Oscar Pistorius - Sentencing - 6.13.2016 #2

[Lyra500]

I haven't been following this stage closely as I have found the whole affair deeply depressing and I find it hard to have confidence that a reasonable sentence will be passed.

I think I stopped having any faith when Masipa declared that she was going to totally discount the evidence of several respected well educated witnesses because they did not fit with the defence timeline. The entire legal process has been a disgrace up until the intervention which changed the conviction to murder.

I did hear something recently though - is it actually true that OP went wobbling around the court on his stumps crying and acting like a poor little lost soul as part of the mitigation? I can just imagine Masipa halving his sentence for that alone.

 

[jilly]

snipped

It's normal practice, as s/he is supposed to know the case best (!)
S/he is meant to put her error right and thus return confidence to the judicial system
Thereby self-correcting practice

That's all I remember Jilly.

I 'm still not sure on the point I made last week - that she HAS to watch it as Nel has made it sentencing evidence and OP is meant to be giving a version of that night- which relates to the points made by Nel in the previous post. Her watching it may not be such a bad thing? IDK

Ideally , for me, as Cherwell says, it should be scrapped as contempt of court at the last moment before broadcast and she should treat his involvement in it's production as an aggravation for sent purposes. Everyone's happy.

But (as I understand it....and I could be wrong), it wasn't entered as evidence, but rather, a submission on behalf of the Pros. The facts of the case (sworn testimony/exhibits) are before Masipa, coupled with the Reasons for Judgment from the SA Appeal Court. Pros argued aggravation and defence argued mitigation. I believe it would be another error on her part to watch this interview. Of course, we'll never know if she does or not. Otoh....maybe Nel opened a can of worms by even mentioning this interview.:thinking: Thank you for responding. I won't belabour this point anymore.....promise!

 

[jilly]

BBM - This is my position on it, especially in light of Uncle A's comment below. All I see forthcoming is more damage control and spewing of excuses by someone who openly considers himself a friend of the family after spending almost three years listening to their "versions" of the murder and has previously stated he believes in OP's innocence.

"In a statement earlier this month, Pistorius’ uncle, Arnold Pistorius, said the family had declined many requests for interviews with the former track star out of respect for the legal process. He said he agreed to ITV’s request in an effort to dispel what he described as the many inaccuracies and speculations that had arisen.

“I decided it was necessary to take up one media offer that would provide our family with a voice to address some of the misconceptions that have remained unchallenged,” Arnold Pistorius said."
http://globalnews.ca/news/2762973/s...-not-give-true-version-of-events-in-shooting/

Too little, too late, imo.

 

[Val1]

Can you or someone else, please tell me how Nel brought up this interview in his argument? What did he say about it?

3:40-4:40
[video=youtube;UMzgoRxT7x4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMzgoRxT7x4[/video]

KM talks about how hard it is for the family being constantly exposed to the media about the case and sometimes having to defend themselves against what's said, Nel picked up on that and asked if she had any knowledge of an interview OP had done, KM explains she's heard through the radio and tv that he had given an interview to be viewed on June 24th.

 

[jilly]

3:40-4:40
[video=youtube;UMzgoRxT7x4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMzgoRxT7x4[/video]

KM talks about how hard it is for the family being constantly exposed to the media about the case and sometimes having to defend themselves against what's said, Nel picked up on that and asked if she had any knowledge of an interview OP had done, KM explains she's heard through the radio and tv that he had given an interview to be viewed on June 24th.

Thanks VERY much!!! Appreciated!!

 

[jilly]

I just wanted to add that I'm sorry for disrupting your conversation! I was totally out of the loop regarding the testimony at this stage!

 

[mrjitty]

The content of the interview is not evidence. The Judge should not watch it.

However the act of giving the interview whilst failing to take the stand at the sentencing hearing should normally draw adverse comment from the Judge,

Especially as the defence made the claim that the accused could not take the stand for health reasons.

I think any credible judge would take a dim view of the defence claiming the accused should be in hospital, yet he is not in hospital and does media work.

 

[JudgeJudi]

OP’s family have laid charges of intimidation after a series of WhatsApp messages were sent to Oscar’s cousin last week. He told the police the messages were from an unknown number in which the sender said OP would be gang-raped should he return to jail.

The sender of the message also claimed to have evidence that Nel paid Charlotte Mashabane to lie in court.

http://www.ann7.com/pistorius-family-lay-charges/


Killer Oscar Pistorius will be beaten up and gang-raped in prison, claim desperate family

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world...s-beaten-up-gang-raped-prison-reeva-steenkamp

 

[DexterMorgan]

OP’s family have laid charges of intimidation after a series of WhatsApp messages were sent to Oscar’s cousin last week. He told the police the messages were from an unknown number in which the sender said OP would be gang-raped should he return to jail.

The sender of the message also claimed to have evidence that Nel paid Charlotte Mashabane to lie in court.

http://www.ann7.com/pistorius-family-lay-charges/


Killer Oscar Pistorius will be beaten up and gang-raped in prison, claim desperate family

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world...s-beaten-up-gang-raped-prison-reeva-steenkamp

No one is going to rape Oscar in jail. The family probably paid someone to send them this so Masipa can toss and turn at night before deciding to give Oscar the most lenient sentence that she can think of. Jmo.

 

[DexterMorgan]

Imo. Atleast there was some doubt that OJ Simpson murdered Nicole and Ron.

But to have your girlfriend trapped in the bathroom while yelling at her before firing 4 shots while she is crying and scared is just beyond any sympathetic reasoning. Jmo.

 

[Marfa Lights]

I wonder how separate the hospital wing is from the main prison areas. IIRC Oscar was isolated in a separate hospital wing with only Radovan Krejcir to share his private gym.
Why would there be any risk of rape from the general prison population?

Sounds like a convenient opportunity for the defense and Pistorius family to use this anonymous WhatsApp message/solicitation as yet another ploy to influence sentencing. Not sure it will work-- even with Masipa.

I suspect Mashobane was paid by the State to give testimony, however. I would expect she was earning her regular (hourly?) wage or salary that day the same as she would have earned performing her daily duties at the prison. It's probably clearly spelled out in her employment contract.

 

[cottonweaver]

As this programme is topical this week and it's a matter pertaining to her sentencing/State's case it's a pity that we don't know why it wasn't blocked legally by her. Or someone like Masutha. ( Not read anything by any SA advocate on it or SA legal restrictions on crims speaking sub judice- only their legal opinions on releasing the Reeva photos. )

When it was announced as only being on ITV, I presume that the family's lawyers had some clause/instruction to allow screening/purchasing rights ( to South African broadcasters) to only open up later ( after hearing closed. )

Let's hope the content doesn't contradict any of the Defence's sentencing evidence this week, as Masipa is not "allowed" to watch it. ( disalllowed - as per judgerly principles)
It's not as if there have been any missed opportunities in this case is it.......

 

[cottonweaver]

I just wanted to add that I'm sorry for disrupting your conversation! I was totally out of the loop regarding the testimony at this stage!

You haven't disrupted anything at all Jilly.
we didn't really get to reflect on what had actually happened across the 3 days of trial as the thread was closed soon thereafter. I expect many will still be catching up watching the videos.

 

[DexterMorgan]

I wonder how separate the hospital wing is from the main prison areas. IIRC Oscar was isolated in a separate hospital wing with only Radovan Krejcir to share his private gym.
Why would there be any risk of rape from the general prison population?

Sounds like a convenient opportunity for the defense and Pistorius family to use this anonymous WhatsApp message/solicitation as yet another ploy to influence sentencing. Not sure it will work-- even with Masipa.

I suspect Mashobane was paid by the State to give testimony, however. I would expect she was earning her regular (hourly?) wage or salary that day the same as she would have earned performing her daily duties at the prison. It's probably clearly spelled out in her employment contract.

Bingo. Agree. Oscar wasn't even in the real part of the main prison general population. Jmo. He was in the minimum security area/hospital access of the prison.

Some rich folks are not as lucky to get the Oscar suite.

Plus we all know that if Oscar gets the flu in jail. Then his lawyer will find reasons to get him out earlier.

So Oscar was and will be definitely watched and in good hands by the staff and administration and whatever inmates that are rich or safe enough to be near him at some point. Jmo.

 

[cottonweaver]

But (as I understand it....and I could be wrong), it wasn't entered as evidence, but rather, a submission on behalf of the Pros. The facts of the case (sworn testimony/exhibits) are before Masipa, coupled with the Reasons for Judgment from the SA Appeal Court. Pros argued aggravation and defence argued mitigation. I believe it would be another error on her part to watch this interview. Of course, we'll never know if she does or not. Otoh....maybe Nel opened a can of worms by even mentioning this interview.:thinking: Thank you for responding. I won't belabour this point anymore.....promise!

Abs no need to apologise.
You're not "belabouring". It's all puzzling

Sorry, "enter into evidence", I should have been more careful with that legal term, I meant Nel has brought the matter into sentencing as aggrav, not he has submitted the actual video Tape and a transcript into the papers. ( Loose/poor use of language)

It's perplexing why this has even been allowed to happen , let's just hope that it's production works against OP in the way that Nel has cleverly utilised it his arguments.
SA law must be so different. OP's lawyers would have been consulted on all this, therefore.......


I think that we can be definitive and say that whatever it's content, in eyes of the public, he has misjudged the public mood all over again. I think virtually everyone has said that since we first knew of it's existence. ( back fired already)

If it's only FOR the public then he has bad PR advisors, if it's actually for the judge then if it would be improper for her to watch it or read about it's impact on 25th, why bother making it?

 

[DexterMorgan]

The content of the interview is not evidence. The Judge should not watch it.

However the act of giving the interview whilst failing to take the stand at the sentencing hearing should normally draw adverse comment from the Judge,

Especially as the defence made the claim that the accused could not take the stand for health reasons.

I think any credible judge would take a dim view of the defence claiming the accused should be in hospital, yet he is not in hospital and does media work.

I have a question. Are there any paralyzed men that are doing hard time in a S.A prison?

Does S.A sentence disabled people to prison for murder.

 

[Marfa Lights]

<Respectfully snipped>


I think that we can be definitive and say that whatever it's content, in eyes of the public, he has misjudged the public mood all over again. I think virtually everyone has said that since we first knew of it's existence. ( back fired already)

If it's only FOR the public then he has bad PR advisors, if it's actually for the judge then if it would be improper for her to watch it or read about it's impact on 25th, why bother making it?

As someone commented earlier on here or on DS, I think the interview was Uncle Arnold's idea to help offset damages to their reputation that might impact the family businesses. Their PR firm probably recommended it and helped "produce" it though. Bad advice, I agree. I imagine they had to come up with something to keep earning their fees and with Uncle Arnie still holding on to delusions of former Olympic grandeur and needing to protect Brand Pistorius, it was probably not a hard sell.

 

[mrjitty]

I forgot that we had not really discussed Molletts on here.

IMO it is well worth a read.

To be fair a lot of the issues were already discussed via the J13 site and then more forensically by Fossil/JJ

On the plus side they have all the crime scene photos many of which we've never seen in high quality before.

They also do some unique work on the blood evidence and the sound evidence.

Overall I think they have one core mistake in their book in that they rely on the Roux/Johnson 3.17 timing

I believe Fossil has it correct in his WTA 2 and that the Johnson 3.17 timing is unreliable.

The difference this makes is that the final shots which kill Reeva happen before 3:15.51 and the Stipp/Mike N calls.

This essentially means the murder happened exactly as the Stipp's reported it.

 

[Trotterly]

I forgot that we had not really discussed Molletts on here.

IMO it is well worth a read.

To be fair a lot of the issues were already discussed via the J13 site and then more forensically by Fossil/JJ

On the plus side they have all the crime scene photos many of which we've never seen in high quality before.

They also do some unique work on the blood evidence and the sound evidence.

Overall I think they have one core mistake in their book in that they rely on the Roux/Johnson 3.17 timing

I believe Fossil has it correct in his WTA 2 and that the Johnson 3.17 timing is unreliable.

The difference this makes is that the final shots which kill Reeva happen before 3:15.51 and the Stipp/Mike N calls.

This essentially means the murder happened exactly as the Stipp's reported it.

At 2.58am and then again at about 3.17 ?

 

[akp]

As someone commented earlier on here or on DS, I think the interview was Uncle Arnold's idea to help offset damages to their reputation that might impact the family businesses. Their PR firm probably recommended it and helped "produce" it though. Bad advice, I agree. I imagine they had to come up with something to keep earning their fees and with Uncle Arnie still holding on to delusions of former Olympic grandeur and needing to protect Brand Pistorius, it was probably not a hard sell.

I also feel the interview must have been the Pistorius family's idea.

The defence team could not risk OP taking the stand and mess up everything like he did in the original trial. To explain this away, they got Scholtz to certify that OP is in bad shape, needs hospitalization. In that background, I just do not see Roux giving his consent to a tv interview - he would know how damaging it would be for OP's case. It has to be the Pistorius family who came up with this bright idea. I am sure they do not listen to even their lawyer always - after all, he is one more of their employees!

I would love to hear an account from Roux on his experience with OP and family when this trial is long over. At various points during the trial, we have all been upset with Roux, but look at it from his point of view - he must have had a horrid time dealing with such a client. In the sentencing hearing, he and his arguments sounded pathetic to me, but that's probably more because of his client. I am certain he would have regretted his decision to take OP as a client.