Trial Discussion Thread #46 - 14.07.7, Day 37

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
G.bng said:
Strange because the DT seems to be saying they never got it!
Click to expand...

I think they said they had the one page, but had no idea if it was the full report. Then Nel said it was.?
 
:
Val1 said:
Didn't her folks say that a year ago.... as her mom said, it's their religion to forgive, though she certainly wants to face him and get to the truth. Even though the bible spouts forgiveness, it also says an eye for an eye and the first step to forgiveness is atonement.
Click to expand...

I think she may have....perhaps the local newspaper has just rehashed old news.....it's known to happen
 
ColonelMustard said:
The definition of "running": IMHO

Derman is the only person who used a "technical" definition of running ( i.e., both feet off the ground), which I think is probably an important distinction in science/research.

Before he got here everyone knew what running meant when Oscar said he "ran." I humbly suggest that that common parlance use of the term "to run" is the more appropriate one to use in most general discussions about the case.
Click to expand...

I'd have expected a man of science to actually have measured OP's speed of movement on his stumps regardless of what the technical definition is.
 
G.bng said:
Strange because the DT seems to be saying they never got it!
Click to expand...

I thought the DT said they only got a one page report.....Nel said that was the full report by the psychiatrist. The panel's full report was provided to all.
 
As mentioned earlier, I've transcribed the entire video (in handwriting at the moment) but it's going to be absolutely massive. I'm seriously considering basically only posting the relevant bits, most of which are verbatim. I can still include anything I think would be good to have in - comments or thoughts. What do you think? If you've seen the video you know that it's basically all OP's version anyway.
 
Today did not go at all as I had imagined. I thought there would be a long meeting in chambers where they would hash out the leaked video. Then a short finish up with Derman and then DT would rest it's case. NONE of that happened. :waitasec:
 
Neither team is allowed to speak to the court appointed psych & the PT isn't allowed access to the DT's psych, so why on earth would it be fair for Roux to have the access he's requested.
 
Judgejudi said:
As mentioned earlier, I've transcribed the entire video (in handwriting at the moment) but it's going to be absolutely massive. I'm seriously considering basically only posting the relevant bits, most of which are verbatim. I can still include anything I think would be good to have in - comments or thoughts. What do you think? If you've seen the video you know that it's basically all OP's version anyway.
Click to expand...

That is AMAZING. wow.

I think breaking it up into most relevant bits makes most sense. ?
 
Judgejudi said:
As mentioned earlier, I've transcribed the entire video (in handwriting at the moment) but it's going to be absolutely massive. I'm seriously considering basically only posting the relevant bits, most of which are verbatim. I can still include anything I think would be good to have in - comments or thoughts. What do you think? If you've seen the video you know that it's basically all OP's version anyway.
Click to expand...

just do a brief piece covering the vital aspects by point is what I'd do
 
katydid23 said:
Today did not go at all as I had imagined. I thought there would be a long meeting in chambers where they would hash out the leaked video. Then a short finish up with Derman and then DT would rest it's case. NONE of that happened. :waitasec:
Click to expand...

You should know by now that you can never predict what will happen next in this circus, LOL.
 
G.bng said:
BIB
But isn't that the whole point? Had the State not called Mangena, Saayman, Van der Nest, etc then it would have been the DT's right to call them if they wanted.

Right or wrong that is what Roux is arguing and it IMO it sounds correct unless there is a legal exception or a precedent saying that psychs appointed (and they are chosen by each side) to carry out a Mental State at Time of Offece Order are excepted witnesses to the rule.

IDK, difficult conundrum for Masipa if no precedent since she risks an appeal on that basis and a retrial if the appeal panel thought her refusal to allow it was incorrect.
Click to expand...

the timing within the case is different here though. i.e. this 'state witness' is a new witness whose evidence has come to light after the state has rested. i guess nel wants to hold 'first choice' for if/when he re-opens the prosecution case. and if he doesn't use the witness when re-opening, [or doesn't re-open] then the defence cannot use the witness at all.

tricky one [if i understand it correctly]
 
ColonelMustard said:
The definition of "running": IMHO

Derman is the only person who used a "technical" definition of running ( i.e., both feet off the ground), which I think is probably an important distinction in science/research.

Before he got here everyone knew what running meant when Oscar said he "ran." I humbly suggest that that common parlance use of the term "to run" is the more appropriate one to use in most general discussions about the case.
Click to expand...

To make it easier maybe, but it wouldn't surprise me if in the judgement Masipa always puts quotes around "run" or "running" or at very least gives an explanation that when the judgement refers to "running" it is OP's running. Since if there were an appeal the panel of judges that look at it would not necessarily know the true situation. And as I posted before IMHO if you look closely at the video what OP does is more akin to marathon walkers, (and they can really walk fast), who are not permitted to have both feet off the ground at any time which is why they need to develop that peculiar swing of the hips which is precisely what allows them to walk very fast and still not be running.
 
Forensics said:
No the one page report was the psychiatrist's own summation there was a full report produced by the panel.
Click to expand...

Maybe, but I did hear Roux mention that he did not want to address the psychologists report.We will have to wait for this confusion to be resolved after the lunch break.
 
I keep thinking sooner or later this case has to go back to the fundamental legitimacy of Oscar's response to the "bump in the night."

With putative self defense (if that still is his defense), won't the court take into consideration the reasonableness of Oscar's assumption that it was an intruder in his toilet and his utter failure to consider (or investigate) if it could just perhaps be the other person sharing the relatively confined area of his bedroom and en suite bathroom with him that night?

It seems the defense just keeps piling on excuses for why Oscar is justified in his intruder assumption.

In order of appearance:
1. the high rate of crime in SA (odds are it had to be an intruder);
2. his justifiable paranoia as a physically disabled person (also reiterated by Derman);
3. his own negligence in securing the perimeter of his house after workmen left ladders laying around and his failure to ensure the alarms were working;
4. he has non-significant levels of Generalized Anxiety Disorder which make him hyper-vigilant (or he still suffers from long-term post-amputation PTSD);
5. he has an exaggerated "fight" response because of his physical disabilities which makes him unable to respond rationally to a perceived threat;
6. he had a series of 3 "startles" that sustained this "fight" response over a longer period of time-- into a prolonged episode that continued to trigger his fight response.

This series of startles is really the last ditch effort to explain his lack of rational thought while somehow going through the various deliberate actions of:
a) getting his gun,
b) taking the safety off,
c) approaching the threat with caution,
d) visually searching but not seeing an intruder,
e) upon hearing a noise in the toilet cubicle, however, feels so threatened that he unloads four rounds of black talon bullets. (Of course, he does not accept conscious responsibility for aiming and firing the gun though.)
​

All of these deliberate actions do not add up to someone responding suddenly and uncontrollably to an unexpected or overwhelming fright despite his claims that he "did not have time to think!" He had plenty of time to think, and even if you buy his story, he over-reacted to a perceived threat and killed someone because of it.

No more excuses, Oscar. Time to take responsibility for your actions!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 71 more.
Total: 270 (members: 72, guests: 198)

Online statistics

Members online
72
Guests online
198
Total visitors
270
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
608,899
Messages
18,247,406
Members
234,496
Latest member
Soldownload
Back
Top