Trial Discussion Thread #52 - 14.11.9, Day 41 ~announcement of the verdict~

[Val1]

[emoji26] Poor Reeva. She really seemed like she was just as beautiful inside as she was on the outside. From those who knew her, she was sweet, smart, and caring. She was an advocate for domestic violence victims, and in my opinion, would have really made a difference in this world.. She was exceptional, in the fact that she was a good person. She cared about other people, which is a rare quality nowadays. All only my opinion.

Add to that being a lawyer she would have known that the best evidence, just in case, is a trail of messages or pics that the authorities could use as evidence, another bit that was overlooked. I don't think she wrote those messages just for OP but also as a record.

 

[Lux et Veritas]

Forget Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde.

The Strange Case of Dr. Masipa and Mr. Pistorius.

 

[Harmony 2]

Mod note:
Direct quotes from articles need to be linked to the source. Any posts with direct quotes that are missing links will be removed. Moreover, information from tabloid newspapers are not allowed here... thanks

 

[ColonelMustard]

"Twitter explodes as Pistorius is cleared of murder charges, final verdict still to come"

http://www.tnp.sg/news/twitter-explodes-pistorius-cleared-murder-charges-final-verdict-still-come

(Open the link, if only to check out the pictureI)

 

[Val1]

OK… let us assume the 3:02 from annette Stipp is wrong

Show me how you get to 3:12 based on the evidence… working backwards as you say

That's simple, get Nel to agree to 3:17 as the time of the second shots(nvm that he clarified that by saying that was approximate) then believe OP when he says it took him about five minutes inbetween.

 

[AJ_DS]

I just clued in my husband to the blatant blunders of today (I am South African and have been following every single day of the trial, and my husband is american and hasn't been following the trial at all, just through me). My husband's response was: I get why you are upset, but aren't you taking this a bit too serious?? Who cares about OP, he is going to suffer for the rest of his life.

I guess it is true, but still, I wanted to see real justice served...

LOL… I just picture the scene in my head…

Stop pestering your husband with matters that don't interest him (kidding)

It's a bit like some guys get all riled up when their favorite sports team play badly or loose the game… I get why you are upset, but aren't you taking this a bit too serious?? Who cares about sports !!

 

[Lux et Veritas]

and look at the time it took...at every possible moment the judge was granting delays...not days but weeks on end and Roux was never ready with witnesses....the whole thing sure did not impress me and in fact made me have a higher regard for our jury system. As much as I'd like to see OP held 100% accountable given the situation I don't think it will happen with appeals etc. and wonder if the Steenkamp family should just try to accept the system and try to move on. I know that sounds stupid...but Mr. Steenkamp's health is not great and I think they have just been through enough...I think at some point OP will get his due someway...just like OJ. I hop the earlier comments are true that he will be unable to resume his sports hero life.

No decent athletics competition in the world would ever again have him. Since the day he killed Reeva, he's been summarily ignored by every SA and international athletics association. (Don't you believe that his agent van Zyl cancelled all his competitions - they were cancelled for him. LOL) Murder is a marketing nightmare.

He murdered not only Reeva, but his own career on Feb 14 2013. Indeed, that very day, SA billboards displaying OP were ripped down.

Competition and sports sponsorships were his LIFE.

Whatever the final verdict, what "life" does he now have?

He'll be a bitter, angry, dissolute playboy, looking for trouble to occupy his time.

No doubt he will find it.

 

[Viper]

BBM

What makes you believe that? The judge has full discretion and she has the discretion to give him no jail time at all. She's already meandered into a nonsensical view, so what clues do we have that she will actually punish OP with a prison sentence, let alone a "heavy" prison sentence?

Because it is the just thing to do. This judge may not be the brightest bulb in the box, she just runs through the legalities and checks off the boxes. But she stopped today and found a box that offended her, something that went against the law, and she declared that OP was negligent as regards to CH. She is well known for handing down harsh sentences to criminals, I cannot believe that this criminal will be treated any differently. And I am on record as understanding that Masipa is not the last stop in this criminal justice train ride for Pistorius, she is just the first conductor.

 

[geevee]

Isn't Darren Fresco's indeminity supposed to be handled tomorrow? I wonder what the global opinion will be if he's denied indemnity yet Oscar's story is believed lock, stock and barrel.

Maybe he'll get a longer sentence than OP, nothing would surprise at this point.

 

[vanatos]

He'll be a bitter, angry, dissolute playboy, looking for trouble to occupy his time.

No doubt he will find it.

He comes from old money, maybe socially people will give him crap, but he wont lack for food, shelter or luxury.

And there won't be a lack of girls willing to be attached to someone with old money.

 

[ColonelMustard]

"Judge Masipa Got It Wrong"

http://www.iol.co.za/news/judge-masipa-got-it-wrong-1.1749695#.VBJfGlaztNw

For those of us sharing this view, it's a great article.

 

[Z&BsMommy]

Add to that being a lawyer she would have known that the best evidence, just in case, is a trail of messages or pics that the authorities could use as evidence, another bit that was overlooked. I don't think she wrote those messages just for OP but also as a record.

I never thought of that but I think you're absolutely right! That's heartbreaking [emoji20]

 

[Z&BsMommy]

Because it is the just thing to do. This judge may not be the brightest bulb in the box, she just runs through the legalities and checks off the boxes. But she stopped today and found a box that offended her, something that went against the law, and she declared that OP was negligent as regards to CH. She is well known for handing down harsh sentences to criminals, I cannot believe that this criminal will be treated any differently. And I am on record as understanding that Masipa is not the last stop in this criminal justice train ride for Pistorius, she is just the first conductor.

My God, I pray you are right.

 

[mister happy]

He comes from old money, maybe socially people will give him crap, but he wont lack for food, shelter or luxury.

And there won't be a lack of girls willing to be attached to someone with old money.

I agree. He's going to be comfortable in luxury, and his family thinks the world of him. Plus, Oscar will always have an inner circle of friends, as well as his hardcore fans. There will be no lack of people coddling Oscar. Then there are those gold digging females who want a piece of his cash, and don't care about the potential danger they may be in. Is he still with the new girlfriend?

 

[Madeleine74]

Because it is the just thing to do. This judge may not be the brightest bulb in the box, she just runs through the legalities and checks off the boxes. But she stopped today and found a box that offended her, something that went against the law, and she declared that OP was negligent as regards to CH. She is well known for handing down harsh sentences to criminals, I cannot believe that this criminal will be treated any differently. And I am on record as understanding that Masipa is not the last stop in this criminal justice train ride for Pistorius, she is just the first conductor.

BBM.

That would be nice, but as I've observed so many times, the law isn't about the "just" thing to do, it depends on who is interpreting the law and there's a subjective component to it, and an emotional component to it, even with judges who are supposed to be deciding only on the evidence and considering all the evidence. This judge dismissed large chunks of evidence and chooses to believe OP's version of events even while at the same time claiming distrust of his version of events. She speaks with mighty forked tongue.

 

[ColonelMustard]

I didn't watch until the end last night. I was too disgusted.

Reading the posts, here today, though, it seems like after lunch she spoke for 18(?) minutes and then got up and left things hanging.

I can't imagine that judges do things just for dramatic effect, do they? Maybe they do?

If not, why would she stop? Was there really not enough time for her to finish at least this one charge?

 

[Suthrnqt]

So, what's the consensus here at WS? Will Pistorius be found guilty of any wrong doing? And if so, what do you think the sentence will be??

 

[turaj]

So, what's the consensus here at WS? Will Pistorius be found guilty of any wrong doing? And if so, what do you think the sentence will be??

Yes CH with minimum sentence not including actual prison time and probably some fines for the gun offenses.

 

[DebinGA]

The judge saw Reeva's autopsy pics (presumably). She heard Capt. Mangena describe the effect of hollow point bullets mushrooming inside her body. She left her seat to stand before the wc cubicle replica during Thomas Wolmarans' testimony to view the trajectory of the 4 bullets ... and still found that OP wouldn't have known that shooting 4 talons/rangers into that tiny space would likely wound or kill whoever was there. She says the shots were rapid, but she heard both Mangena and Wolmarans testify that OP changed position, i.e. moved as he fired, and that each shot required a separate pull of the trigger.

 

[Mr Fossil]

Oscar Pistorius Trial: Thursday 11 September 2014, Session 3 from 50:52

There is no doubt that when the accused fired shots through the toilet door he acted unlawfully. There was no intruder. Instead, the person behind the door was the deceased and she was dead.

I now deal with Dolus Eventualis or legal intent.

The question is:

1) Did the accused subjectively foresee that it could be the deceased behind the toilet door?

and

2) Notwithstanding the foresight, did he then fire the shots, thereby reconciling himself to the possibility that it could be the deceased in the toilet?

The evidence before this court does not support the State’s contention that this could be a case of Dolus Eventualis. On the contrary, the evidence shows that from the onset the accused believed that at the time he fired shots into the toilet door the deceased was in the bedroom while the intruders were in the toilet.

This belief was communicated to a number of people shortly after the incident:

- At 03:19 the accused disclosed this to Johan Stander when he requested him to come quickly to his house.

- At 03:22 he told his version to Carice Viljoen on her arrival in the company of her father, Stander.

- A few minutes later the same information was relayed to Dr Stipp when he arrived at the accused’s house.

- And lastly, it was told to the police at about 4 o’clock in the morning the same day.

Council for the Defence argued correctly that it was highly improbable that the accused would have made this up so quickly and be consistent in his version even at the Bail Application before he had access to the police docket and before he was privy to the evidence on behalf of the State at the Bail Application.

The question is: Did the accused foresee the possibility of the resultant death yet persisted in his deed reckless whether death ensured [ensued] or not?

In the circumstances of this case the answer has to be “no”.

How could the accused reasonably have foreseen that the shots he fired would kill the deceased? Clearly he did not subjectively foresee this as a possibility that he would kill the person behind the door let alone the deceased as he thought she was in the bedroom at the time.

To find otherwise would be tantamount to saying that the accused’s reaction, after he realised that he had shot the deceased, was fate; that he was play acting merely to delude the onlookers at the time.

Dr Stipp, an independent witness who was at the accused’s house minutes after the incident had occurred stated that the accused looked genuinely distraught as he prayed to God and as he pleaded with him to help save the deceased. There was nothing to gainsay that observation and this Court has not been given any reason to reject it and we accept it as true and reliable.

It follows that the accused’s erroneous belief that his life was in danger excludes Dolus. The accused therefore cannot be found guilty of murder Dolus Eventualis.

That however is not the end of the matter as Culpable Homicide is a competent verdict.