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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
N: Why do you think it's significant that OP referred someone to a doctor?

VZ: Because it could have saved a kid's life..

N: But you would do that...most people would do that..
 
N: Bobby Charlton...the athletes became involved to support Bobby's charity work?

VZ: OP did not become involved because there was an overlap...

Nel questioning if OP really did not have time to get involved.
 
N: So the charity (which was the overlap preventing OP from becoming involved with Charlton) wasn't in existence then, in 2013?

Witness agrees it wasn't.
 
Barry Bateman ‏@barrybateman 1m1 minute ago
#OscarTrial Van Zyl: we planned to role out Pistorius’s own foundation in July 2013. BB
 
Nel now asking about Oakley initiative.

Judge list her place: 'Hold on, hold on'.
 
Nel's mentions about the Oakley initiative. There were other sports stars present. He was obliged to take part.

VZ says Impossible to Possible. Oakley nominated that charity, not OP.
 
N: There were other athletes involved and Oakley was his sponsor, he had to support it?

VZ: That's correct.
 
It's a disgrace for this guy to mention a landmine charity, when OP has blown a young woman's body to pieces with black talon bullets.
 
Nel is saying it's a matter of course for athletes to be involved with charity events, not peculiar.

VZ says you can leverage and contribute.
 
N: I'm not saying OP was not involved in charitable events, just saying it's a matter of course for athletes?

VZ concedes it is commonplace for athletes.
 
OP was only added in June when he was invited to attend the Olympics.
 
No idea where Nel is going with this. I'm assuming he's trying to dismiss Van Zyl's testimony as basically a fabricated curriculum vitae for OP with all the work that he's stated OP done but never actually done.

.. yes, that is what he is trying to do .. he is also trying to get across that OP is not indispensable, as Vz is trying to make out that he is.. Nel is trying to get across that these charities are doing perfectly ok without OP now, other athletes are involved and they don't actually need Pistorius. Also that most of the stuff Vz has highlighted about Pistorius's work is nothing over and above what any other ordinary person would've done.

I don't think Milady is getting any of this stuff though ..
 
N: OP was invited to become a United Nations goodwill ambassador.
 
I think Nel is labouring the points way to long. I think the court (as well as the audience, including us) is fully aware what Nel is correctly doing and he should move on.
 
Talking about international Inspiration charity now.

VZ: The reason why OP was only added in June was because he's only just competed in Olympics...they wanted to elevate it to the next level..
 
Now we are talking about Oakley campaign (Pistoirus is sponsared by Oakley sunglasses meaning he would be presumably committed to this campaign contractually) at that each athlete would nominate a specific charity that they would give funds too.

Pistorius choose: ‘Impossible to Possible’ which was one of Oakley’s suggestions. The athlete was too busy to reply which means and Oakley made the choice. Nel calls this 'being busy' an “excuse.”

Nel wants to stress to Van Zyl that’s it’s a matter of choice for most athletes will be involved in charity, this is not special to Pistorius.
Van Zyl agrees, states high profile athletes use their “leverage” for charity.
 
Nel doesn't want to deal with every page. He came across duplications of pages, and letters.
 
Nel mentions the invitation for OP to be a goodwill ambassador, that many people are asked to be that.

Nel says he's going to move on. I think that's fortunate because he seems to be floundering to me?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
195
Guests online
1,809
Total visitors
2,004

Forum statistics

Threads
600,855
Messages
18,114,790
Members
230,990
Latest member
DeeKay
Back
Top