Trial Discussion Thread #38 - 14.05.13 Day 31

[weeeva]

You answered your own question. If they are showing no signs etc, then they don't need to keep them in.

Can you see the point of this evaluation? I honestly can not see how it is applicable in this case. If they are expecting to see signs of this GAD in a hospital situation it is not going to happen. If the assessors don't see it, which they won't, it does not mean that it was not present on the night in question.
All they can do is question him on his past behaviour. That won't take long.

 

[aoibhinn]

No, it would be conditional, so it could make a difference. A person with no anxiety disorder would be expected to act differently under the same circumstances as the person with the disorder. If OP's disorder was particular to his fear of being burgled and killed, and this fear was due to his physical disability (not being able to escape quickly enough), it is understandable that he would overreact due to his anxiety disorder.

Then I'm confused because this is an example of a phobia, which is completely unrelated to an anxiety disorder. Particularly, a generalized anxiety disorder.

Just picking up on your post but it seems the defence is trying to throw everything into the pot, in the hopes it might mitigate or explain his actions in some absurd way.

 

[weeeva]

Yet did anyone else catch that if he were to attack an imaginary intruder, that would be considered paranoid :scared:

ummmmm, isn't that interesting

I have said before that OP was not necessarily suffering from paranoia. A deep rooted fear of being burgled and killed in your own home would be regarded as paranoia where I live, in the UK.
OP's fear was justified because he is in SA, and even more justified because of his disability. Only of course, if we are to believe his version of events.

 

[Gbtaketwo]

This is funny! I was thinking about it earlier, wondering how OP is going to carry on worrying about [at least three things] for 30 days. But when you think it through OP is primed to complete the task, it will be effortless for him IMO.

The trouble is the staff will have information about the case and information about OP that V did not have. They will also have a need to test OP, that is also something V apparently did not have. So I would not be surprised if they confirmed the diagnosis of GAD but also found some other issues more closely related to his capability to lash out and harm another person.

If he had such a severe case of GAD that he was temporarily insane at the time that he committed the murder I am sure we would have heard that from V. I don't know about the other things really, but this "worrying" illness is not going to push the charge down to culpable homicide. I posted a link that has the information about GAD. Check it out. It is not what some may believe.

Thanks
Will go and find your link now.

 

[aoibhinn]

I am puzzled what is going to be looked for in this assessment. If OP's disorder manifests itself only under particular circumstances, they will not see this manifestation during a stay in hospital, as he will feel safe there. Also he is on medication which he was not taking on the night in question.

Sorry weeva, I'm just jumping off your post again. They will evaluate him for a pervasive anxiety disorder, which according to Dr. V. is worsening.

A diagnosis of GAD or any chronic anxiety disorder must find that the patient has been suffering for at least six months. If it's chronic, it will be immediately apparent to a physician. If it's moderate, he may be able to control it at times. However, putting him 'on the spot', so to speak, should actually cause the symptoms to present more obviously because of the nature of the disorder.

On the other hand, it will be difficult to precisely ascertain his state of mind at the time of the incident. It occurred 15 months ago. There are no quantitative diagnostic tools available to screen how he felt in the past. It will be purely based on the interview findings of the clinicians in attendance.

 

[jilly]

Okay...this is a big answer, sorry in advance.

The defence really doesn't want involuntary because the burden on them is so high and it is extremely difficult to prove. Its also not what they're putting forth - what they want the Court to believe is Oscar is more anxious and vulnerable than the hypothetical reasonable person and because of that, its reasonable he would shoot 4 bullets into a closed door killing a human being.
The defence is going to argue putative with 'special' factors - anxiety and vulnerability. They want Oscar 'ill' but not so ill it holds them to a higher burden.

There's a series of stages for determination. If the judge and assessors believe putative self-defence, they look first to murder, dolus eventualis. To determine intent - under dolus eventualis, its basically could Oscar foreesee the consequences and did he proceed anyway - the reasonable person test is applied.

If Oscar is acquitted of murder, then they look to CH, also using the reasonable person test to detetmine culpability.

If she doesn't believe his defence, and feels the State has proven intent, he will be convicted of murder. They'll start with dolus directus (did he intend to kill Reeva?) Sentencing, in theory and IIRC, could range from 15 years to 'life' (in practice roughly 25 years).

His disorder could be a mitigating circumstance, how much so is debatable. There are mandatory minimums but I believe in SA sentencing is mostly at the judge's discretion.

HTH and apologies - I'm not well known for brevity.

Please pardon errors as posted via Tapatalk with a less than stellar user.

Great post. Thank you!

As I've said before tho....one bullet maybe but 4 into a closed door when he was not in imminent danger?
The Defense seems to be cherry picking that one word, "reasonable" and saying that Oscar was justified in firing those 4 shots. This GAD defense (basically anxiety/worry) should be renamed GAG because I find it sickening.

As Nel says, let's get back to one defense. I also think the Judge will rule against the psych evaluation.

 

[AlwaysShocked]

There is a world of difference in receiving a psychological evaluation and receiving psychological treatment as an inpatient.

Evaluation consists of both interviews and the administration of a complete battery of psychological and even neuropsychological tests. And yes, certain tests have the ability to detect the suspicion of malingering. There are hundreds of questions to be answered. Photographs to be looked at, after which the subject is asked to tell a story about what is taking place in the photograph. The traditional "ink blot" test is still used. There are the broad screening tests and there are the specific, targeted tests.

A basic physical exam is normally done at the beginning of the process. Patients are observed throughout the process for things like affect, choice and use of language, eating patterns, and sleep patterns.

Some psychologists specialize in forensic evaluations. The results of all the testing are then evaluated by a psychiatrist.

I did not hear Dr. Vorster mention any standardized testing of OP other than some results of testing done by an industrial psychologist at some point in the past. She did not know who he was or why the testing was performed. She did give the opinion that it seemed to her the testing was done for "forensic reasons" rather than "treatment reasons".

Given all of the above, were I this judge, based on the import the introduction of GAD and Depression have on this case, based on the psychiatrist's warning about the increasing level of the disorder in OP, combined with the lack of solid testing at this point, and combined with the continuous wailing and puking throughout this trial, I would feel duty bound to order the extensive testing at this time.

------------

Some here seem to be mixing up the terms "conditional" and "intermittent". With GAD, it is not intermittent, it is there all the time. At some level. Then, when something stressful happens in the person's life, the symptoms of it become much more pronounced. That is what is meant by "conditional".

------------
Sometimes in delving into the world of medicine, psychology, and/or psychiatry, it helps to actually look up a term in a medical dictionary. They are online. Because oftentimes, even when you think you know what a word means, it can have a slightly different meaning within the medical world. Words that we think we know so well, like "delusions" "hallucinations" or even "dementia" can have many shades to them.

 

[lithgow1]

Here's the girls, Robyn and Kelly.

[video=youtube;bpQqUhucSJ0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpQqUhucSJ0[/video]

 

[Greater Than]

I think, that the request at the end of the day will be up to the Judge and Section 78 decision is probably the correct decision but I think it will be more about time.
The Judge gives me the impression she wants this over with.

I agree that she has given the impression that she wants this over with, but I really don't see time weighing into her decision at all. It would be a severe injustice to deny the application simply because she wants this trial to conclude sooner rather than later. Milady strikes me as the type to rule in the most just manner, not the most convenient. MOO

 

[fox1lady]

Why does this witness say "Your Ladyship", is it because she doesn't want to use "My Lady" or is it just the same thing anyway?

 

[jay-jay]

All this talk about mental disorder is so typical of Roux strategy to deflect the attention.

Double-tap
Head shot first
Screaming like a woman
....
Mental disorder

We spent so much time talking about each of the things and now we are talking about this mental disorder even though it is all BS. I mean come on, they didn't suggest this mental disorder about this until now?! Come on.

Man what other BS excuses can the DT come up with?

We have three bloody defenses now - self defense, accidental killing and not mental disorder.... this is ridiculous

Yes, absolutely .. I can't help but think this is all a ruse to take the focus away from all the lies and inconsistencies of the defence witnesses (including OP himself) .. all the focus just seems to be on this ridiculous 'diagnosis' of GAD now .. somehow I don't think the Judge will have forgotten the rest of OP's BS though, at least I sincerely hope not!

 

[Giles]

Why does this witness say "Your Ladyship", is it because she doesn't want to use "My Lady" or is it just the same thing anyway?

Yes, I noticed that too. I think it's the same thing.

Did you notice Nel calling her M'lord at one point during proceedings?

 

[jay-jay]

All this fight or flight is nonsense... There was no intruder just a murder

Yep ...

 

[Giles]

On the Legal Round Table this evening, one of the experts said that if the judge grants this application there could be a delay in finding an available bed at the Psychiatric Hospital. He said that in the interim Oscar would be taken to jail. So, if he's correct we could see Oscar being led away to jail tomorrow!

 

[Cherwell]

All this talk about mental disorder is so typical of Roux strategy to deflect the attention.

Double-tap
Head shot first
Screaming like a woman
....
Mental disorder

We spent so much time talking about each of the things and now we are talking about this mental disorder even though it is all BS. I mean come on, they didn't suggest this mental disorder about this until now?! Come on.

Man what other BS excuses can the DT come up with?

We have three bloody defenses now - self defense, accidental killing and not mental disorder.... this is ridiculous

I couldn't agree more. Mental disorder, my :butthead:
It's all a load of Castor & Pollux.

 

[toevlugsoord]

On the Legal Round Table this evening, one of the experts said that if the judge grants this application there could be a delay in finding an available bed at the Psychiatric Hospital. He said that in the interim Oscar would be taken to jail. So, if he's correct we could see Oscar being led away to jail tomorrow!

Frankly, it isn't really fair that he is out on bail to begin with.

 

[Cherwell]

On the Legal Round Table this evening, one of the experts said that if the judge grants this application there could be a delay in finding an available bed at the Psychiatric Hospital. He said that in the interim Oscar would be taken to jail. So, if he's correct we could see Oscar being led away to jail tomorrow!

lease:

Yes, I read that in the Telegraph and posted a link earlier! They said the wait could be as long as six months! :floorlaugh:

 

[sleuth-d-]

They were discussing this later this evening on the Oscar channel.

Apparently the reason for 30 days is that it is possible to malinger / feign symptoms for a few days, but impossible to do it over a thirty day period when under continuous observation from trained nurses and a rigorous programme of evaluation etc.

bbm. and yet vorster managed her gad diagnosis in two meetings. and was sure there was no feigning. *rolls eyes*

 

[Interested Bystander]

On the Legal Round Table this evening, one of the experts said that if the judge grants this application there could be a delay in finding an available bed at the Psychiatric Hospital. He said that in the interim Oscar would be taken to jail. So, if he's correct we could see Oscar being led away to jail tomorrow!

If that happened he probably would show signs of mental illness in short order. :behindbar I have read somewhere, sorry I didn't note it down, that he most likely would be able to stay with Uncle Pistorius but I don't recall who said it or of what legal standing they were.

 

[jay-jay]

The fight or flight is not nonsense. It is the description of how living creatures react when confronted with danger. None of us knows for sure what took place that night. So everything has to be taken into consideration.

He wasn't confronted with danger, he had an argument with Reeva and shot her dead (imo).