of Lundgren's EIC and cross? Here is that day's proceedings, summarised fairly accurately by Lisa in her blog:
https://juror13lw.wordpress.com/201...ay-27-may-8-lundgren-van-schalkwyk-wolmarans/
See what it tells you about Lundgren's evidence.

No, it doesn't. I was just talking about Knight and following up on my previous opinion.

 

[Trotterly]

Thank you for that Cottonweaver. I don't know how but I must have missed it earlier. Made me feel more positive. I do hope the Appeal is televised.

I did ask eNCA and they said it was their intention to televise the appeal.

 

[aftermath]

Reputation? An expert on clinical anesthesia agrees to give expert testimony in a murder trial on the findings related to gastric emptying, including post mortem, against the medical pathologist's evidence? She acted out the role of Hired Gun for money, just like Dixon (Forensic Geologist), LOL, the two have no credibility after this fiasco and they acted against the interest of the court by pretending to be experts on matters that they clearly are not. She should have refused the money, like this reputable doctor did:

"Private forensic pathologist Reggie Perumal — who joined Pistorius’s hand-picked team soon after Reeva Steenkamp was killed on Valentine’s Day morning 2013 — will not take the stand, amid suggestions his post-mortem findings support key parts of the prosecution’s case.

"http://mobile.news.com.au/world/top-pathologist-hired-by-oscar-pistorius-wont-testify-in-new-blow-to-defence-after-brutal-crossexamination/story-fndir2ev-1226888814355

Yes BIB- an expert in her field. Not an anaesthetic nurse, but a practical clinician with a PhD that specialised in anaesthetic deaths, editor of the South African Journal of Anaesthesia and Analgesia, member of the Safety and Quality of Practice committee at the World Federation of Societies of Anesthesiologists.

She was always very respectful of the pathologist's findings and was also very clear about where her professional opinion on gastric emptying was relevant. She didn't -to my memory - ever say that Dr Saayman was wrong, only that gastric emptying was inexact and unreliable, and influenced by many factors. To suggest that as a result of her testimony she has no credibility is baseless - unless you have evidence of where she has been shunned, criticised, ridiculed by members of her own profession?

 

[Viper]

To accept OPs version you have to accept that all of the police lied and that they rearranged the fans, the duvet, the curtains, the door, and the extension cord before taking any photos the night of the murder. If that is not accepted then he himself admits that his version is impossible.

At 16:54:

[video=youtu;uw6PDga4MlA]http://youtu.be/uw6PDga4MlA[/video]

This is a part of the State's HOA.

 

[cottonweaver]

To accept OPs version you have to accept that all of the police lied and that they rearranged the fans, the duvet, the curtains, the door, and the extension cord before taking any photos the night of the murder. If that is not accepted then he himself admits that his version is impossible.

RSBM

Not only were they liars who set up the scene/selective scene tamperers..... they are psychics who could predict OP's subsequent "story"

BTW Does anyone know at which stage of the trial Oscar's team got to see the crime scene photos? Obv post bail affidavit, but I presume pre-trial? Is the latter correct?