Trial Discussion Thread #38 - 14.05.13 Day 31

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Oooh .. well spotted Judge M .. he didn't put the cricket bat against the door in addition to the lock but put it there because the lock wasn't working properly (due to door shrinkage :facepalm:)
 
Roux is listing all the 'preparation' OP had made to fix window, put ladder away etc. Asks Dr if that is relevant and she seems reluctant to agree...
 
R: You constantly say if it's not section 78, it depends on the facts...2 factors are delusion and paranoia

R goes on to talk about OP imagining the open window was being slid open

And I think Dr is saying that's not a delusion 'not in the realm of delusion at all....I (also) looked for paranoia and didn't find it'.

R: As you stand here you don't make an allegation of (OP needing sectioning)?

V: No.

Interesting. Yesterday she said there would be no harm in it and that it would give the court another opinion. My how we've changed our tune.
 
I hope it's telling ( to M'lady) that his md was SOOOOOOOO cautious with Nel but rattles right along with Roux. I know she's a defense witness but she's SO clearly biased and uses it by omission and commission.
 
No Roux, it was OP who told the Dr. that he'd fired at the noise.... that's what she had told the court.
 
Please tell us how he managed to get up on that cement barrier?! And what is that cop holding in his left hand?

That was a piece of a protein bar !! lol

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-chihuahua-chp-rescue-highway-20140512-story.html


ETA: ugh don't know what happened with the quote.

It happens here all the time. Open it in Edit and look at the brackets [] around the word Quote, and the / at the end of the quoted post.

And at the beginning make sure that it is only quoting one person, not two, like this:
. Double quotes seem to pop up out of nowhere today. LOL

HTH
 
Roux sounds like he is cross examining her for the prosecution, he's taken on Nel's role :scared:
 
Nel IS making the application, formally, for evaluation.
 
R: You constantly say if it's not section 78, it depends on the facts...2 factors are delusion and paranoia

R goes on to talk about OP imagining the open window was being slid open

And I think Dr is saying that's not a delusion 'not in the realm of delusion at all....I (also) looked for paranoia and didn't find it'.

R: As you stand here you don't make an allegation of (OP needing sectioning)?

V: No.


It's official! Pistorius isn't paranoid!!

(Doesn't mean everybody's not out to get him though) ;)
 
V: The fact someone may have PTSD or other disorder doesn't necessarily mean it will affect their capacity to stand trial or accept responsibilty for their actions...

Roux is done.

Nel: May I have the opportunity to bring an application...?

Here we go!!!
 
Ohhhhhhhhhh he is indeed submitting the application! ;-)
 
Mr Fossil,

Would you mind, if you have time, please provide a link for the comment in the previous thread. I have been unable to find it and I do like to read, at first hand, from court proceedings/papers exactly what was said. I am not suggesting this is wrong, just a foible of mine. MTIA.

This is what you posted.

Nel Admissions in terms of Section 220 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

One. That the two iPhones seized in the bathroom of 14 February 2013, and two Blackberry phones as well as two iPads seized from the bedroom on 14 February 2013 were handed to Captain Muller.

https://soundcloud.com/primediabroadcasting/am-court-proceedings-20140324

There was some serious discussion between Nel and Roux before the start of this day's proceedings and this recording covers the missing bit on YouTube referred to elsewhere. It also covers the admission of the missing iPhione into evidence.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
66
Guests online
2,136
Total visitors
2,202

Forum statistics

Threads
602,240
Messages
18,137,382
Members
231,281
Latest member
omnia
Back
Top