Thanks for this, it's interesting listening to the view of those watching Pistorius in Court, especially the view that some of those in Court 'could have' been asked to 'audibly cry' when Pistorius walking on his stumps in Court.
Some points i picked out from the article link.
Roux says on Pistorius demonstrating walking on his stumps in Court
I don’t want to overplay vulnerability, that’s not what I want to do.”
(but that's EXACTLY WHAT HE WANTED TO DO)
Nel says
“A murder of what, my Lady, that ‘what’ is Reeva.”
“If we want to talk about a broken man, we saw a broken man” – Nel talking about Barry Steenkamp
Nel then address the ITV interview. In addressing Oscar’s multiple versions, he says:
“I don’t know what will happen with ITV, my Lady,
but in this Court, there’s no acceptable explanation ever offered. He had the opportunity to do so
– he failed.”
and this is very important to remember what Nel said in Sentencing Arguments (shown in the link), he reminded Judge Masipa of .....................
Nel reads from Masipa’s judgement:
“There was ever a feeling of unease on my part as I listened to one witness after another, placing what I thought was an overemphasis on the accused’s vulnerability. Yes, the accused is vulnerable, but has excellent coping skills. Thanks to his mother, he rarely saw himself as disabled and against odds, excelled as a top athlete, became respected worldwide and even came to compete against able-bodied persons. For some reason, that picture remains obscured in the background”
and Nel says
“If one takes that paragraph – ‘I know there’s somebody in the bathroom, I fired 4 shots through that, into the toilet door’ – why is that not very close to Dolus Directus? So we argue the accused’s degree of culpability is very close to Dolus Directus.”
