Trial Discussion Thread #40

[patCee]

I'm still stuck on the possibility that a pre-trial psychiatric report may already have been done and with held by DT.

If the above is true, and the reason it was with held is that it is incriminating. Then retaining Dr V was a calculated risk, or not, on Roux' part. So why so shocked and strongly resistant to one being ordered now.

Is it never the case in SA that where there are concerns about a defendant's mental health, both sides would consult with the judge in chambers, and seek an agreement/guidance about the way forward? Albeit with some pressure from either party to agree within the framework of the Act for such an evaluation. All in the interests of the public's safety, and justice of course.

Still struggling here with the DT's position on this.

ETA: does it smell?

 

[DILLIGAF]

respectfully snipped

(personally, I believe Gerrie reckons his true colours won't take long to emerge without the help of anything external. OP can not keep up a facade for 30 days. The hope for the prosecution, I'm sure: Fit to stand trial, zero anxiety disorder, but Narcissistic tendencies etc)

It really is beneficial to the PT - either way.

A question for you CTC. What are the chances that OP's evaluation will be done as an outpatient?

 

[Cape Town Crim.]

Thanks CTC - so what do you think of the idea that it's also CNN's policy? I think it must be or there would be better discussion of the case overall. You may have missed it but there was one post I made where Phelps and Robyn Curnow were discussing the day in court a couple of weeks ago and it went back to the studio a bit abruptly and the two anchors, who had obviously been watching (it was when they were transmitting the court proceedings live, maybe during OP's cross) had those open-mouthed 'are we watching the same thing?' expressions on their faces.

I read that article on the Pistorians - it was funny and I liked that the author pulled no punches in describing them.

I can't see CNN enforcing any sort of 'sympathy' policy? Perhaps I am wrong, but in SA, the channels have been brutally truthful with no regard for anyone's 'feelings'. It has been objective (apart from the 1 or 2 sympathizers who have snuck in the back door, never to be heard from again) start to finish - with some BRUTAL commentary at times. Brutal, but truthful with regard to the happenings of the day.

I think Robyn is simply desperate to remain in the Pistorious family's 'good books' - in order to get some 'exclusive' interview or commentary once this is over. Ditto for Alex Crawford on SKY.

That CNN have not presented a more balanced and objective commentary is however very concerning. Was it by poor selection that they have the 2 most obsessed Pistorians on the planet doing all their reporting?

Curow and Phelps. Might as well have had Uncle Arnold doing the commentary.

 

[kaos]

Very extreme. But is has been done. I just can't think of the case.

I'm quite happy with the outpatient ruling. I feel folk are far more pathetic and 'anxious' when institutionalized than what they are when they 'feel' they are in control.

OP would be certain he was in control and 'special' because he would only be visiting Weskoppies from 5am until 9pm daily, not staying there.

Him thinking he is in control is far more beneficial for an accurate diagnosis. IMHO.

His sitting sniveling in a padded cell; sleeping on a mattress on the floor, whilst listening to sociopaths taunt him would make a diagnosis of GAD very easy........... Not as easy if he doesn't have that 'fear' of sleeping there, and losing control. He believes this is going to be a 'diddle' for a manipulator such as he..... :facepalm: because he is 'special' and in control. I say, "the computer says no"

I do hope he gets to do some art and music therapy though. :drumroll:

Somebody on Oscar Radio yesterday commenting on a listener's Tweet about OP receiving preferential treatment regarding bail etc was that the only preferences given to OP was that Nel got the case. If it had been given to any other prosecutor we might never have known half of what's been put before the court.

Out of curiosity, if OP had thrown himself on the mercy of the court, would he have served his time by now?

 

[lithgow1]

http://www.health24.com/Columnists/Whos-nuts-Oscar-or-his-defence-20140514

Prof Simpson's latest column.

Thanks for that. I liked the article but this professor did get a few things wrong of which the most glaring is that Dr Forster ignored the possibility that OP might be lying when she did the opposite and conceded, quite bluntly, that yes, he could just be lying. It disappoints me when authors/experts do things like that as it then makes you question their other conclusions. But an interesting read nonetheless.

 

[Lochlynsmom]

His mental health hasn't been at issue up until now afaik. Why do the "experts" think he should have been assessed earlier if there was no issue there? Are they advocating mental health assessments for anyone who has killed someone?

His defense is claiming his actions that night were influenced by GAD. He should have been assessed if they were going to use it as a defense.

 

[Trooper]

http://www.health24.com/Columnists/Whos-nuts-Oscar-or-his-defence-20140514

Prof Simpson's latest column.

:great::laugh::biglaugh:

 

[lithgow1]

I can't see CNN enforcing any sort of 'sympathy' policy? Perhaps I am wrong, but in SA, the channels have been brutally truthful with no regard for anyone's 'feelings'. It has been objective (apart from the 1 or 2 sympathizers who have snuck in the back door, never to be heard from again) start to finish - with some BRUTAL commentary at times. Brutal, but truthful with regard to the happenings of the day.

I think Robyn is simply desperate to remain in the Pistorious family's 'good books' - in order to get some 'exclusive' interview or commentary once this is over. Ditto for Alex Crawford on SKY.

That CNN have not presented a more balanced and objective commentary is however very concerning. Was it by poor selection that they have the 2 most obsessed Pistorians on the planet doing all their reporting?

Curow and Phelps. Might as well have had Uncle Arnold doing the commentary.

I think you are right about Curnow wanting to remain in the good books. One entry I read by an independent journo/observor (Natasha someone?) stated that there is a small handful of journos that the Pistorian clan speak to and I imagine she is one of them. Re choosing Curnow I think she is their SA correspondent so it would just be her job. It's Phelps that puzzles me more. We all are likely to have particular interests in this case beyond the overall trial - for some it's forensics, for others DV - for me, it's Kelly Phelp's bias! Small fry I know but someone has to do it.

 

[Cape Town Crim.]

I'm still stuck on the possibility that a pre-trial psychiatric report may already have been done and with held by DT.

If the above is true, and the reason it was with held is that it is incriminating. Then retaining Dr V was a calculated risk, or not, on Roux' part. So why so shocked and strongly resistant to one being ordered now.

Is it never the case in SA that where there are concerns about a defendant's mental health, both sides would consult with the judge in chambers, and seek an agreement/guidance about the way forward? Albeit with some pressure from either party to agree within the framework of the Act for such an evaluation. All in the interests of the public's safety, and justice of course.

Still struggling here with the DT's position on this.

ETA: does it smell?

Barry would have been negligent if he hadn't sent OP for a full evaluation pre trial - this is why I believe this WAS done, and buried.
OP, as the client, gives instruction - and he would in no way admit to, or want to use a mental incapacity defense. His psyche would not allow this.
So even if the reports weren't that damaging - they would state he is not 'normal' and that he can't entertain at all.

One reason, they might not have been used from the get-go.

The OTHER reason: the reports showed him to be manipulative etc etc. And the defense have a right to not incriminate their own client. In SA we call it the 'blanket right of silence' on EVERYTHING.

I hate it - and it is the ONE massive weakness in our judicial processes. The defense just hide, keep quiet, don't share anything etc etc all within the realms of the law.

Barry is not being unethical - as even if these reports were damming to OP's character, they are still not proof of guilt in THIS crime - which means Barry is not 'lying to the court'.

I hope this makes sense? :blushing:

 

[Cape Town Crim.]

Thanks for that. I liked the article but this professor did get a few things wrong of which the most glaring is that Dr Forster ignored the possibility that OP might be lying when she did the opposite and conceded, quite bluntly, that yes, he could just be lying. It disappoints me when authors/experts do things like that as it then makes you question their other conclusions. But an interesting read nonetheless.

He gets a lot wrong actually. But he is :floorlaugh: I read him for the laugh. His columns keep me giggling - all of them.
Not afraid to take the swipes.....

Unlike Kelly P. Yes, she is an enigma. I would love to grab a few of her students for opinion. I'm sure she gets some terrible flack from them, deserved flack.

 

[jay-jay]

Thanks for that. I liked the article but this professor did get a few things wrong of which the most glaring is that Dr Forster ignored the possibility that OP might be lying when she did the opposite and conceded, quite bluntly, that yes, he could just be lying. It disappoints me when authors/experts do things like that as it then makes you question their other conclusions. But an interesting read nonetheless.

This bit is absolutely spot on ..

"She seemed to be using an old trick beloved by analysts. If you say you’re anxious, they’re right, you have an anxiety disorder. If you say nothing, you’re just covering and hiding that disorder, and they’re still right.

If you insist that you’re really not anxious at all, they’re still right, because you’re just denying your anxiety. If you seem to be coping really well, it must be merely an illusion: It’s “superficial coping”.

.. but I'm inclined to think that most psychologists are like that, and I doubt that the ones assessing OP will be any different (both DT, PT, independent, whatever) and that they will also confirm that he has GAD. That could be a disaster for the PT, only for the fact that Dr V herself stated that GAD could not only have been a problem for OP in the way he perceived there to be an intruder and then went on the attack, but that it could also be a problem for the way he handled relationships too, especially one that has ended.

It just seems to me that all the psychological stuff will go round and round in circles .. none of it proves anything, and that is all the court is trying to do is to work out what, and if, he is guilty or not guilty of.

 

[Cape Town Crim.]

Somebody on Oscar Radio yesterday commenting on a listener's Tweet about OP receiving preferential treatment regarding bail etc was that the only preferences given to OP was that Nel got the case. If it had been given to any other prosecutor we might never have known half of what's been put before the court.

Out of curiosity, if OP had thrown himself on the mercy of the court, would he have served his time by now?

If he had thrown himself at the mercy of the court, he would be halfway through his sentence I reckon. Perhaps already under correctional supervision.

Unreal to think this chap wanted to walk away from it all, without a record, without a 'mental incapacity note', just FREE...because he made a 'mistake'.

:facepalm:

 

[kittychi]

Oscar most certainly still has the right to silence in terms of ANYTHING that could incriminate him re: the crime. Solving a crime or extracting a confession is not what the panel will be doing.
One must remember that this a court ordered evaluation, in which the court has instructed a panel (3 psychiatrists - most definitely - 1 defense, 1 prosecution, 1 STATE institution Weskoppies for example along with any clinical psychologists, forensic social workers etc that might be agreed on - Barry has already alluded to clinical psychologists). Oscar whilst not having to answer any incriminating questions (and any admissions of guilt will not be admissible in any event) has been ordered by the court to participate in this evaluation, testing etc.

The gold mine I speak of, is that all reports compiled by the panel will be available to Gerrie Nel. These reports will clearly indicate where the information was gained and will in all probability refer to his childhood, events, events leading up to the incident, interviews with WHOMEVER the panel desire. This in order to provide an appropriate diagnosis if necessary or highlight his mental capacity at the time of the shooting, as well as now.

They have to state to the court if Oscar knew the difference between right and wrong, and if he was able to act accordingly etc etc.

To do this, the panel (and the PT's psychiatrist in particular) they need a VERY BROAD frame of reference. Not just fond words and recommendations from loved ones.

In their findings and reports lies a potential gold mine. Gerrie would never have come close to having a PT shrink actually interviewing Oscar - not even if he re-opened his case. It would not happen. The only way a PT shrink was going to come close to Oscar and his inner working - would be through sectioning.

Remember, that state are NOT entitled to call character witnesses during the presentation of their case, so much of what the prosecution knew to be 'true' about OP's character - was buried. (The Myer's girls have stated that nothing they told police in statements has been revealed in court - this because it is inadmissible.)

However, this evaluation brings the opportunity for 'some' of OP's previous behavior etc to be evaluated - and not just from a positive PR family, defense paid angle.

Gerrie get's access to everything that goes down in the 30 days. For the PT (who have been fighting blind, due to the accused's and defense's 'blanket right to silence' on eveyrthing) this is gold - of huge value.

It tells him exactly in which way to move forward (closing etc) What is found in these reports (the findings) - WILL be entered into evidence, and may be used in argument.

Remember, OP can refuse to answer anything put to him by the panel. Anything that may incriminate him. He has however been ordered by the courts to participate. It's risky for him to be anything other than co-operative............

(personally, I believe Gerrie reckons his true colours won't take long to emerge without the help of anything external. OP can not keep up a facade for 30 days. The hope for the prosecution, I'm sure: Fit to stand trial, zero anxiety disorder, but Narcissistic tendencies etc)

It really is beneficial to the PT - either way.

Hi CTC, thank you so much for your very succulent posts!

BBM...I bet OP will not know whether to s#!t or go blind as he tries to game the system during his eval. No matter what he says (or won't say) will be on record and legally scrutinized, plumbed, analyzed, and presented.

 

[Jake18]

So legal minds are saying it's extreme that Nel wants Pistorius to be examined on an inpatient basis? That seems strange since one SA psychiatrist was saying she'd never heard of this type of investigation being done on an outpatient basis and someone on the previous thread linked to a comment from the psych hospital that this particular type of court-ordered evaluation had never been done as out-patient there before. If I got all that right then wanting him to be an outpatient would be the extreme position.

By "inpatient assessment" I actually meant the whole 30 day assessment process, I'd forgotten that he may be having it as an OP. There doesn't seem to have been much in the way of precedent for sending a defendant to one of these units, in the middle of a trial, when neither side actually believe he has diminished capability due to mental illness. Nel presented it beautifully though and I think it's beneficial to the PT.

I have no idea what would be more "typical" though - the PT reopening its case with a rebuttal PT psych expert??

 

[Magdalyn]

. I fully believe that Oscar WAS evaluated by clinical teams before the trial, and it was decided very quickly to bury those reports and not use them at all. Barry would have been extremely negligent if he had NOT done this pre-trial. And whilst he had the client from hell, he is not negligent. I also believe firmly that these reports would have been damning. Besides this, Oscar himself would be

Snipped for focus and really just bouncing off this excellent post :seeya:

This was the point I was trying to make yesterday, repeatedly, lol, and the reason I kept asking "Why didn't Roux ask for a section 78 himself?"

Answer: Because Roux knew what the results of the psychiatric testing would be and knew it wouldn't help Oscar's defense one little bit.

I do have to wonder, if OP was examined a year ago and diagnosed as mentally ill and a danger to others, is there not mandated reporting in SA?

 

[lithgow1]

If he had thrown himself at the mercy of the court, he would be halfway through his sentence I reckon. Perhaps already under correctional supervision.

Unreal to think this chap wanted to walk away from it all, without a record, without a 'mental incapacity note', just FREE...because he made a 'mistake'.

:facepalm:

Others have commented here, and I totally agree, the Pistorius' 'strategy' for want of a better word was indeed to get off everything, walk out of court a free man, resume his career and wait for the sponsors to start coming back. That would help explain pleading not guilty to the minor firearms charges.

It's also been commented that had he 'owned up' and said he did it in a fit of rage - and given his disability he could have concocted all sorts of 'mean' things RS said to him - he could be close to out by now. Given that alternative I'm glad he went for the 'I dun nuthin' wrong' approach as it may well have backfired big time. Again, it would be very interesting to know what Roux and co advised him re this.

 

[jay-jay]

One must remember that this a court ordered evaluation, in which the court has instructed a panel (3 psychiatrists - most definitely - 1 defense, 1 prosecution, 1 STATE institution Weskoppies for example along with any clinical psychologists, forensic social workers etc that might be agreed on -

Thanks for your long, informative post, CTC .. have snipped and just quoted a bit I want to ask about/make a point on.

Do we actually know whether there will be more than 3 on the panel? Because it just seems to me that two of them can be discounted immediately (the DT one and then the PT one) because I cannot see them be unbiased .. which then only leaves one other person .. and they themselves may not be totally unbiased .. like we were saying about the judge, they're only human and will have made up their minds already to a certain extent and might well be inclined to try and fit their findings to what they think rather than the other way around.

Once again I say, I do tend to find that anything of this nature (psychology) is way too subjective to be used as part of finding someone guilty/not guilty of a crime. I would much rather they spent time tracking down hard evidence such as phonecalls, what was said by OP to NetCare, etc, etc .. we haven't heard anything with regard to those sorts of things and yet, to me, they are far more important in establishing the facts of the case and whether a person is guilty or not.

 

[jay-jay]

If he had thrown himself at the mercy of the court, he would be halfway through his sentence I reckon. Perhaps already under correctional supervision.

Unreal to think this chap wanted to walk away from it all, without a record, without a 'mental incapacity note', just FREE...because he made a 'mistake'.

:facepalm:

That is shocking to think that a perpetrator of a killing in a domestic violence situation could spend such a short time in prison, just because 'she made me do it, I didn't mean to'. To me it is murder just like any other murder and whether admitted to or not should mean a 25 year sentence (and all of it served as a custodial one). It's as if crimes of passion are almost acceptable/not as serious as other murder because the perp simply cannot help themselves. It totally sends out the wrong message, imo.

 

[Magdalyn]

.. That could be a disaster for the PT, only for the fact that Dr V herself stated that GAD could not only have been a problem for OP in the way he perceived there to be an intruder and then went on the attack, but that it could also be a problem for the way he handled relationships too, especially one that has ended.

That doesn't worry me so much. Methinks someone who is so mentally incapacitated by GAD that they could accidentally-on-purpose murder some unknown through a closed door because they heard wood moving, or so mentally incapacitated by GAD that his knee-jerk reaction to a break-up is to murder the girl who is leaving him...

I have to assume the judge wouldn't want to endanger society, and that OP would be spending many, many court mandated years in a psychiatric institution, for his safety, and the safety of others.

 

[Cape Town Crim.]

A question for you CTC. What are the chances that OP's evaluation will be done as an outpatient?

HUGE.

There are currently (and I stand to correction) about 1700 folk waiting for beds.

Most of these folk are in prison as they await evaluation. Bumping a bed forward for OP would be horrific in terms of these folks rights - and I can't see it happening. He is not Shrien Dewani, who only by the terms of his extradition order is receiving some sort of 'preferred treatment'.

As an outpatient much time is saved - MUCH. And although many feel OP needs to be sent to 'Weskoppies' as a form of punishment, I don't see it this way. I see it as getting the evaluation done ASAP.

Let's hear whether he suffers from any diminished mental capacity and let's get on with the trial.

**Remembering that if this were done on Appeal, the process could have taken up to 18 months, even more, to complete**.

The panel are not being put together to find him guilty or not - so I say get on with it. I am sure however, that if ONE of the panel feel he needs to be monitored due to a), b) or c) etc (danger to himself) they will approach the court in terms of adjusting the court order (outpatient to inpatient).