Trial Discussion Thread #44 - 14.07.1-2, Day 34-35

[jay-jay]

Come back, Dixon! All is forgiven! lease:

 

[zwiebel]

Newsflash: low fear individuals respond differently to high fear individuals!

 

[zwiebel]

Oh no. Onto next paper now.

 

[Giles]

Is he still doing this? I thought it was just a slip of the tongue earlier. No, it can't be used interchangeably .. 'fight' is just that .. 'fight' .. the whole point of the phenomenon is that you either 'take flight' or you 'stay and fight'

Yes, still doing it. Sometimes he says "fight/flight" and other times "fight/fright".

 

[katydid23]

I bet the standard psych tests don't include those for 'startle disorder'. So would be basis for appeal maybe? If OP could only be diagnosed with it....but who could possibly do that?

Who doesn't have 'startle disorder'? I was at Starbucks this morning, and someone knocked over a shelf with cups, which fell and smashed. EVERYONE cringed/jumped/reacted in a startled manner.

 

[zwiebel]

Oh yes. They (I think) def laying groundwork for appeal. Now on about children and enhanced responses with some sort of parental issue or something.

OP's dad's under the bus again.

 

[kaos]

Newsflash: low fear individuals respond differently to high fear individuals!

BOO!!


You're doing a fab job zwiebel, I'd be comatose by now.

 

[G.bng]

He is quoting further studies showing increased risk of attack for people with disabilities.

I notice there is no specifying of 'visible' disabilities. What if, like OP, a disability may not be obvious?

I don't think visibility is the issue here. IMO this expert's testimony is more intended to going towards showing the reasons why a disabled person might feel more vulnerable and consequently the whys for their reactions, if they find themselves in a situation of perceived danger, confrontation, etc.

This could, and I AM NOT SAYING IT WILL, count towards the "reasonable person" criteria Masipa uses if coming to a culpable homicide verdict, since although, as Prof. Grant notes in a couple of his posts, SA law has to date been reluctant to take into account disability as a part of the "reasonable person" criteria, in most modern democratic countries including the UK as the witness has referred to, this is changing as disability rights and promoting the understanding of disability becomes ever more prominent.
JMOSNNFS,I,OR

 

[Cherwell]

Who is this witness again, please? I've lost track.

IARQPOTSTTSIST

 

[jay-jay]

I bet the standard psych tests don't include those for 'startle disorder'. So would be basis for appeal maybe? If OP could only be diagnosed with it....but who could possibly do that?

Well, just like the GAD thing which led to the 30 day assessment, any of this only has any relevance if OP did not knowingly and intentionally kill Reeva. Everything points to the fact he did knowingly and intetionally kill her, therefore this BS is not in the slightest bit relevant.

 

[HauntsForHope]

nope. I promised not to change my tagline until someone goes to jail, but nothing yet.

Good for you, for sticking to it! That lovely child met a grievous end. I surely hope that Hailey gets Justice for having her young life stolen.:twocents:

 

[zwiebel]

O: requests that these two reports to be released into public domain...contain private and personal info...request you grant an order....

But they have already been released into public, judge says, so major problem.

 

[JudgeJudi]

Oldwage is talking about the balance of the reports one of which contains very personal, intimate information and doesn't want it to be released to the public, only the conclusions.

 

[PrimeSuspect]

Oldwadge makes request to the court.

Oldwadge asks Masipa to grant an order prohibiting the publication other than conclusions of the reports.

Masipa grants order.

http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/Oscar_Pistorius/Live/LIVE-UPDATES-Day-36-Pistorius-trial-20140702

 

[zwiebel]

Judge: This is my order as requested by defence...prohibiting publication

Does this mean the world has to delete everything already released?

Crazy. From this moment it can't be published. Even if it has been already. Ridiculous, unenforceable order I think.

 

[katydid23]

What reports? These ones this witness was referring to? The study?

 

[JudgeJudi]

Masipa can only prohibit what has not yet been released.
Oldwage was only informed of this at the conclusion of the lunch break.

So we may yet get to read everything???

Masipa orders, as requested by the defence, prohibiting publication of the contents of those exhibits (reports) apart from the findings that were put on the record. Masipa asks media to be careful.

 

[Val1]

O: requests that these two reports to be released into public domain...contain private and personal info...request you grant an order....

But they have already been released into public, judge says, so major problem.

Quick, did anyone get them before they get locked on us?

 

[Forensics]

What reports? These ones this witness was referring to? The study?

no the psychiatric report I believe.

EWN Reporter @ewnreporter · 1m
#OscarTrial Masipa says can't stop what has been published already but any more details will be in contempt of court. GN

 

[katydid23]

So what are these reports???????????