Trial Discussion Thread #47 - 14.07.8, Day 38

[AJ_DS]

From that link: "Once a date has been allocated a date will be given to the parties on which they have to submit their heads of argument which is a summary of the grounds of appeal and where the court a quoerred as well as a complete list of the case law relied upon in arguing that the SCA should come to a different finding"

So the "heads of arguments" are "summary of the grounds of appeal" plus case law and not the closing arguments given at the end of trial?

BiB… No, no, no

Heads of arguments = closing arguments… has nothing to do with the Appeal process

In the Appeal process, both parties also produce Heads of arguments, but very different ones… these would summarize why the Appeal should be granted or rejected and NOT why the accused is innocent or guilty

 

[buntspecht]

Sunday Night video:

in the reconstruction, where OP is not only talking, but playing/being him, why didn't he became emotional?

 

[Lochlynsmom]

Not a difficult thing to produce a bunch of affidavits of Defence witnesses that state that :

1) they refused to testify because of the media circus around the OP Trial.

2) their testimony and evidence would have been relevant and probative.

I suspect those affidavits are already signed.

I suppose, I am not familiar with the SA appeals process and how tough the burden would be.

 

[AJ_DS]

I suppose, I am not familiar with the SA appeals process and how tough the burden would be.

Just to clarify… I believe OP will do anything and everything possible… it WILL buy him some time out of prison… but it MIGHT NOT keep him from eventually having to serve his sentence in prison.

 

[Interested Bystander]

The DT must really be worried about what the verdict is going to be then, if they have ensured they've put a few things out there for an appeal. If they were that confident (and confident that OP was telling the truth) then they wouldn't even need to be doing this.


Desperation, that's what it is .. and to use something like the trial being televised and putting off witnesses is just ridiculous .. they don't think that this would've been looked into at the start of the trial? The judge has been so careful throughout to ensure that OP received a fair trial .. even allowing stuff which really did not ought to have been allowed .. she surely wouldn't have let a simple thing like this to have been available as a reason for appeal, therefore my view is that it will be dismissed.

Maybe the recent TV programme was aired to add to the pressure. I am very cynical. I note Uncle has been missing for a couple of days. No doubt he didn't want to be questioned by the press as to his involvement.

 

[Nausicaa]

Not a difficult thing to produce a bunch of affidavits of Defence witnesses that state that :

1) they refused to testify because of the media circus around the OP Trial.

Agreed.

2) their testimony and evidence would have been relevant and probative.

Not agreed. The opinion of a witness as to the relevance and credibility of his testimony is always valueless, even if he does give evidence, let alone when he doesn't. Only the court is competent to decide whether evidence is relevant and convincing or not.

I suspect those affidavits are already signed.

You may be right. But on the other hand they may turn out to be as insubstantial as the precedents (for the right to interrogate a State witness) Roux claimed to have only yesterday, before admitting that he hadn't really got any after all.

In my view, if such witnesses are brought forward, they will have to be very specific about the nature of the evidence they intended to give. And I really don't see what it could usefully be. After what we have seen so far I'd be expecting any other defence witnesses to be either family and friends or more psychobabble.

 

[eimajjjj]

I doubt Masipa will not allow appeals

("It’s very unlikely that the application will be refused because in asmuch as Masipa will feel confident in her handling of the matter and her judgment she will also know that the appeal process is a natural step in trial process and a full bench of 3/5 judges could find differently to her")

i.e. if she denies the appeal process there's a bigger chance he'll get off in a larger appeal to the Supreme court where there are more judges to convince.

Thus, I guess the question we all have (and the answer hopefully to be in the affirmative) is can OP be put away for the gun charges at least so his lengthy appeal process can't keep him roaming around as a freeman and will take place from inside? (if found guilty of murder,of course).

This could be a great compromise for Masipa. She knows that she won't close the appeal process but if she can get him put away for the gun charges while he makes his murder appeal, there's somewhat more justice there.

Otherwise yes, it seems justice will be on the back burner for another year or so.

 

[JudgeJudi]

The Oscar Pistorius mental evaluation report by a psychologist, banned from publication by the South African high court, appears in graphic detail in at least one local newspaper this weekend, in spite of the court order that banned its publication in the “public domain.”

According to the newspaper that claimed this publication coup, all it took was “an agreement” with the blade-runner’s legal team to be able to publish. The same newspaper also highlights a controversial “secret video” that has surfaced on social media over the weekend.

The City Press article published today states that they (City Press) were given permission by Judge Masipa on Friday “to publish a redacted version in terms of the agreement reached.”

http://guardianlv.com/2014/07/oscar-pistorius-psychologist-report-published-in-spite-of-court-ban/

So this is how the DT are trying to defend him now - showing this report to the world to counter the video. All I can say is that I'm not at all surprised that the names have been blacked out because it's so obvious that they're all family and friends IMO. It's plain that OP has told lies to this doctor. A number of things jumped out at me immediately.

I've had enough and I'm going to bed now. Enjoy your evening everyone. :bedtime:

 

[Viper]

The DT must really be worried about what the verdict is going to be then, if they have ensured they've put a few things out there for an appeal. If they were that confident (and confident that OP was telling the truth) then they wouldn't even need to be doing this.


Desperation, that's what it is .. and to use something like the trial being televised and putting off witnesses is just ridiculous .. they don't think that this would've been looked into at the start of the trial? The judge has been so careful throughout to ensure that OP received a fair trial .. even allowing stuff which really did not ought to have been allowed .. she surely wouldn't have let a simple thing like this to have been available as a reason for appeal, therefore my view is that it will be dismissed.

I have to Agree with you on this. For Masipa to grant an appeal based on her own decision to allow the trial to be televised makes no sense. I cannot remember whether or not Roux objected to it at the start of the trial, anyone???

Most comments support her automatically granting an appeal but I feel that is inappropriate. There are hundreds of thousands of convicts sitting in prison right now who are begging their trial judges to grant an appeal, and their applications are constantly denied. OP is not special, he is just an oddity when it comes to SA murderers that's all.

 

[Lochlynsmom]

Just to clarify… I believe OP will do anything and everything possible… it WILL buy him some time out of prison… but it MIGHT NOT keep him from eventually having to serve his sentence in prison.

Especially if he is relying on his stellar defense team for the appeal.

 

[G.bng]

The DT must really be worried about what the verdict is going to be then, if they have ensured they've put a few things out there for an appeal. If they were that confident (and confident that OP was telling the truth) then they wouldn't even need to be doing this.


Desperation, that's what it is .. and to use something like the trial being televised and putting off witnesses is just ridiculous .. they don't think that this would've been looked into at the start of the trial? The judge has been so careful throughout to ensure that OP received a fair trial .. even allowing stuff which really did not ought to have been allowed .. she surely wouldn't have let a simple thing like this to have been available as a reason for appeal, therefore my view is that it will be dismissed.

Bit late in the day for Johnson's telephone number and Burger's photo though. And let's face it every time a witness came in there were frantic attempts here and in other blogs to find a photo, a cv, i.e. glean anything and everything possible about them.

Personally, I can only say I hope the UK system of pre-trial total media blackout continues. It seems fairer to me although no doubt many Brits, especially many on here, would prefer otherwise.

 

[Cherwell]

Misleading comment in the Telegraph, listing GAD as one of the reasons why Pistorius might be acquitted.

3) Pistorius suffered from a Generalised Anxiety Disorder, a psychiatrist who evaluated him found, which along with his disability may have made him react more extremely to a perceived threat.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...-10-reasons-why-he-is-guilty-or-innocent.html

 

[pandax81]

Hmmm, I was looking at Scholtz's psychology report.

On the Personality Assessment Inventory test, there are about 20 results and 3 noteworthy scores (Scholtz says scores of 50-70 are normal):

• Depression is 78
• Stress is 73
• not really a surprise given the post-incident circumstances

• Warmth is 35. This means OP measures significantly low on this test of warmth, outside the normal range, and in fact this is the standout result in terms of the numbers.
  [*]The report states: "Warmth (WRM) - The WRM scale provides a measure of the extent to which an individual is empathic and engaging versus withdrawing, rejecting and mistrustful in interpersonal relationships. Item content involves being sociable, sympathetic, affectionate, and patient with others."

Whilst there is specific discussion about lots of the other results, this particular test result of warmth is ignored completely by Scholtz...

 

[soozieqtips]

I have to Agree with you on this. For Masipa to grant an appeal based on her own decision to allow the trial to be televised makes no sense. I cannot remember whether or not Roux objected to it at the start of the trial, anyone???

Most comments support her automatically granting an appeal but I feel that is inappropriate. There are hundreds of thousands of convicts sitting in prison right now who are begging their trial judges to grant an appeal, and their applications are constantly denied. OP is not special, he is just an oddity when it comes to SA murderers that's all.

BBM - that's why I said I wondered if the judge could legally refuse a grant for appeal. Surely OP won't appeal the gun charges? Can the judge refuse an appeal for those and allow an appeal for the killing? That way, OP could go to jail for one of the charges and await an appeal for the other. It just doesn't sit right that Reeva's family should have to tolerate his indefinite freedom when he's the reason Reeva's life ended in a toilet. How can they ever move on if he's allowed to roam free for years?

 

[believe09]

You don't need me to weigh in here-it has been such a pleasure reading all of these thoughtful, insightful, analytical posts. Thank you for helping me navigate everything associated with the SA justice system and providing such clear links to resources world wide.

Some foolish woman will attach herself to OP, no question. Look at all of the women who attached themselves to OJ. How bad must you feel about yourself to start a relationship with someone who slaughtered the one before you? More than that, bringing the possibility of children into the mix...it is almost too much for me to bear. There were a series of articles done on OJ's children and family around the anniversary of the murders-how can someone with any kind of compassion or conscience even consider bringing a child into that kind of spotlight? OJ's entire family fractured and melted down from what I can see. It seems to me that the story is the same every time-the defendant's loved ones live in the day to day moment inside of a bubble. Once the trial is over and the verdict rendered, they have to turn around and get back to their lives. They have to reflect and process and acknowledge everything they just witnessed. All of the things they may not know about their loved one. His sister may be helpmate and laughing and whatever now, but it will change unless she is similar in her mental mind set. jmo.

 

[Cherwell]

Bit late in the day for Johnson's telephone number and Burger's photo though. And let's face it every time a witness came in there were frantic attempts here and in other blogs to find a photo, a cv, i.e. glean anything and everything possible about them.

I agree that private citizens are entitled to their privacy.

But if someone is on the stand as an expert witness, I feel that they are fair game, certainly if they have an online website or cv.

 

[believe09]

Right on the money, don't you think? Tough to spin away his lack of empathy.

Hmmm, I was looking at Scholtz's psychology report.

On the Personality Assessment Inventory test, there are about 20 results and 3 noteworthy scores (Scholtz says scores of 50-70 are normal):

• Depression is 78
• Stress is 73
• not really a surprise given the post-incident circumstances

• Warmth is 35. This means OP measures significantly low on this test of warmth, outside the normal range, and in fact this is the standout result in terms of the numbers.
  [*]The report states: "Warmth (WRM) - The WRM scale provides a measure of the extent to which an individual is empathic and engaging versus withdrawing, rejecting and mistrustful in interpersonal relationships. Item content involves being sociable, sympathetic, affectionate, and patient with others."

Whilst there is specific discussion about lots of the other results, this particular test result of warmth is ignored completely by Scholtz...

 

[buntspecht]

BBM - that's why I said I wondered if the judge could legally refuse a grant for appeal. Surely OP won't appeal the gun charges? Can the judge refuse an appeal for those and allow an appeal for the killing? That way, OP could go to jail for one of the charges and await an appeal for the other. It just doesn't sit right that Reeva's family should have to tolerate his indefinite freedom when he's the reason Reeva's life ended in a toilet. How can they ever move on if he's allowed to roam free for years?

Dexter would appreciate it if oscar would be free for some time:drumroll:

 

[Viper]

BBM - that's why I said I wondered if the judge could legally refuse a grant for appeal. Surely OP won't appeal the gun charges? Can the judge refuse an appeal for those and allow an appeal for the killing? That way, OP could go to jail for one of the charges and await an appeal for the other. It just doesn't sit right that Reeva's family should have to tolerate his indefinite freedom when he's the reason Reeva's life ended in a toilet. How can they ever move on if he's allowed to roam free for years?

Masipa can do whatever she likes after closing arguments. There is no rule of law that requires her to grant an appeal. I would be shocked if she did.

All of this discussion by attorneys to the contrary of the above is just more added drama for consumer consumption; like watching a CNN legal discussion show. Now if CapeTwnCrim or Trooper were to say otherwise, that would be a different matter, I trust them!

 

[AJ_DS]

Agreed.

Not agreed. The opinion of a witness as to the relevance and credibility of his testimony is always valueless, even if he does give evidence, let alone when he doesn't. Only the court is competent to decide whether evidence is relevant and convincing or not.

You may be right. But on the other hand they may turn out to be as insubstantial as the precedents (for the right to interrogate a State witness) Roux claimed to have only yesterday, before admitting that he hadn't really got any after all.

In my view, if such witnesses are brought forward, they will have to be very specific about the nature of the evidence they intended to give. And I really don't see what it could usefully be. After what we have seen so far I'd be expecting any other defence witnesses to be either family and friends or more psychobabble.

BiB 1… Naturally… I meant that the DT (not the witness) would argue that what those witnesses had to offer would have been credible, reliable, relevant, probative and useful for the Defence.

BiB 2… When evaluating the grounds for granting an Appeal, Judges are not as strict as you suggest… they are looking for a reasonable possibility.