Trial Discussion Thread #51 - 14.11.9, Day 41 ~announcement of the verdict~

[Greater Than]

This is beyond disappointing.

I'm at a loss for words.

 

[MeeBee]

Well, for a start.... "accident"?

There was no accident here. She acknowledged that.

And secondly - are you honestly saying that it ought to be perfectly understandable for a man to think someone is in his toilet, ignore any means of escape and choose to blast them to death without giving them at least an option to surrender? Or even warn them that you have a gun?

Yes, I know that various posters are thinking "Well, I have said this all along....CH", and see this as some kind of vindication. It's not. I think you are wrong, and I think Masipa is wrong. She misunderstood the test for Eventualis.

And an awful lot of experts online are agreeing.

This whole things is a disgrace.

This post was aimed at MeeBee. Forgot to include the quote.

You, a layman, think an experienced and educated South African judge misunderstood a point of South African law? OK then!

 

[Sherbert]

Yep. At no time she say that his version was "true and reliable".

She did say that the State had presented no evidence that disproved OP's [many] defences/versions beyond a reasonable doubt, though. She said the onus is on the State to prove their case, not the accused.

Yes, and her use of the description 'peculiar' should, IMO, dispel reasonable doubt.

 

[DebinGA]

If OP gets off with this I actually think his life might be in danger such is the apparent disgust in SA and we know this is a 'gun happy' state.

OP was paranoid before murdering Reeva, so it's satisfying to think he'll be looking over his shoulder the rest of his life.

 

[LaLaw2000]

I take comfort in the belief that uber-narcissist OP will find life without constant adulation/affirmation a living hell.

OP's life will not end well, IMO. This will happen again or he will get drunk & angry and kill someone. His anger is too consuming and dark for him to ever again live a charmed life. Life as he knew it is over, IMO.

 

[Interested Bystander]

This is beyond disappointing.

I'm at a loss for words.

Interestingly I read last week comments that Masipa was a novice with respect to this type of case. I am sure some of you will also have read this. I would love to know whether she and the assessors all agreed.

 

[JudgeJudi]

Clear IMO now that no acquittal. Only question is CH vs eventualis - I think she'll go for the latter. Don't forget the medical evidence which she put to one side and said she will come back to. Would be v surprised if that got him off the hook tho

I didn't understand when she mentioned Saayman saying Reeva would have only taken a couple of breaths after the head shot and wouldn't have been able to scream. What she didn't mention was that Saayman said he would have been surprised if she hadn't screamed after being shot in the hip. Big difference in my opinion.

 

[believe09]

This is interesting to me-there are a plethora of legal experts reporting that she misunderstood the law or misapplied it. They are not laypersons. They heard the same evidence and know the same law.

 

[G.bng]

I'm not sure judge will find OP guilty of culpable homicide either.

I'm mystified that she found him a very poor, inconsistent and dishonest witness, but totally accepts his version of events?

Not quite I think. IMO she accepted his physical version of events because they fit the timeline created by independent call data and which proves bard that witnesses could not have heard Reeva screaming which was the most important part of the State's case for her murder premeditated or otherwise. The State on the other hand ignored the timeline since not least because using independent data and not speculation, conjecture and guesses there was no way it could fit their case so they washed over it as if it never existed.

But Masipa has not AFAICS accepted OP's stated intentions and has not only called him a dishonest witness who was not candid with the court but one who had adapted answers in respect of his intentions, state of mind at the time, etc. according to how it could affect the verdict.

 

[Sherbert]

You, a layman, think an experienced and educated South African judge misunderstood a point of South African law? OK then!

Why not? Judges make errors all the time. That is precisely why a Defendant has a right of appeal.

 

[LemonMousse]

I think Minor4th is incorrect.

True, the state couldn't prove intent to kill Reeva. On balance, I think that was correct.

But they did prove intent to kill the intruder....and intent to kill ANYONE is murder.

She forgot the "human being" part (which an intruder would be) and applied every test to the contention that he was specifically trying to kill Reeva.

I think that is wrong. And I think this will become very clear over the next few days.

 

[04009margaret]

The one point I can't get over & it also seems the experts are in agreement, is that she stated OP firing 4 bullets into the toilet door, he could not foresee that he could kill somebody. That in itself is a disgrace

 

[DebinGA]

If OP is convicted of culpable homicide or one of the gun charges, can he ever legally carry a gun again? I'd like to think not.

 

[zwiebel]

Did anyone hear on whoop who it was who has just said verdict so far reflects badly on SA legal system? Was it someone important or high profile?

 

[geevee]

The courtroom seal is up.

 

[Really?]

OP's a living legend, I think we underestimated this. :shame:

......and.......she has a mad crush on either OP himself....or.....Roux....moo

 

[LemonMousse]

What precisely is the appeals process for if a judge is always, always correct.

Plenty of verdicts get overturned on appeal.

 

[christee]

For me it all comes down to the choices OP made. He chose to make his way down the long hallway to the bathroom to confront an "intruder". He chose NOT to reach for Reeva's hand and escape through his bedroom door a few feet away.

I know the choice I would make.

 

[Lux et Veritas]

Dear God. How did this woman get to be a judge on the High Court?

Seriously, If I was on trial, I’d trust 99.9% of you here to judge me rather than Masipa.

 

[ColonelMustard]

I have been reading all of this and I am extremely angry.......this is exactly what is wrong with the world today..........our politically correct legal systems in the western world. Common sense has gone out the window and the prosecution must bend over backwards and then do cartwheels as well to prove "beyond reasonable doubt"................well I say, the word "reasonable" needs to be re-established and based on common sense. Too many of these murderers and that is what they are, are getting off because of these strict guidelines. We don't want to go back to times when people were executed for ridiculous reasons, but like many other things in this world, the freaking do gooders have taken it too far the other way................and what is lost in all of this is the rights of the victims of the crime........I am furious.

Great post I heard a lawyer here in the US say recently that juries interpret "reasonable doubt" as ANYTHING they can think of that MIGHt have happened. Well, that can be anything anyone can imagine, which is EVERYTHING

He said they are supposed to use the facts and their common sense asking themselves IS there a REASON to doubt. That made sense to me.