Trial Discussion Thread #40

[DILLIGAF]

how do you explain Reeva's attraction. By all accounts I've read, she wasn't an insecure woman. How did she not see right through him?

Reeva may well have seen through him, but it may just have taken three months to do so.

Attracted to him early because of his fame and charm, but gradually realising that he's not a nice person.

Hence texts like: “I’m scared of you sometimes and how you snap at me and how you act at me.’’

 

[Cape Town Crim.]

Good morning all. 06:45am in Cape Town, and it's a typical winters morning.

Just to give some info about the final report, and what any disagreement in findings would mean. I found this.

"If the report submitted to court was the unanimous finding of the panel of experts who assessed his mental condition - and the report was not disputed by the accused or the prosecution - the judge could determine the matter on the report without hearing further evidence.

In the event of the report being disputed, either party could call experts to question the findings. "

Actually, here is the link to a pretty good article.

http://www.iol.co.za/news/crime-courts/oscar-s-fate-in-hands-of-panel-1.1688482#.U3WW2Sg0ojg

 

[Cape Town Crim.]

I would also be keen to hear what some of you feel the 'WORST' case scenario (for Oscar) would be in terms of what is ultimately contained in this report.

I'm going with:

"Danger to society". (of which there is already some evidence. More to be obtained when evaluating - speeding at insane levels - boats and cars. Negligence and recklessness with firearms - threats of violence - and complete disregard for authority and the law)

It would be THE 'killer' blow IMHO.

 

[Cape Town Crim.]

What is up with women falling all over themselves for this guy? He may be handsome, and opposite to that he is disfigured. Some women despise a man that has killed, while at the same time they love that he seems boyish and needs attention to soothe him? :weird:

One of our news channels interviewed the ABC African correspondent. (A South African woman).

She was at pains to relay how 'vulnerable and tragic' Oscar looked whilst giving his evidence in chief. She stated that she 'wished' he had agreed to being televised throughout this, as she believes MANY would have then seen his pain, his anguish, his raw grief........

I chucked a magazine at the telly in anger. :facepalm: Felt physically ill listening to this drivel.

There is a real problem with the need to nurture and 'fix' amongst many of the women following this case. (I am female, so I mean so disrespect at all).
It comes from some deep instinct to mother and protect quite possibly. This made even worse when the object of their affection is so obviously 'damaged'.

I feel the same at times - but only when it comes to abused animals, NOT killer humans.

(If Oscar were a crippled Rottweiler crying at the side of the road, I would probably be as bad as Kelly Phelps in terms of my rabid desire to protect, nurture and heal :scared

 

[DILLIGAF]

For clarity: Today it is called ECT - Electroconvulsive Therapy

Yes it is different. It does not cause the old fashioned "grand mal" seizures of the past. In most patients there may be a small twitching of a leg. They do still use the mouthguard during the procedure, by the way. Not so the patient doesn't "swallow their tongue". It is so they don't bite their tongue.

It is mainly used to treat resistant clinical depression. As far as memory, ECT is more likely to impair memory than to "jog it".

As for "racking", I don't think that was ever used as a psychiatric treatment. But immersing the patient into ice baths was. Oh yes.

Being someone who has undergone this procedure, I can say that your description of it is spot on. :goodpost:
While many think ECT is a barbaric form of treatment, there is evidence that it is effective in treating major depression or as you put it "treatment resistant depression"
I underwent three courses of six ECT procedures (18 in total) and it worked. My only complaint is that it did impair my memory, particularly my short term memory.

Now what was I talking about? ........ :giggle:

Totally irrelevant to OP's assessment, but its nice to see that some people have a good understanding of modern day ECT and that it's nothing like "One flew over the Cuckoo's Nest"

 

[BabaJ]

Psychiatrists are physicians they take the Hippocratic Oath. If you think that anyone in the mental health field will treat Oscar as Nel did you are simply mistaken. What you are suggesting would be the willful harming of a human being by mental health professionals.

Mental health professionals that are not doctors also have the moral and legal obligation to not harm patients/clients in their care.

It is a simple case of morality.

I am not sure if I understand well, did you imply that Nel willfully harmed OP? I have been trying to be objective but no matter how you look at this case, OP fired FOUR shots into a door knowing that there may be a human being while aiming impeccably considering he was scared, it was dark and he did not have good balance on his stumps. Sometimes it seems to me that there is confusion about who the victim is - it is not Oscar, it is Reeva.

To my understanding there were complaints to Human Rights commission with respect to Nel's questioning methods during OP's testimony, however, they were turned down. And yes, OP will likely be subject to a large number of questions and tests some of which he would not like.

All this in my opinion only:truce:

 

[Greater Than]

We part ways that OP intended to kill whoever was behind that door. Your obviously firmly believe he did. I think there's reasonable doubt. Those are both opinions, and yeppers, everyone's entitled to have them and shout them and otherwise do what they will with them.

Does not change the fact that OP is not a murderer until he is legally convicted of murder--if that happens. Your thinking him so does not make him so, no matter how many times you say so.

And thanks for the list, but think I'm up to speed already on the legal definitions and implications you itemize.

I'd bet if it was you behind that door you'd be pretty certain the guy on the other side was shooting to kill.

 

[katydid23]

Even if a phone is locked, even with no service/reception and no credit (Pay& Go applicable only) emergency calls can always be made. The only inhibitor would be if a phone had no charge.

If you have no reception, and no service, then I don't believe you can make an emergency call. I know from experiences, as we were lost on a hike in the wilderness, and had no reception, hence, no 911 call was possible. We finally climbed atop a large hill and found a few bars of reception and made the call.


Also, I think Reeva would have been very reticent to call police. I don't think she wanted bad publicity for herself or Oscar. But I don't believe that she had any idea he was going to shoot her.

 

[Greater Than]

Oscars version is different, he did not believe he had the ability to flee do to his panicked state and the fact that he is missing the bottom half of his legs. He also did not think he was shooting at a retreating intruder he thought he was shooting at an aggressive intruder that was moving toward Oscar and Reeva.

An aggressive intruder wouldn't hide and corner himself behind a locked toilet door. An aggressive intruder would've crawled though that window with guns-a-blazing!

 

[Feynman]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hope4More View Post
He's guilty of killing her. He's not been found guilty of murdering her;
he is innocent of murder until proven otherwise.




I would love to know the difference between "innocent of murder until proven otherwise" and "presumed innocent." What is the big difference?

Aren't all people, not-yet-convicted, but accused of crimes, "technically" and legally innocent?

People cannot be punished for a crime unless they are found guilty, beyond a reasonable doubt, in a court of law. All the rest is meaningless boilerplate. To see how silly "innocent until proven guilty" can be, note that murder suspects are often conveyed to court hearings in orange jumpsuits, handcuffs and foot chains by multiple armed police. Now how innocent is that?

 

[Budgie]

When the last thread was just closed, I panicked. I worried that everything would shut down for 30 days like OP channel.

Thanks Harmony2!

lease: from Budgie and my birthday celebrations on Wednesday. I have to admit, OP getting the little he did, and me turning 21 again with all my family and friends
....Doo-lal-ee was eventually going to come into to play.

I'm stoked OP got sectioned on my B'day. After a year and still NO justice for Reeva!

...I was and I'm still happy this chap isn't going to be able to appeal in the future, courtesy Gerrie Nel.

 

[minor4th]

People cannot be punished for a crime unless they are found guilty, beyond a reasonable doubt, in a court of law. All the rest is meaningless boilerplate. To see how silly "innocent until proven guilty" can be, note that murder suspects are often conveyed to court hearings in orange jumpsuits, handcuffs and foot chains by multiple armed police. Now how innocent is that?

Yeah and there's that whole pre-trial detention thing

 

[BabaJ]

One of our news channels interviewed the ABC African correspondent. (A South African woman).

She was at pains to relay how 'vulnerable and tragic' Oscar looked whilst giving his evidence in chief. She stated that she 'wished' he had agreed to being televised throughout this, as she believes MANY would have then seen his pain, his anguish, his raw grief........

I chucked a magazine at the telly in anger. :facepalm: Felt physically ill listening to this drivel.

There is a real problem with the need to nurture and 'fix' amongst many of the women following this case. (I am female, so I mean so disrespect at all).
It comes from some deep instinct to mother and protect quite possibly. This made even worse when the object of their affection is so obviously 'damaged'.

snipped

I think you "hit the nail on the head", we had the same experience with our daughter who always fell "in love" with the same type of guy - always somehow disadvantaged and usually having deep psychological issues, interestingly those types were very similar to OP ie mannerism, "Oscar talk", no accountability, extremely impulsive, self-centred, narcissistic, etc. etc. Nobody would believe that she could have any problems as she was doing great in all other aspect of her life. She was actually diagnosed with depression while she was having a huge need to help these guys, she put all the energy into trying to fix these people. Following the treatment she is doing great and happily married to a great guy.

 

[toevlugsoord]

I haven't seen this interview before with OP's uncle:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9L3f0TtMqQ

Posting in case others haven't seen it either!
I thought I'd seen them all...

 

[Fuskier]

why commit OP for assessment - YouTube
why commit OP for assessment
39 minutes ago
David O'Sullivan discusses with legal panel Advocate Mannie Witz, Attorney Khanya Jele and Judge Chris Greenland why OP had to be committed for psychiatric and psychological assessment. This panel discussion is post Judge Masipa's decision.

 

[Budgie]

Even as an outpatient, if we look at the facts of the case for a final wrap up.

The inept-ness of the police, the clutching at straws by the defence. The solid points placed to all witnesses by the prosecution.
Judge Masipa has one heck of a job as a result. She has two assessors. Who we, the public, know nothing about...and rightly so. They are effectively the 12 man jury in some regard in all western societies. ....our world wide reprentatives.

Astonishingly, they have an amazing job. They must wade through a quagmire of testimony. Of which, all of it, to only advise My Lady of the bones of SA law and the hearsay that should be disallowed.
Judge Masipa picked correctly with her selection of advisors.....by all accounts.

I'm now left wondering, how well did OP pick his defence counsel.

Raising curious eyebrow.

 

[BritsKate]

I do not believe that they are looking for a mental disorder so great that the legality of an insanity plea will even be talked about. (In fact I think that I read SA doesn't have an insanity plea, I don't know what their equivalent would be).

I believe the good mental health wardens will be tasked with determining Oscar's general mental health, before, during, and after the morning he killed Reeva. They will also be tasked with putting a diagnosis to their findings if they believe he has a mental health disorder/illness which is listed in the DSM V. Their evaluation will then determine whether Judge Masipa should give any weight to Oscar's mental health when she is considering her judgement as to the reasonableness of his actions.

In other words was an diagnosed mental health defect a mitigating factor in Oscar's behavior in that AM.

I'm so, so far behind on posts.

South Africa most definitely does recognise an insanity defence of sorts termed involuntary (or by some automatism) that's been discussed repeatedly and at length.

There are, legally, two different things being discussed:
1) Does Oscar have a disorder? Does that disorder mitigate criminal responsibility? (Meaning basically: does it bolster his defence? Could it be a mitigating factor to be considered at time of sentencing, assuming he's convicted?)
2) Does such a disorder rise to the level of such that Oscar cannot be held criminally responsible for the crimes he's charged with? (This is what determines an involuntary defence.)

The evaluation will ultimately determine both of the above. They won't specifically be looking for any outcome for a specific legal determination. They're certainly not limited to mitigating factors and the question of whether his dx rises to the level of absolving him of criminal responsibility (inability to distinguish between right and wrong) is a primary reason for the evaluation itself.

JMO

ETA: Any disorder he's diagnosed with could impact the outcome, not would. Just to make that very clear. It's totally dependent on diagnosis and severity.

 

[Fuskier]

OP's defence - YouTube
OP's defence
6 minutes ago
David O'Sullivan and the legal panel, Advocate Mannie Witz, Attorney Khanya Jele and Judge Chris Greenland discuss OP's defence to the charge of murder. This panel is post Judge Masipa's decision and discussing defense strategy before next Tuesdays Order.

 

[TessaG]

Hi there TessaG and welcome to WS :welcome:

Just a friendly tip. When you quote someone's post, try and remember to include the last quote sign at the end of their post, otherwise we can't see where their quote ends and your post begins. You've got the first quote sign included, but you're missing the one right at the end of the post you're quoting, this one...

Thanks, Soozie, I wondered why everyone elses quotes were highligted:floorlaugh:
Don't do much of this t'internet social networking lark, green as a cabbage, me.
Thanks for the welcome, too.

 

[sicknote]

An aggressive intruder wouldn't hide and corner himself behind a locked toilet door. An aggressive intruder would've crawled though that window with guns-a-blazing!

Unless he was bursting for a s***.:facepalm: