Trial Discussion Thread #55 - 14.14.10, Day 44 ~ sentencing~

[patCee]

OMG she's reluctant to do her job by knowing, and voicing his version of how the offence happened which is necessary for her to marry that with his circumstances at the time in addition to his background.

 

[zwiebel]

N: You have to take into account seriousness of offence?

AV: That's correct.

 

[lithgow1]

From Bateman:

#OscarTrial Vergeer: I’m there to focus on the accused’s personal circumstances, not go into facts the court made a finding on. BB

 

[kaos]

She's as combative as OP was on the stand. She's giving as good as she's getting though and I thought Nel was going to go easy on her. I wasn't aware she was paid for by the defence though so I'm glad she's getting a hard time.

 

[zwiebel]

N: You stated as a fact he was remorsful...for what?

AV: That he fired the shots that killed the accused..

 

[sleuth-d-]

she mentions 'the seriousness of the offence' many times. [then talks about working with children.]

to me it is a serious offence [even] within the ch spectrum...

 

[zwiebel]

Witness complaining again, ranting on, voice rising to squeak at times. She doesn't know what Nel wants her to answer, she says.

 

[K.T]

“As a probation officer I am there to look at his work history. I am not going into facts the court has made a finding of…”

Nel disagrees, “you have to look at the serious of the offense.”

I wish Nel would ask all these experts what detrimental societal effect of no jail time/custodial sentence, recommended by these two South African judicial officers, means in historical and present context for partner-killing “reckless” or “negligent” crimes, which are outrageously common in South Africa.

 

[zwiebel]

She just said 'the mere fact that his girlfriend had died'

N: So, you say as probation officer you can't be concerned if he was negligent

AV: Correct.

She insists it's not her field of expertise.

 

[jay-jay]

".. the mere fact that his girlfriend died as a result of the gunshots .." .. OMG :facepalm: .. and did you all see the look on June's face??

 

[lithgow1]

Barry Bateman @barrybateman · 14s 14 seconds ago
#OscarTrial Masipa steps in telling Vergeer that we’ll be here for days if she doesn’t listen to the questions. BB

 

[jimmy73]

A good line of questioning by Nel, but one that will likely just get ignored by the Judge and the apologists.

 

[JudgeJudi]

Marc Batchelor is shaking his head and the girl next to him is smiling.

 

[patCee]

Wow! MJ intervenes appropriately asking AV to answer the question, and...... admonishing her that she'll be on the stand all day if she doesn't.:happydance:

 

[zwiebel]

Judge: If I may assist, you may takes days on stand if you don't listen

Judge sets out questions, forces witness to answer.

AV: He shot the deceased.....but not because he intended to kill her

 

[jay-jay]

AV is quite rude. She's been asked a question and should answer it. Masipa looks extremely bored and appears to be doodling something on her notepad. Probably zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

Oh, good .. at long last Masipa is doing something .. chivvying up the witness!

 

[zwiebel]

Nel now asking if she took into account OP armed himself before going to bathroom. Witness says 'therof' in her answer.

 

[zwiebel]

Witness never spoke to Barry and June.

 

[lithgow1]

Barry Bateman
‏@barrybateman
#OscarTrial Nel quotes from Vergeer’s report that she took into account the circumstances of the crime… what specifically? She can’t say. BB

 

[Interested Bystander]

Does anyone else find it odd that she was allowed to work privately for the DT to provide a report? If the DT pays for information this witness must feel obliged in some way and I think that is why she is being so evasive.

It is the DT's job to provide the report but if it is a financially rewarding report there is bound to be some bias. I just do not believe that it would be possible not to make an allowance for the fact that this was a document that was paid for privately and at a high cost. I don't think the DT would accept a report without any bias in favour of their client, in particular this DT. They would go elsewhere if they didn't get what they wanted.