Nel is back up, he is arguing a point, fiercely. he says.. its a fact that it is now before this court that a psych made a finding, a diagnosis. why wasn't this placed before you ?? she makes a finding...
Judge.. you are saying that this falls under mental defect. because if that is the evidence, you have EVEry right to put it to me. .
Nel.. . if its a disorder , milady.. a mental illness.. or a mental defect.. ( judge says , yes, or a defect, yes ) .. a psych condition. but milady a psych condition , in the terms here in.. diagnostic and statistical definition as a disorder, its a mental illness. that's my argument.. judge, I am not sure I follow..
Nel. it is listed in the Dsmm as a disorder ,and I am arguing this is a mental illness..
Judge. where do you get this from??
nel. where do I get this from?? ( nervous laughter) .. Nel recovers..
Nel. if it affects his capacity to decide right and wrong. it is the evidence the doctor gave..
Judge... I am not sure that is the evidence??
Nel. this disorder affected his capacity to judge right or wrong..
Judge. did you write that down??
Nel. she said, his psych factors may have diminished his capacity to decide right or wrong.
Roux is up. arguing fiercely against this perception. a person who is very nervous, the court should take this into account, and not elevate it any higher.. ( Roux is fighting to keep his client out of the psych ward for 30 years ) ..
Roux says, no. this cannot be, .
Judge. you want to rephrase it??
Nel. I will rephrase it, the diagnoses of general anxiety disorder MAY have the capacity to diminish his ability to tell right from wrong?>
Vos.. NO. he doesn't have a mental illness. he can tell the diff between right and wrong, but his CAPACITY to follow thru would be diminished by his anxiety disorder. its for the court to decide.
nel. the way I interpreted your answer.. the GAD MY affect the ability to act with in tbhe accordance of right and wrong.. I am now dealing with the fact I ask you what the purpose ofyour report was. you said, it was for conviction and sentencing, and its relevance to the court. ( cunning cunning nel) .. otherwise this wouldn't have been mentioned by you. if you say, you diagnosed this may have affected his ability to act.
Vos. again. the problem is, it depends on what the offence is. I have to summarise. if he was afraid there was an intruder, then having a generalised anxiety disorder would have affected his capacity to react. .
Nel ( jumps on this. ) . but this is his exact defence on his version. not that I agree with his version. I will go thru with that report based on this evidence of this witness. I will report a section 78 (1b) and 78(2) on this accused, Mr Pistorius. . it goes so far as to motive, 92 (1) .. from the accused, who pleaded guilty , he cant remember what happened, he should be referred as to observation of his mental state..
the basis of 78 is for the court to satisfy ITSELF of the mental state of the accused.. .
if the defence purpose is to call a psych, it can only be in relation to the accused mental state. there can be no other purpose for it.
( edge of seat here.. Nel is playing a hell of a long game here ) ..
I am sure, milady, I have bought to the courts attention. I received her report an hour before court began, I am convinced that this is now the situation. my reason to proceeed with a Section 77.. the witness can be provisionally excused. I feel strongly about it, there doesn't seem any way out.
I am sure it wasn't mr Roux intention to have his client sectioned.. . I will deal with sme aspects of your report then we might have to have you back later.
