Post sentencing discussion

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Errrr said:
May I just vent about the things in this trial that seem suspicious to me?
From the start we were warned OP had been over charged and could get off the charge of premeditated murder. Then there were things like phone records that should have shown times called. Why look at the phones themselves? Is SA different? OPs phone records should have shown all the people he called. If it is so difficult to nail down times why would they toss multiple testimony about fighting and screaming so as to make dubious phone records match an uncertified scenario?
Why were obvious signs of an altercation overlooked? A bullet hole in the bedroom door, clothes ripped off, bedclothes tossed around bullet dent in the side of tub, blood all over end of bat, jeans lying outside the murder cubicle (was she trying to flag for help?). How loud is an air gun or a door slam? I would think louder than a few cricket bat pries on a panel door. Why was forensic evidence of them being awake a short time earlier tossed because OP said they were fast asleep. That bruise on her back...I never knew the dead could bruise. Since when do corpses hold their pee? Why didn't prosecution ask for maximum of 15 yrs as Nels said the crime was on the outer limits of culpable homicide?
Maybe it is the way the SA justice system works but all the grandstanding looked like they were putting on a show to make it look like they were being hard on OP. OP looked like he had to pretend he was suffering.
Has anyone told him he can stop acting now? I have never before heard the word of the accused accepted as fact so that any evidence must be twisted to fit or else ignored if it won't.
As for his"career", I hope Canada has no plans to let a felon in here.:tantrum:
Click to expand...

Excellent post. I agree with everything you have said. Is this the fault of the head guy in their police force? Why weren't visuals of the timeline made by both sides to explain as far as they could all the bits of evidence to form the mosaic? Are visuals not allowed in courts these days? They are in the US and were used very successful by the Defence in the Casey Anthony case. Human beings are visual people so visuals assist the understanding. I realise that sometimes they cannot be accurate so they can say "about this time" or "between this time and that". What Mr Fossil is working on now should have been done by the police as they collected evidence. Police training is certainly lacking in South Africa. There were so many missed opportunities to nail this. The evidence was there but about one quarter of it was ignored. Timeline should have been done as they went along.
 
When he fell from Grace, it caused me to remember a very important rule my mom had taught me.

Hope is born not in mortal men, nor is courage. Character, ethics and integrity come from a much higher place and the moment we forget our relative position, is the moment we fail

http://buzzpo.com/oscar-pistorius-waste/
 
Sherbert said:
Mr Fossil, thank you for posting your revised theory.

I'm not too sure about the door slamming loudly three times - if Reeva were struggling to shut it, I don't see how the momentum of the door would be great enough to produce such a loud sound - at least, not three times in quick succession.

Before the trial started, I was convinced that OP was enraged because Reeva had his phone and was checking it inside the toilet. I thought that, perhaps, she had waited for him to fall asleep, so that she could creep out of the bedroom with it, under cover of darkness, and check it. However, we now know that it would have been passcode protected, so it would not have been possible for her to check it unless she was familiar with his passcode. I am wondering if she knew the code, or thought she might know it, because he used the same code for other devices that she had accessed with his permission.

In any case, if the iPad and iPhone were synced, would it not have been possible for Reeva to read his iPhone texts on the iPad? Just imagine if she were sleeping in the spare room and able to read his texts off the iPad as they came in?
Click to expand...

I am not also convinced about the door slamming being done with such force so quickly three times and being heard over that distance. So you are assuming that Reeva is trying to lock the door and OP is on the other side of the door trying to open it and she is strong enough to slam it back again three times against a man with such well-developed bicep muscles as OP? And it makes so much noise?

It's just like the cricket bat version. It takes time to swing it back and then swing forward. It could not be done so quickly. I think it was something else such as hitting the metal of the bath or tiles where you do not have to hold the bat up which takes time. You have it down.

As for the phone call, I think she was trying to phone the police as in his version, "Reeva call the police". OP might have said, "Reeva, don't call the police."
 
lithgow1 said:
Interesting points above Judgejudi and I can see those backgrounds being likely. Not having much real life experience of lawyers and barristers my example of a 'good' upper class lawyer would be from reel life - the QC in the Aussie film The Castle, which I imagine you may be familiar with. Idealised yes but I'm sure people like him exist.

With this case I didn't despise Roux, though I found him very smarmy. I saved all my dislike for Oldwage. To me he was almost like a caricature of a pompous and snide legal man. Roux at least seemed to have a bit of a spark about him, and a sense of humour, something I saw no signs of in his learned colleague.
Click to expand...

I don't like Oldwage either and I agree he's pompous and snide. There are many reasons why I despise Roux but I just don't have it in me any more to go back through the history of the trial to name them, and in any event they're all irrelevant now. I know a lot of the tricks counsel use and they all use them. However in my opinion Roux waged a dirty tricks campaign which disadvantaged Nel considerably. His "expert" witnesses were basically all appalling and wasted a considerable amount of valuable and expensive court time. This also meant that other individuals waiting for their day in court, possibly having waited years, have had to wait an additional 6 months because this trial shouldn't have gone for more than a month.

After a lengthy break he had the audacity to tell the court his witnesses weren't ready because they had young children to look after and yet these same witnesses worked. I believe this to have been an outright lie. Roux needed a couple of days because the psychologist was interviewing OP on one of those days and then extra time was needed in order for her to prepare her report. When the neighbours eventually did testify they basically had nothing of substance to say. The DT did have an expert witness, the acoustics guy, but poor Nel, as per usual, got his report just before the witness got in the box. So he had no time to read it, no time to understand it, no time to prepare the questions needed to be asked and had to excuse himself on numerous occasions to turn around and get advice from someone.

I have to add that the personalities of counsel in the courtroom can be and frequently are radically different when you know them on a personal level. From what I've read about Roux, he's supposed to be an extremely private person away from the courtroom and a nice person and I have no reason to doubt that. But as I say, you have to know them on a personal level to see the real person underneath the court gown.

When I first went to work for one, I was asked by other counsel and their employees how I found him. It was an odd question that was asked constantly. At that point I replied that he seemed very pleasant and I had no problems. It took less than 2 weeks before his true colours started to emerge. I can't really continue on because I could literally talk non-stop for a day on how I was treated. You wouldn't believe the stories I could tell. Suffice to say by the time I resigned I told my husband I'd rather work as a checkout chick than ever work for anyone in the legal profession again, a view I still hold to this day. LOL, I'm past my use by date for working.
 
foxbluff said:
Not sure I'm reading this right. Are all 45 visits no-contact?
Click to expand...

A reporter on TV said that he'd be behind glass for the first 6 months and that after that he may be able to sit at a table with his visitor.
 
Judgejudi said:
OP’s agent, Peet van Zy,l says he's seeking a meeting with him in prison in the next few days to discuss his running future. South Africa's Olympic committee says OP is ineligible to compete for five years.

He said that lawyers will meet with OP in prison on Friday, after which it will become clearer when Van Zyl and OP’s track coach, Ampie Louw, can talk to him about his career.

The only thing Peet and Ampie can tell him about his career is that it’s over, finito.

http://www.bradenton.com/2014/10/23/5431610_pistorius-agent-to-have-prison.html?rh=1
Click to expand...

I think Peet and Ampie's gravy train has gone BYE-BYE for good! :lol:
 
cottonweaver said:
BIB . The "they" are the same 20plus superfans/groupies that have been tweeting their unconditional support since the trial started. Even Carl must realise what a tiny, dwindling handful of supporters his brother has.

And all the "Oscar cries himself to sleep" stuff is probably just more PR spin. We'll start to hear more and more after the first visits this weekend.
Because of the 10 months joke sentence they need to make it look as he is really suffering. Uncle Arnie was looking forward, even on the court steps after sentence, to his nephew's "Restoration" . So they are planning for the future. Let's hope an appeal announcement kicks their long-game-strategy out of the park.
Click to expand...

I can only imagine how many nights Reeva's parents must have cried themselves to sleep.

He gets no sympathy from me.
 
Greater Than said:
I can only imagine how many nights Reeva's parents must have cried themselves to sleep.

He gets no sympathy from me.
Click to expand...

Is the reporting of OP sobbing himself to sleep trying to garner sympathy or is it degrading?

I have never met a male who would want the public to know he cries (except at a funeral) let alone have it published in the world's media.

If these articles came from their PR, the pride of most men would be hurt. Their mates would be referring to them as, "Cry baby, Oscar."

Also, as far as I can see, these reports are not even true. But on twitter it's now been published as being true for the last few days by every newspaper in the world. It is still one of the main stories.

Does OP gain money out of having these articles published?

One newspaper in South Africa interviewed the head of the prison who said they do not report such things.

Also it could not be true as he has only a small window which is closed on the door of his cell and crying or sobbing would not be heard. So for anyone to hear it, he would have to be holding this window open and screaming.

Has Oscar been told to act like a cry baby for the next 10 months while in prison?

I really don't think many people will feel sorry for him. Rather they would tell him to grow up and and take his punishment like a real man. IMO if he were my son, I would find these reports degrading to his image and expect him to have privacy while in prison. Next week we will be told what he had for breakfast and he got diarrhea or something. Do we really need to know?
 
Judgejudi said:
I don't like Oldwage either and I agree he's pompous and snide. There are many reasons why I despise Roux but I just don't have it in me any more to go back through the history of the trial to name them, and in any event they're all irrelevant now. I know a lot of the tricks counsel use and they all use them. However in my opinion Roux waged a dirty tricks campaign which disadvantaged Nel considerably. His "expert" witnesses were basically all appalling and wasted a considerable amount of valuable and expensive court time. This also meant that other individuals waiting for their day in court, possibly having waited years, have had to wait an additional 6 months because this trial shouldn't have gone for more than a month.

After a lengthy break he had the audacity to tell the court his witnesses weren't ready because they had young children to look after and yet these same witnesses worked. I believe this to have been an outright lie. Roux needed a couple of days because the psychologist was interviewing OP on one of those days and then extra time was needed in order for her to prepare her report. When the neighbours eventually did testify they basically had nothing of substance to say. The DT did have an expert witness, the acoustics guy, but poor Nel, as per usual, got his report just before the witness got in the box. So he had no time to read it, no time to understand it, no time to prepare the questions needed to be asked and had to excuse himself on numerous occasions to turn around and get advice from someone.

I have to add that the personalities of counsel in the courtroom can be and frequently are radically different when you know them on a personal level. From what I've read about Roux, he's supposed to be an extremely private person away from the courtroom and a nice person and I have no reason to doubt that. But as I say, you have to know them on a personal level to see the real person underneath the court gown.

When I first went to work for one, I was asked by other counsel and their employees how I found him. It was an odd question that was asked constantly. At that point I replied that he seemed very pleasant and I had no problems. It took less than 2 weeks before his true colours started to emerge. I can't really continue on because I could literally talk non-stop for a day on how I was treated. You wouldn't believe the stories I could tell. Suffice to say by the time I resigned I told my husband I'd rather work as a checkout chick than ever work for anyone in the legal profession again, a view I still hold to this day. LOL, I'm past my use by date for working.
Click to expand...

I call Roux, "Dirty Tricks Man".
 
The National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) says it's still unhappy with the culpable homicide conviction and will be reviewing the judgment and sentencing over the next few days.

The NPA, however, was reluctant to say whether it would in fact push for a murder conviction despite the fact that prosecutor Gerrie Nel indicated last week that the crime was so serious it bordered on dolus eventualis.

Wits law professor James Grant says the issue is still being debated.

http://ewn.co.za/2014/10/23/Experts-believe-NPA-will-appeal-Masipa-verdict
 
Estelle said:
I've often wondered whether the Prosecutor gets to meet and interview each witness before they have to testify. Or are they just given the statements and have to go off that?

Also I do not think it fair that the Defence gives their reports/statements at the last minute as they did. How can the Prosecutor prepare properly? Most often Nel then had to read whatever he was given and even ask for time to do that. I have not seen that done in other countries.

IMO there should be a rule that Prosecutors are given reports/statements so many days in advance.
Click to expand...

The prosecutor doesn’t necessarily have to interview all witnesses pre-trial, however the usual practice is that most witnesses are interviewed. No advocate, whichever side, wants to call a witness without knowing what they may say.

Both prosecution and defence must provide details of any witnesses they intend to call at the trial, i.e. name, address and age, and in the case of expert witnesses, name, address and qualifications . As far as I'm aware, there is no requirement for either side to supply any statement from a witness to the other side in advance. I don’t know why there isn’t a requirement in this regard but imagine it’s probably because they don’t want potentially damaging information coming out and need to see what happens as the trial progresses.

In essence, a defendant will receive all potential evidence, but they are not required to receive any information regarding the prosecution’s intention to admit this evidence, or how this evidence may play into their overall legal strategy.

The defendant also has the right to the disclosure of any exculpatory evidence. This is evidence that favours the defendant and tends to clear him of guilt.

A defendant who's charged with committing a crime must plan a defence for trial. In order to plan the best defence, he may need to know certain information that's in the hands of the government. The defendant has the legal right to have access to many types of evidence pre-trial.

The process of obtaining relevant information that's held by the other party is called discovery and from what I’ve seen it’s pretty much the same in all the major first world countries, including the USA . This promotes case settlement, which saves judicial time and resources. If a guilty defendant finds out before trial that the prosecution has a particularly strong case, that defendant will be more likely to plead guilty and save the government the hassle of trying the case. Discovery is a significant reason why at least 90% of criminal cases settle before trial.
 
Estelle said:
I liked Juan Martinez in the Jodi Arias trial. He was wonderful.
Click to expand...

I only learned of that trial through this forum. I started watching it from the beginning but didn't like it all. Australian, New Zealand, British and SA courts are all pretty much the same - very sedate, prim and proper, with counsel always standing at a bar table. It took a few days before I became accustomed to the style of an American courtroom with all the approaches and the other side, particularly the DT, constantly interjecting and addressing the judge without even standing. I won't say what I thought of JA's attorneys except ugh.

I then picked it up starting at her cross-examination. To this day I still can't believe her conduct, arrogance, insolence and manner in the witness box. I doubt anyone has ever witnessed conduct such as hers before. I called my husband upstairs a number of times to watch her ... and he hates trials ... and even he found it riveting. I skipped over the Alyce LaViolette E in C and went straight to her XX, and as soon as the sexually explicit parts started I totally bypassed them.

As in this case, the medical examiner, and psychologist in particular were fantastic witnesses as was the chief police investigator. For those who haven't yet seen it, it's all there on Youtube and I highly recommend it. It's an extremely long trial and all I can say is, you can safely avoid all the defence witnesses unless you're a glutton for punishment. :)
 
James Grant ‏@CriminalLawZA 16h16 hours ago
@agnes0610 I have told Adv Nel in person that, IMO the state should appeal the errors of law and Seekoei.

James Grant ‏@CriminalLawZA 16h16 hours ago
@agnes0610 I can say he is thinking seriously about whether to appeal.

James Grant ‏@CriminalLawZA 16h16 hours ago
@Brucecamza My thoughts on the judgement are captured on http://Criminallawza.net . Am working on a piece on Seekoei which Adv Nel is checking.
 
<Respectfully snipped>

Estelle said:
Is the reporting of OP sobbing himself to sleep trying to garner sympathy or is it degrading?

I have never met a male who would want the public to know he cries (except at a funeral) let alone have it published in the world's media.

Also, as far as I can see, these reports are not even true. But on twitter it's now been published as being true for the last few days by every newspaper in the world. It is still one of the main stories.

One newspaper in South Africa interviewed the head of the prison who said they do not report such things.

Also it could not be true as he has only a small window which is closed on the door of his cell and crying or sobbing would not be heard. So for anyone to hear it, he would have to be holding this window open and screaming.
Click to expand...

OP was inconsolable as he cried himself to sleep on his first night in prison. His biggest shock had been the closing of his cell doors after yesterday&#8217;s visits.

And as Masipa would say "and I coat" ...

&#8220;When you talk from your cell, you have to scream. For people to have heard him crying, it would have been very loud.&#8221;

http://www.heraldlive.co.za/pistorius-cried-sleep/


On his first night in prison, OP was heard sobbing loudly after being left alone in his cell.

&#8220;A prison source told the South African Times newspaper: &#8216;You could hear him. Shortly after the door closed you could hear the tears. He was torn up. Broken. The crying went on and on. We think he stopped when he fell asleep. It was really bad&#8217;".

The cell has a solid steel door.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/oscar-pistorius-cried-himself-sleep-4492565

If I hear that word "broken" again I'm going to scream like a man.
 
Judgejudi said:
[Posted by mrjitty on last thread]

...

This gave rise to speculation that Henzen du Toit may have been the person who actually wrote it with input from Masipa rather than the other way around.

...
Click to expand...

If HdT actually wrote that thing her dissertation committee should deny her degree!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 126 more.
Total: 2,901 (members: 127, guests: 2,774)

Online statistics

Members online
127
Guests online
2,774
Total visitors
2,901
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
603,392
Messages
18,155,729
Members
231,717
Latest member
Nat Dru
Back
Top