Trial Discussion Thread #38 - 14.05.13 Day 31

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
I had to go out and have missed the last couple of hours . Before I catch up is there anything big that has come out ?
TIA
 
katydid23 said:
An attorney on whoopwhoop radio is predicting that the DT will bring on an expert who will talk about the Fight vs Flight syndrome, and how it would affect OP's decisions and behavior...
Click to expand...

Not much of a prediction when Roux stated as such when arguing the section 78 application.
 
What does everyone think the Judge will say?

I vote no. But Nel has made very sure that the mental illness/disorder won't be part of the defence's case, IMO. My main reservation is around the appeal process but it would be a brave lawyer who'd reintroduce psychiatric issues after this palaver. All IMO and I have no strong opinions either way.
 
Nel has boxed Roux into a corner - hence the emotional aspect to his objection. I think he was further irritated when Nel responded by saying the reason why he knew so much about the case he was referring to, is that because he was the Counsel involved and was arguing against the motion.

I believe that it matters not whether Judge Masipa grants the referral. Either way, the Defence is severely compromised as by stating that they would be bringing yet another Witness, they are saying that due process should not be followed.

Essentially, Vorster's testimony has created the requirement for Nel to ask for a referral. Arguing against the referral by saying 'Oh, well we are bringing someone else to court and we might have to have another referral if different aspects are highlighted,' shows a lack of preparation for this situation, which I find staggering.

In my personal opinion, Masipa will say no, but will declare that the defence cannot rely on Vorsters testimony.
 
Jake18 said:
What does everyone think the Judge will say?

I vote no. But Nel has made very sure that the mental illness/disorder won't be part of the defence's case, IMO. My main reservation is around the appeal process but it would be a brave lawyer who'd reintroduce psychiatric issues after this palaver. All IMO and I have no strong opinions either way.
Click to expand...

I think Nel put forth a very good argument, but if the application is denied then I think Vorster's testimony should be stricken from the record. MOO
 
http://www.citypress.co.za/news/psychologists-watch-pistorius-closely/

"His own psychologist – Dr Lore Hartzenberg – is always on hand to comfort Pistorius after a particularly agonising time in the witness box. ... Pistorius appears to be a very different person before and after a lunch break. It’s been suggested that this is when his psychologist counsels him back from breaking point."


Dr. Hatzenberg, with her "hands-on" courtroom therapy sessions, seems too biased for Roux to call to testify, but who knows.
 
Jake18 said:
What does everyone think the Judge will say?

I vote no. But Nel has made very sure that the mental illness/disorder won't be part of the defence's case, IMO. My main reservation is around the appeal process but it would be a brave lawyer who'd reintroduce psychiatric issues after this palaver. All IMO and I have no strong opinions either way.
Click to expand...

I agree with you. GAD isn't a serious disorder (although it certainly can be) and there's really little doubt Oscar would be found competent. The only question for me, really, is that their own expert conceded he's dangerous. That will have to now weigh into her ruling. That alone could change everything.

However, regardless of how she rules, in a sense one avenue of appellate grounds likely closes and Roux will have to be more cautious during summation than he probably would have been had Nel not risen the issue.

JMO
 
I'm sad. An expert on whoopwhoop said he doesn't think she'll grant the application, so now I'm, pessimistic. ;o(

The guy said that , in the end, none of this bears on the merits of the case. He also has worked with Nel. While there may be additional reasons, he said Nel gains a GREAT deal because Nel is allowed all the records of everything OP talks about or says to anyone, which he can use.

I'll be very sad, as will - I think - June Steenkamp, if it's not granted. As many here have said, she was smiling as Nel spoke. It's also true that RS's sister said, after OP's testimony, that the family thought he was a "disgusting liar." I think they'd be willing to wait just to see this guy get tossed into a rubber room. They think he'll look good in a extra long-sleeved, white ensemble, decorated with lot of buckles.
 
I didn't follow Roux's argument at the end re his next witness. Was he saying the next witness will answer the questions raised by Dr. Vorster re OP's disorder, or that the next witness's testimony will raise additional questions, so m'lady ought to delay the OP evaluation decision until she's heard from both psych witnesses? Or something else?
 
I get a kick out of it every time someone calls him Oscar "Pretorius". I get why they slip up on it but it's funny.
 
DebinGA said:
I didn't follow Roux's argument at the end re his next witness. Was he saying the next witness will answer the questions raised by Dr. Vorster re OP's disorder, or that the next witness's testimony will raise additional questions, so m'lady ought to delay the OP evaluation decision until she's heard from both psych witnesses? Or something else?
Click to expand...
So much for being wrapped up by Tuesday.
 
DebinGA said:
I didn't follow Roux's argument at the end re his next witness. Was he saying the next witness will answer the questions raised by Dr. Vorster re OP's disorder, or that the next witness's testimony will raise additional questions, so m'lady ought to delay the OP evaluation decision until she's heard from both psych witnesses? Or something else?
Click to expand...

He said the next witness is going to testify about another disorder OP has relating to the fight vs flight reaction.
 
DebinGA said:
http://www.citypress.co.za/news/psychologists-watch-pistorius-closely/

"His own psychologist – Dr Lore Hartzenberg – is always on hand to comfort Pistorius after a particularly agonising time in the witness box. ... Pistorius appears to be a very different person before and after a lunch break. It’s been suggested that this is when his psychologist counsels him back from breaking point."


Dr. Hatzenberg, with her "hands-on" courtroom therapy sessions, seems too biased for Roux to call to testify, but who knows.
Click to expand...
If Roux calls her I'm celebrating with tequila shots!
 
BritsKate said:
I agree with you. GAD isn't a serious disorder (although it certainly can be) and there's really little doubt Oscar would be found competent. The only question for me, really, is that their own expert conceded he's dangerous. That will have to now weigh into her ruling. That alone could change everything.

However, regardless of how she rules, in a sense one avenue of appellate grounds likely closes and Roux will have to be more cautious during summation than he probably would have been had Nel not risen the issue.

JMO
Click to expand...

bbm1
if there is a wide spectrum from 'not serious' to 'can be dangerous', then the 30 day assessment will remove any doubt as to which end of the spectrum op is at.

bbm2
if there is any doubt, best to clear it up. after the 30 day assessment the doubt will be completely removed - one way or the other.

to this point imo the judge has been very careful to err towards caution, and remove any possibilities of appeal or mistrial, i think she will continue along this path.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 182 more.
Total: 3,321 (members: 183, guests: 3,138)

Online statistics

Members online
183
Guests online
3,138
Total visitors
3,321
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
599,898
Messages
18,101,141
Members
230,951
Latest member
Yappychappy
Back
Top