Trial Discussion Thread #19 - 14.04.07, Day 17

[james83]

I agree.
It's not discussion of the case at all.

FWIW IMO... I think Nel is coming across as a nasty petulant little man. I assume he has realized (been told) he has to "up his game" but I don't think being nasty and sarcastic and petty is going to do it for him.

But yet when roux was cross examining you didnt have a similar problem?.

 

[Danta]

Some people are not happy with people's posting so we all get lumped into the big nasty ball and get bashed by people on the forum.

 

[Suthrnqt]

I agree.
It's not discussion of the case at all.

FWIW IMO... I think Nel is coming across as a nasty petulant little man. I assume he has realized (been told) he has to "up his game" but I don't think being nasty and sarcastic and petty is going to do it for him.

So its okay to bash Nel, the prosecutor, but OP is off limits?
:waitasec:

 

[kittychi]

O: December 2012 I was assaulted. Gentleman at a party warned me I was being threatened, spoken about by someone.....later I heard him talking on the phone. Later, I was hit on the head. Had bump and black eyes. Two days later I complained.....I didn't want a make a big thing. Didn't want it in the media. I never got my side of the story across. I left it at that.

He was photographed with a black eye for a promotional thing he had already committed to. Reeva's enemies said that SHE had given him the black eye.

 

[steveml]

I completely believe OP about the Jack Russell being a better watchdog than the big ones. Boy, can they bark...and bark....and bark.

I used to have one. I never really liked them as a kid, as it was the only type of dog I'd ever been bitten by.

Anyhow, I got one and she was absolutely brilliant. Unusually she wasn't a yapper as well. She was the shyest one in the litter, so maybe that had something to do with it. She could bark when she needed to tho.

She was called Star. :angel:

 

[zwiebel]

Alex Crawford ‏@AlexCrawfordSky 13 Min.

#oscarPistorius OP is crying, tears rolling down cheeks as he is being comforted by a psychologist

Just bumping this, as it seems the session ended exactly as it began. Isn't there some term for when professionals have to maintain a proper distance and separation between themselves and clients, but they allow it to get confused?

 

[Bazinga]

R: Ever assisted anyone caught in a crime?

O: Two men one night were pulling a woman around, I told them to leave her alone.....Coming back from a training session car and taxi skipped a robot....they smashed a window, dragged the guy out and started beating him with rocks in the face....I drew my firearm and pointed it at them.....they fled. the guy was bleeding all over....everytime he tried to stand up he fell over...blood everywhere.....I called netcare.

How thoughtful and helpful to call netcare!

And he does like talk about what a hero he is.

 

[Interested Bystander]

I agree.
It's not discussion of the case at all.

FWIW IMO... I think Nel is coming across as a nasty petulant little man. I assume he has realized (been told) he has to "up his game" but I don't think being nasty and sarcastic and petty is going to do it for him.

[modsnip]

Nel is being tough but no more than Roux. Roux used a squirmingly artificial niceness at times and then called the witness a liar. I would much prefer no messing. This is a court of a law not a family chat about a murder.

 

[solar]

Excuse my ignorance but what the heck is that contraption Uncle Arnie clasps to his chest constantly?

It is a hearing loop to help him follow the trial i use a similar one at home to watch t v.

 

[sorrell skye]

He's just a living saint isn't he?

After the glorious recounting of the special deeds of the illustrious Oscar Pistorius, I'll be disappointed if the Vatican doesn't convene a special meeting, during which it is decided that a living person can be granted sainthood.

 

[Viper]

I agree.
It's not discussion of the case at all.

FWIW IMO... I think Nel is coming across as a nasty petulant little man. I assume he has realized (been told) he has to "up his game" but I don't think being nasty and sarcastic and petty is going to do it for him.

BIB But you loved when Roux was doing it! :floorlaugh:

Mr. Nel is much better at this stuff than Roux. Mr. Nel actually gets the witness to break and change their story. Lovely day for the PT today.

 

[graceholl]

Some people are not happy with people's posting so we all get lumped into the big nasty ball and get bashed by people on the forum.

I'd say that went both ways

 

[Magdalyn]

You've lost me there. Criminals come in all races, colours and creeds. There's nothing inherently racist in saying a certain place has a high crime rate.

Agreed. :seeya: US citizen here. I've never heard that it's considered rude to comment that a specific urban area is high in crime when the statistics back it up. Crime is committed by all races and nationalities, and specifying a place is 'urban' is simply specifying it is of or pertaining to the city, not a suburb, and not rural.

 

[MeeBee]

Agreed. :seeya: US citizen here. I've never heard that it's considered rude to comment that a specific urban area is high in crime when the statistics back it up. Crime is committed by all races and nationalities, and specifying a place is 'urban' is simply specifying it is of or pertaining to the city, not a suburb, and not rural.

It's not racist at all! You can talk about the factual high crime rate of certain areas and cities and not be considered racist. It's just a fact.

 

[Lyra500]

I thought, when this question came up about crime on that estate, that it had been said there had been no reported crimes .. except for OP's crime of shooting Reeva?

I have definitely seen an article saying there had been no incidents in the previous two years.

 

[Danta]

I'd say that went both ways

That's what I meant by we.

 

[steveml]

I've got a feeling that all this is being allowed because the Judge 'knows' .. and she is just humouring him/the DT.

I think the judges pen should be a mini Taser and if any lawyer steps out of line.....:whip2:

 

[jay-jay]

No, he didn't confess to murdering her. There is a difference between murder and killing (as killing can be lawful).

And there is still presumption of innocence required here, at least of premeditated murder!

Just wanted to clarify a little bit, from the law's standpoint

We know all of that .. but what we are saying is that this was never just a freak accident, say for instance she was out in the garden with him, doing a bit of work on the garden cutting down a branch of a tree or something and that branch happened to fall and hit her on the head and kill her. It's not that kind of accident .. in this instance, OP, deliberately and intentionally killed someone, and that someone turned out to be Reeva (whether he knew it at the time or not!). There is no possibility of innocence, because the law does not allow a person to shoot a target behind a closed door and without establishing who your target is, first .. OP failed to do that, and he failed to ensure that it wasn't his girlfriend behind that door (either that or he knew it was her, and intended to kill her .. but neither of those scenarios will ever mean that he is innocent).

 

[graceholl]

I just feel like every time someone brings up the whole presumption of innocence thing and all that, someone mentions how this is a victim friendly forum and I fail to see how those two things are related. One can be victim friendly and still think it more appropriate to see all the evidence and hear all the testimony before jumping to guilt. Finding that a defendant might be telling the truth, or, god forbid, might be innocent, is not perp friendly or any less victim friendly than anyone else. And it doesn't mean if you don't automatically jump in and start bashing a person accused of a crime that you aren't victim friendly, though it sure makes for a difficult time on WS, unless the defendant is George Zimmerman. Now that was a totally non-victim friendly board if I ever saw one.

OT;

Sometimes I used to wonder what the Arias forum would have been like if Nurmi had been prosecuting and Martinez defending. Crazy to think about. I equally wonder how this case would play out if Nel and Roux swapped roles.

We know all of that .. but what we are saying is that this was never just a freak accident, say for instance she was out in the garden with him, doing a bit of work on the garden cutting down a branch of a tree or something and that branch happened to fall and hit her on the head and kill her. It's not that kind of accident .. in this instance, OP, deliberately and intentionally killed someone, and that someone turned out to be Reeva (whether he knew it at the time or not!). There is no possibility of innocence, because the law does not allow a person to shoot a target behind a closed door and without establishing who your target is, first .. OP failed to do that, and he failed to ensure that it wasn't his girlfriend behind that door (either that or he knew it was her, and intended to kill her .. but neither of those scenarios will ever mean that he is innocent).

You're correct, but that's why the state needs to prove premeditation. That's where the presumption of innocence bit plays out. He is not innocent but he is as yet not guilty of premeditated murder.

 

[DebinGA]

R: Ever assisted anyone caught in a crime?

O: Two men one night were pulling a woman around, I told them to leave her alone.....Coming back from a training session car and taxi skipped a robot....they smashed a window, dragged the guy out and started beating him with rocks in the face....I drew my firearm and pointed it at them.....they fled. the guy was bleeding all over....everytime he tried to stand up he fell over...blood everywhere.....I called netcare.

Hope Nel asks OP if he stayed around and gave police a report in those two incidents. Sounds like in the many crime examples of OP's, he's always the victim-by-proxy, i.e. anecdotes of others' encounters with criminals.