Trial Discussion Thread #38 - 14.05.13 Day 31

[Really?]

On Valentines Day, of all the days in their new relationship, OP was still pi**ed off because Reeva had coffee with her ex. That is why he did not get her a card or a gift or a scribbled heart on a bar napkin. He was angry inside. OP was possesive of Reeva, he was jealous, and he was worried that she was going to exit the relationship. Can we just get those things established as the consensus? (Joking, sort of) :smile:

Thank you Vipes, this is what I have been posting all along.......that AND the fact that she toked her some Jamaica mon weed!.....'what ELSE did she do there?' the killer quizzed her......relentlessly....the b'sturd.

 

[Viper]

I disagree. Please listen to her redirect when she clarifies her position.

It was very significant when V replied in the affirmative that OP does represent a danger, given his current state of mental illness, if he has access to a firearm. You are an attorney. You have posted information about Family Law. What do you think, should OP be compelled to be evaluated by psychiatric professionals in a protected setting for his own safety and the safety of others?

 

[vansleuths]

Could this application to have OP committed not be considered a double edge sword for the PT?

If OP is committed and an independent psychiatrist finds he does have GAD, the DT could argue that he is innocent due to diminished capacity.

 

[katydid23]

Roux clearly said it was not to excuse him of responsibility or claim diminished capacity

Well, yes, AFTER the brouhaha, Roux said it didn't have any real impact on the trial.

 

[Cherwell]

No, I was speaking of the blonde in the pic that came up when I searched OP, Dr. Holmes and olympic to see if that could have been where that report had come from, before I saw someone post the date of it .. to me she looks like the blonde that was sitting beside OP's sister in court yesterday, as I referenced to the video just above that post. Just trying to fit some pieces together. More friends/relatives in the mix, possible bias?

This is a red herring. April Holmes is not the blonde woman, she is in the back row right of the photo, next to the mascot. She is from the USA and is not related to Dr Richard Holmes.

 

[katydid23]

What is it telling you?
I think you are right that it is a hint of something and I am not quite sure of what it means though.

It's telling me that OP doesn't want to lose his bail privileges and sit in custody for months and months while they find room for him in a mental hospital.

 

[Really?]

:truce:

Could this application to have OP committed not be considered a double edge sword for the PT?

If OP is committed and an independent psychiatrist finds he does have GAD, the DT could argue that he is innocent due to diminished capacity.

well I hope that he will be found a danger to society...therefor locked away...for all eternity...:jail:

 

[Carmelita]

Why? What difference would it make .

Section 78 is a specific legal referral to an institution, it also has a very specific legal significance, requesting that the state be allowed to have their own psychiatrist evaluate Oscar is not an extraordinary request.

 

[Carmelita]

Do you know for sure just what the defence case is now? I'm sure the court would like this information.

Putative self-defense, Roux once again stated today, Oscar's defense has not changed, I don't think Mi'lady or her assessors are confused about this as they have never questioned it.

 

[BabaJ]

Exactly. He didn't think he was acting wrongfully - he thought he was defending himself. That's the defense.

Just wondering, it cannot be denied that OP's reaction was unusual (if we consider his version as true version) ie not checking whether RS is in bed, fight vs flight reaction, shooting at the door four times, running around afterwards on his stumps looking for Reeva in a dark room with his gun in his hand etc. It is surprising that he was not properly evaluated earlier with respect to psychological issues. Isn't it in his interest as well to have a proper evaluation? Just for the sake of the argument, what if he really has a condition, which would explain his behaviour?

 

[Really?]

Section 78 is a specific legal referral to an institution, it also has a very specific legal significance, requesting that the state be allowed to have their own psychiatrist evaluate Oscar is not an extraordinary request.

As well he should be evaluated by any and all Drs....he is a menace to all the good people who just want to live life and be loved. What is wrong with at?what right did he have making all the wrong ASSumptions that night. Ending the thoughtful, beautiful and loving Reeva's life.....he has to be put away .boom

 

[Viper]

Just wondering, it cannot be denied that OP's reaction was unusual (if we consider his version as true version) ie not checking whether RS is in bed, fight vs flight reaction, shooting at the door four times, running around afterwards on his stumps looking for Reeva in a dark room with his gun in his hand etc. It is surprising that he was not properly evaluated earlier with respect to psychological issues. Isn't it in his interest as well to have a proper evaluation? Just for the sake of the argument, what if he really has a condition, which would explain his behaviour?

"Elvis has left the building."

 

[Really?]

"Elvis has left the building."

Tcd.....g'nite folks.....see you mañana .

 

[BabaJ]

"Elvis has left the building."

I know I know - for the sake of the argument

 

[Greater Than]

I disagree. Please listen to her redirect when she clarifies her position.

She CLEARLY stated her position on cross:

Nel: What is the purpose of your report?

Vorster: To being psychiatric factors to the court's attention that may be of relevance to the court for the purpose of conviction and, if required, of sentencing.

5:25 http://youtu.be/sMi1epmqkko

She did not "clarify" on redirect, she back peddled.

 

[minor4th]

Just wondering, it cannot be denied that OP's reaction was unusual (if we consider his version as true version) ie not checking whether RS is in bed, fight vs flight reaction, shooting at the door four times, running around afterwards on his stumps looking for Reeva in a dark room with his gun in his hand etc. It is surprising that he was not properly evaluated earlier with respect to psychological issues. Isn't it in his interest as well to have a proper evaluation? Just for the sake of the argument, what if he really has a condition, which would explain his behaviour?

I think that's what the psychiatrist was there for. She evaluated him and essentially gave an explanation of how his version could be true if you consider his anxiety and vulnerability.

 

[Greater Than]

Exactly. He didn't think he was acting wrongfully - he thought he was defending himself. That's the defense.

He passed the firearm competency exam. He 100% knew that firing at an unseen target is unlawful.

 

[minor4th]

He passed the firearm competency exam. He 100% knew that firing at an unseen target is unlawful.

Well we're getting beyond the scope of the discussion we were having. His defense is that he shot at what he thought was an intruder in self defense. He's not claiming he shot Reeva but didn't know it was wrong.

 

[wb180]

He passed the firearm competency exam. He 100% knew that firing at an unseen target is unlawful.

Totally agree - so I also guess no GAD back then eh? This whole GAD thing is so ridiculous.

 

[G.bng]

I listened to most of the testimony and argument today. I do not think the judge is going to refer OP. What would it accomplish? Nothing but a delay in the proceedings. I don't even think it's proper for Nel to bring this motion, as the burden is on the accused to establish that he has a mental condition that reduces his responsibility - and he is not claiming that.

I didn't think Nel would file it but I am glad he did because to the contrary I think it is proper, i.e. morally correct, ethical and just, if there is a chance, as he said, "... the diagnosis was directly relevant to the accused's version and may have affected ability to act in appreciation of wrongfulness".

I have always heard it is not the prosecutor's job to get a conviction at any costs, rather for them try, in an imperfect system, to arrive at truth and justice. IDK, but IMO Nel might even be handing OP a line after his dreadful testimony, and it is not good for a prosecutor if a conviction is overturned on appeal on the basis that the defendant was not mentally sound, so it is a win win all round because if OP is cleared the trial will resume only a few weeks later.

And I know it's not the same, but as a volunteer advocate for adults with learning disabilities I know of cases here, and in the US too, that have been wrongly convicted and later acquitted, albeit many years later, because they were unable to properly defend themselves and their learning disability had not been brought to the court's attention. So I think it should be, if it isn't already, a duty of any officer of the court that when there is credible evidence about the capacity of a defendant then it should always be investigated.
I was trying to catch up going back through the thread but I am so tired can't keep my eyes open so I am off to bed!