Oscar Pistorius - Discussion Thread #67 *Appeal Verdict*

[mister happy]

I am gonna pm Tricia. I am now very concerned as she would seem to normally be all over this.

She could just be having computer/connection problems.

 

[JudgeJudi]

OT: Has anyone "seen" or "heard from" Zwiebel? I am concerned as I haven't seen her on any of the threads recently. IIRC, the last time she posted was right before the Paris bombings. I just want to make sure she is ok. TIA.

No. I think we all expected her to be here with breakfast pics. Have you tried PM'ing her?

I sent Zwiebel a PM the day following the Paris attacks and asked if she was safe. I never got a reply. I'm concerned about her welfare too.

 

[Fuskier]

Appreciate this post Mr Fossil.
Such 'justice affirming' words from Judge Greenland who speaks for many of us. Solemn exaltation. Justice is seen to be done. :clap:

Special thank you to Mr Jitty who was committed to clarify and simplify the Law for us here. Appreciated. :takeabow:

 

[mhiforme]

As far as Masipa is concerned, the issues she was all muddled over seem not to have been overly complicated issues. When something as straightforward as not realising that identity was irrelevant in establishing DE, it's quite serious IMO, especially as an innocent family whose loved one was murdered by that were left hanging for a year. I know you harbour extremely negative feelings towards Reeva (as evidenced by one of your posts...) but you shouldn't allow that to cloud your judgement. If she were in the dock being accused of murdering OP, would you still be defending the judge? Would you be making cruel and disparaging remarks about OP as you did Reeva?

ETA - the last paragraph of the ruling is the one you think everyone remembers??? I think what everyone remembers is that a slimy little has-been finally got labelled correctly - murder.

BIB, I think this is a really good example. I have absolutely nothing against Reeva, I never have. What's frustrating to read over and over is how some forum posters feel they personally know Reeva through this trial and believe she is angelic in nature. The reality is that none of us know what her true traits are.

You're example of Reeva in the dock is perfect. If that was the case, most people would be saying poor Oscar and writing warm glowing comments about him. How could Reeva talk such a life, a guy who did so much for disabled kids, a man who put South Africa on the map, etc etc. We'd see the same bleeding hearts. The reality that we have come to learn is far different and this guy is a hot head.

I'm sure Reeva had her own skeletons that she had in her closet, that's the point I am trying to make. She's another human being.

 

[Fuskier]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-34993002

Oscar Pistorius guilty of murdering Reeva Steenkamp
9 hours ago Africa

"... Many South Africans have applauded the court's decision on social media, saying justice has now been served for Ms Steenkamp.
This ruling is expected to go some way to show that no-one is above the law, not even South Africa's once beloved "blade runner"...

 

[soozieqtips]

BIB, I think this is a really good example. I have absolutely nothing against Reeva, I never have. What's frustrating to read over and over is how some forum posters feel they personally know Reeva through this trial and believe she is angelic in nature. The reality is that none of us know what her true traits are.

You're example of Reeva in the dock is perfect. If that was the case, most people would be saying poor Oscar and writing warm glowing comments about him. How could Reeva talk such a life, a guy who did so much for disabled kids, a man who put South Africa on the map, etc etc. We'd see the same bleeding hearts. The reality that we have come to learn is far different and this guy is a hot head.

I'm sure Reeva had her own skeletons that she had in her closet, that's the point I am trying to make. She's another human being.

BIB - then why did you feel the need to make such insulting comments about her, especially on a victim friendly site? Do you really not think her 'skeletons' as you call them would have surfaced in the last 3 years? Has anyone come up with stories of how she bullied and intimidated people? Or how she had a vicious temper and got friends to take the blame for her own dirty deeds? No. However, stories about OP began to surface immediately and most of them were negative. He had a short fuse. He was reckless with guns. He treated people with disrespect. No one has said Reeva was a perfect human being.

No one is perfect, but your remarks about her were unpleasant and unjustified and pulled out of thin air. It was your opinion that she was those things you said she was, not a fact. The negative stuff about OP is fact, not an opinion. There's the difference. Then you post that he should basically make a run for it while he still can, highlighting again your disregard for the woman he killed and showing that you don't care about justice in this particular case. If you have nothing against Reeva, why would you suggest her murderer try and escape justice?

 

[Hope4More]

BIB, I think this is a really good example. I have absolutely nothing against Reeva, I never have. What's frustrating to read over and over is how some forum posters feel they personally know Reeva through this trial and believe she is angelic in nature. The reality is that none of us know what her true traits are.

You're example of Reeva in the dock is perfect. If that was the case, most people would be saying poor Oscar and writing warm glowing comments about him. How could Reeva talk such a life, a guy who did so much for disabled kids, a man who put South Africa on the map, etc etc. We'd see the same bleeding hearts. The reality that we have come to learn is far different and this guy is a hot head.

I'm sure Reeva had her own skeletons that she had in her closet, that's the point I am trying to make. She's another human being.

Exactly. What makes every abrupt and senseless death of victims most tragic, IMO, is just that. They are/were REAL people, real human beings, and flawed because we all are. Pretending otherwise is to rob them of their humanity.

 

[Hope4More]

OT: Has anyone "seen" or "heard from" Zwiebel? I am concerned as I haven't seen her on any of the threads recently. IIRC, the last time she posted was right before the Paris bombings. I just want to make sure she is ok. TIA.

Zuri...saw that you'd been here looking for Z. Could you please post in JA sidebar if and when you get news? Thanks....

 

[Coldpizza]

BIB, I think this is a really good example. I have absolutely nothing against Reeva, I never have. What's frustrating to read over and over is how some forum posters feel they personally know Reeva through this trial and believe she is angelic in nature. The reality is that none of us know what her true traits are.

You're example of Reeva in the dock is perfect. If that was the case, most people would be saying poor Oscar and writing warm glowing comments about him. How could Reeva talk such a life, a guy who did so much for disabled kids, a man who put South Africa on the map, etc etc. We'd see the same bleeding hearts. The reality that we have come to learn is far different and this guy is a hot head.

I'm sure Reeva had her own skeletons that she had in her closet, that's th point I am trying to make. She's another human being.

Many of us may have skeletons in our closets but we are here to defend ourselves. Reeva sadly does not have that option.

The Court has decided that Oscar Pistorious is culpable of the Murder of Reeva Steenkamp and will receive his sentence at an undetermined date with a minimum of 15 years.

He may suffer, he may endure pain, but it will never compare to the loss of Reeva and the loss her parents, loved ones and friends endure daily.

:rose:

 

[Val1]

I think Leach has a bit more than suspicions!

I think he is pretty convinced!

The Supreme Court is not deaf to the wider context, even if they can't directly hear it.

Just wondering, wouldn't the SCA also have had access to any sealed info giving them a full view of the evidence, like perhaps some of the phone records we wish we had, RS's laptop history, a full accounting of where, with whom, and what OP had been doing the full day of the 13th, maybe even that recording of OP screaming like a woman... Even though so much evidence had gone missing(OP's cell msgs, RS's purse and all its contents, the receipts/garbage helping to prove what they'd had for dinner, timely toxicology tests, etc.), or at least was not used, surely there were bits of evidence that were withheld that a higher court would have been able to take into account while determining whether the lower court had made errors?

 

[Madeleine74]

Based on Masipa's previous light sentencing for OP, I believe she'll look for any and every loophole she can to justify giving him as light a sentence as she must. I'm sure she wasn't happy to be verbally chastised by the S.C. in their decision. Yes, we all know her logic was faulty, perhaps even she knew it too, at the time. She gave OP the sentence she wanted him to have and (IMO) worked backwards then to try and explain her rationale. Only problem was, her rationale wasn't rational. Since she is biased and uses subjective/selective reasoning and chooses to see OP as 'the victim,' can her views have changed in the last year? I suspect not.

If OP goes to prison longer than 5 years on top of what he's already served I'll be surprised. Besides, with SA's early release program for good behavior, he won't actually serve 15 years if that's what's handed down. Somehow I think he'll slither his way into something far less.

 

[JudgeJudi]

Just wondering, wouldn't the SCA also have had access to any sealed info giving them a full view of the evidence, like perhaps some of the phone records we wish we had, RS's laptop history, a full accounting of where, with whom, and what OP had been doing the full day of the 13th, maybe even that recording of OP screaming like a woman... Even though so much evidence had gone missing(OP's cell msgs, RS's purse and all its contents, the receipts/garbage helping to prove what they'd had for dinner, timely toxicology tests, etc.), or at least was not used, surely there were bits of evidence that were withheld that a higher court would have been able to take into account while determining whether the lower court had made errors?

Prior to the appeal, Roux asked the SCA to read only the most relevant parts of the trial record. Nel failed to convince the SCA to read the entire record. Judge President Mpati agreed with Roux and asked that the most relevant parts only be submitted. However, if they wanted anything else, they were able to access it.

 

[JudgeJudi]

Kelly Phelps has one eye on wrapping up after exam marking and her PhD (she starts work on her dissertation in January).

These are the frameworks of research papers that will examine elements of the trial that concerned her most: contempt of court, including scandalising the court and sub judice, dolus eventualis and the media representation of the trial.

The first paper is on dolus eventualis. This facet provided an important backdrop for Masipa's verdict, which was heavily but unfairly criticised, says Phelps.

"It is true the reasoning in her judgment could have been clearer but ultimately the judge got it right. She was accurate on the law, so I think it warrants a robust, academic article to explain why she was correct, where the law comes from and why it is the way that it is."

In spite of the State being given leave to appeal the verdict and sentence, Phelps believes Masipa's sentence was remarkable. Yes, the SCA and most of us here found it remarkable too, but for very different reasons.

"The judge really managed to craft a sentence that was carefully reasoned in terms of current sentencing, jurisprudence and principles coming from other cases. She gave adequate attention to the characteristics of the offender without ever appearing to be unduly sympathetic to the offender."

(Phelps will deliver a lecture on the trial at UCT's Summer School in January 2015.)

http://www.uct.ac.za/dailynews/?id=8924

Kelly should consider cancelling this lecture. I read somewhere last night, but have yet to find the link again, that her students have asked for a refund of fees paid for attending her lecture on the OP trial/judgment!!!

Another of her gems is this, ““My professional opinion is that the defence is correct in their interpretation of dolus eventualis”.

http://citizen.co.za/241517/legal-experts-mixed-reaction-pistorius-judgment/

You know the old adage, “Those who can, do. Those who can’t, teach”.

 

[mrjitty]

Kelly Phelps has one eye on wrapping up after exam marking and her PhD (she starts work on her dissertation in January).

These are the frameworks of research papers that will examine elements of the trial that concerned her most: contempt of court, including scandalising the court and sub judice, dolus eventualis and the media representation of the trial.

The first paper is on dolus eventualis. This facet provided an important backdrop for Masipa's verdict, which was heavily but unfairly criticised, says Phelps.

"It is true the reasoning in her judgment could have been clearer but ultimately the judge got it right. She was accurate on the law, so I think it warrants a robust, academic article to explain why she was correct, where the law comes from and why it is the way that it is."

In spite of the State being given leave to appeal the verdict and sentence, Phelps believes Masipa's sentence was remarkable. Yes, the SCA and most of us here found it remarkable too, but for very different reasons.

"The judge really managed to craft a sentence that was carefully reasoned in terms of current sentencing, jurisprudence and principles coming from other cases. She gave adequate attention to the characteristics of the offender without ever appearing to be unduly sympathetic to the offender."

(Phelps will deliver a lecture on the trial at UCT's Summer School in January 2015.)

http://www.uct.ac.za/dailynews/?id=8924

Kelly should consider cancelling this lecture. I read somewhere last night, but have yet to find the link again, that her students have asked for a refund of fees paid for attending her lecture on the OP trial/judgment!!!

Another of her gems is this, ““My professional opinion is that the defence is correct in their interpretation of dolus eventualis”.

http://citizen.co.za/241517/legal-experts-mixed-reaction-pistorius-judgment/

You know the old adage, “Those who can, do. Those who can’t, teach”.

Phelps is just a self promoter.

Typically in law some of the professor's have the best analysis - often submitted to the law journals - as it is really their role to follow the development of the law whereas working lawyers like Nel & Roux don't have the time. For example Grant was very good at focussing on the issues rather than the personalities.

I found her analysis to be embarrassing - e.g. this

Phelps said the problem started off with the way that the indictment was drafted.

She is basically fan girl-ing for the media

 

[mrjitty]

I think he'll be feeling pretty dejected. Even though the writing was on the wall, I'm sure he still held onto that little grain of hope that the verdict for which he fought so hard would be allowed to stand.

I think he will be cursing Masipa

Had she written the judgement properly - this never would have been appealed.

 

[Mr Fossil]

The Pistorius Verdict: Justice was done, The System works (Mandy Weiner)
http://www.dailymaverick.co.za/arti...stice-was-done-the-system-works/#.VmFDJPnhBph

Reeva's murder finally catches up with Oscar Pistorius (Karyn Maughan - behind paywall at the moment)
http://mg.co.za/article/2015-12-03-reeva-steenkamps-murder-finally-catches-up-with-oscar-pistorius

Think you’ve heard the last of Oscar? Think again (Simon Allison)
http://www.dailymaverick.co.za/arti...-the-last-of-oscar-think-again./#.VmFEU_nhBph

 

[lithgow1]

Waiting for lithgow to land or log in for the good news!!

I am here! I actually heard it live. The flight had BBC live news on so I was watching it. Of course captain and crew announcements kept interrupting it - by the time Justice Leach was heading towards the verdict we were coming in to land at KL and of course they kept breaking in with non important things like fasten your seat belt and put your seat upright. Mine was very upright already! Then, we were only minutes from landing and he was still talking and I was sure they would turn off the entertainment system as they often do right when he got to the decision but as luck would have it they kept it going so by the time I was disembarking I knew OP was officially a 'murderer'! Thought of all the regulars here and how it was a just decision IMO for the memory of Reeva Steenkamp and at least a bit more justice for her family. Was very pleased for Mr Nel and his team too.

Thanks for thinking of me soozieq - now I will go back to your message and read on through everyone's comments. While drinking a cold beer in fog free warm weather!

 

[lithgow1]

If he's not under house arrest at this time, there is no legal reason that he can't follow up on his dream to teach young children in Mozambique. Why put something off to tomorrow when you don't know what tomorrow will bring. Perhaps today would be a good day to just make that trip to Mozambique and start on his dream

Someone has probably already responded to you but the fact that your posts seem very much to sympathise and side with someone who five SCA judges have decided is a murderer is disturbing IMO.

 

[akp]

Another of her gems is this, ““My professional opinion is that the defence is correct in their interpretation of dolus eventualis”.

http://citizen.co.za/241517/legal-experts-mixed-reaction-pistorius-judgment/

You know the old adage, “Those who can, do. Those who can’t, teach”.

RSBM.

Let's just accept that she is utterly incompetent and stop there. Let us not color everyone in the (what I consider to be a noble) profession by hers.

 

[lithgow1]

Phelps is just a self promoter.

Typically in law some of the professor's have the best analysis - often submitted to the law journals - as it is really their role to follow the development of the law whereas working lawyers like Nel & Roux don't have the time. For example Grant was very good at focussing on the issues rather than the personalities.

I found her analysis to be embarrassing - e.g. this



She is basically fan girl-ing for the media

Other than the very first interview she gave after the MURDER Phelps has been an advocate for Pistorius, aided and abetted by Robyn Curnow. She even defended Dixon as a good witness! She was also heavily criticised for her comments in the Bateman/Maughan (?) book. Well Kelly, five SCA judges do not agree with your informed opinions, which having heard those opinions does not surprise me in the least.