Trial Discussion Thread #58 - 14.17.10, Day 47 ~ sentencing~

[lithgow1]

Very interesting - I read that silence differently - as in, he was thinking to himself - 'why didn't she say anything' - and overcome by the moment.

Something that interests me - and I'd be interested to hear from others - is where OP was actually standing when he shot. I'd always assumed that it was directly in front of the toilet door. But some reconstruction videos I've watched have suggested it was closer to the passageway from the bedroom, and therefore quite a bit away from the door. Anyone able to help me out?

And you could very well be right too Exchange973 - as the reporter said, whatever he was visualising at that moment, no-one else in that courtroom could see it. I can't help you with where exactly he was standing but I'm sure someone will but can anyone recall if at any point he asked 'Who is in there?'. I can't recall that he did, which makes me more confident of my 'guilty Oscar' take on the long pause: he didn't need to ask who was in there because he knew.

 

[LemonMousse]

Very interesting - I read that silence differently - as in, he was thinking to himself - 'why didn't she say anything' - and overcome by the moment.

Something that interests me - and I'd be interested to hear from others - is where OP was actually standing when he shot. I'd always assumed that it was directly in front of the toilet door. But some reconstruction videos I've watched have suggested it was closer to the passageway from the bedroom, and therefore quite a bit away from the door. Anyone able to help me out?

I think Mangena's evidence was that it could have been anywhere between 60cms from the door and the bathroom entrance.

The evidence was not inconsistent with his claim that he was standing in the doorway.

That's if I remember it correctly.

 

[lithgow1]

I've been thinking about this issue of remorse.

I do think he has horrible memories and is traumatised. I do think he has massive regret over it all, but....

...when did he ever direct even the smallest shred of criticism at himself for what happened that night? As far as I can tell, never. His testimony was all about justification - "It was dark. I was scared. I wasn't thinking. I wish Reeva had screamed, but she didn't..." and so on.

If it had been an accident, truly, then it was a shocking one. A normal person would hate themselves...."WHY did I grab the gun? WHY didn't I check Reeva was safe? WHY didn't I stop and think for half a second? What the hell is wrong with me that I would do that?"

Yes, he acknowledged his responsibility when confronted by Nel "Of course I shouldn't have done that....", but he never, ever volunteered it. He displayed NO criticism of himself for any of what he claims happened and an honest person who'd made a terrible mistake would.

And the only explanation I can see is simply because none of it happened. It would take more acting ability than he has to convincingly react to a series of events that are pure invention.

I do believe he's horrified by what he's done....but he can't properly verbalise that because he can't/won't actually admit what he did do. He's had to manufacture events and also manufacture the emotions that go along with them - and they are unconvincing.

Again, JMO.

And again, I think you are pretty spot on. To be a bit of a devil's advocate, I guess his defence of PPD does rely on justification - the reason for killing the person has to be justifiable even if it wasn't justified - I think that's what PDD relies on anyway! So in a way that would explain all the excuses.

But it does also seem to be part of his make-up, this seeming inability to say 'I was wrong' - the whole back and forth about whether he was reckless in leaving his gun on-board on that boat trip would be a good example. Why not just say 'yes, I was an idiot'. Perhaps again that comes back to the bigger picture of not being able to admit to anything in case that then fed back into the main charge. IMO it is probably some combination of the kind of person he is in normal life coupled with the particular circumstances of the trial. That is, he's probably the arrogant privileged and cossetted celebrity who never wants to admit to being in the wrong who's put himself into a situation where he thinks he can't admit to it in any case. Maybe I am thinking too much but in any case I think you make a very good point about it being hard to act out genuine remorse when it is over something that never happened.

 

[Susza]

[rsbm]

Brilliant post!

It would be hard to find a more informed court gallery than here on WS. I've been astounded by the mix of dedication, reasoned insights, patient explanations and obvious humanity of posters like Zwiebel, Mr. Fossil, JudgeJudi, AJ-DS, Lux, Pandax, Jay-Jay, BritsKate, mrjitty and the many others I've neglected to mention.

I'm sure I wasn't alone watching Masipa's judgement and feeling a strange sense that reality had somehow been suspended; in particular, her findings that the ear-witnesses were all mistaken, that the testimony of credible expert witnesses for the PT could be ignored, and, most alarmingly that an incredible accused was genuinely remorseful.

The outrage that followed her judgement, not just on WS and in much of the legal world, but also in the comments sections of almost any online article anywhere in the world make it self-evident that mrjitty has hit the nail in the epicentre of it's head: Masipa got it wrong. The fault lies not in Nel's strategy, Roux's cunning, Oscar's snotty sniveling, or narrow-minded insistence that a bullet hole with a crack through is some wholly incontrovertible Shroud of Turin. The buck stops with Masipa and she'll be doing herself a big favour handing down a stiff sentence. It's her only chance of unwinding the coiled cobra, Gerrie Nel.

Speaking of religious relics (and not meaning to disparage clear-thinking folks of faith), the overwhelming majority of support for OP appears to come from people who are impressed with his public displays of piety: his exhortations to God (rather than paramedics), his humble tweets (while recovering from hangovers) and his his in-court Kumbaya prayer sessions. It's not surprising that they accept his nightclubbing and girl-on-knee bouncing; it's to be expected. It's part of the redemption narrative central to their beliefs. The further he falls the higher he soars.

While I agree that he has lost all that he had (still a droplet in the sea of the Steenkamp's suffering), I'm convinced that he will be welcomed with open arms by those that have stood by him because of their faith, and not because they are expert in reasoning or objectively assessing evidence that refutes their strongly-held beliefs. Whether or not he goes to jail, Pistorius, the convicted killer, will have a long and lucrative career speaking up and down the bible belt, signing autographs for adoring fans, performing miracle cures on the broken and twisted limbs of the devout and, every now and then, if the mood is right and the audience suitably in awe, wailing like a woman possessed.

The tarnished hero will once again fly high on the wings of angels, unless of course he gets a tap on the shoulder from brawny justice down here on earth.

jmho

Thank you all so much for this forum. It's been a welcome voice of reason and, though I've been very quiet, a home of abundant good will and delicious breakfasts throughout this long, amazing trial.

'Til Tuesday, then.

OZe, with this post, for me, you are the cherry on the cake (like we say in french).
I thank you from the bottom of my heart for this incredible post.
You didn't thank me, fortunately!!! Neither neglected me by not mentionning me. Even if I am here since april, I didn't contribute. I couldn't. For several reasons but mainly because I'm an ignorant person in what concerns law and beside this, I don't have the faculty to express myself in a concise way.
But the people here are amazing concerning the knowledge they have and the way they share it.
I feel so happy to experience that there are such dedicated people, with passion for humanity and justice and a great sense of humour - I would never have been able to express this in the adequate words like you did it.
Thank YOU.
Thanks to ALL of you.

 

[LemonMousse]

And again, I think you are pretty spot on. To be a bit of a devil's advocate, I guess his defence of PPD does rely on justification - the reason for killing the person has to be justifiable even if it wasn't justified - I think that's what PDD relies on anyway! So in a way that would explain all the excuses.

But it does also seem to be part of his make-up, this seeming inability to say 'I was wrong' - the whole back and forth about whether he was reckless in leaving his gun on-board on that boat trip would be a good example. Why not just say 'yes, I was an idiot'. Perhaps again that comes back to the bigger picture of not being able to admit to anything in case that then fed back into the main charge. IMO it is probably some combination of the kind of person he is in normal life coupled with the particular circumstances of the trial. That is, he's probably the arrogant privileged and cossetted celebrity who never wants to admit to being in the wrong who's put himself into a situation where he thinks he can't admit to it in any case. Maybe I am thinking too much but in any case I think you make a very good point about it being hard to act out genuine remorse when it is over something that never happened.

Yes, that's true. He did have to explain what happened and why it did, so the justification is still necessary. But it's the total absence of criticism of himself alongside it that is very telling for me.

It was also quite clear from Nel's final questions to him "Who is to blame? The government? The bullet manufacturers?" that Pistorius either genuinely doesn't blame himself at all or cannot admit that he is to blame.

Which is an idiotic stance. Even if it was an accident, he would still be blaming himself.

 

[Susza]

Thank you OZe and Mr Jitty too for both of the posts above. I am not sure why but I feel so much better after reading them. It's been amazing how much anxiety and frustration this trial has generated for me. And like the author of the article in the Daily Maverick yesterday, I will be glad to be done with Oscar soon.

Thank you, Marfa Lights, I totally agree.

 

[Susza]

Yes, I agree totally. And there is also the consideration that she is bound to award less than he requests.

BBM - Is she? Really??

 

[foxbluff]

Guess Carl skipped class the day they actually read Nietzsche or he would know Nietzsche was an atheist.

Great catch there, Marfa Lights !! :floorlaugh:

 

[Marfa Lights]

Very interesting - I read that silence differently - as in, he was thinking to himself - 'why didn't she say anything' - and overcome by the moment.

Something that interests me - and I'd be interested to hear from others - is where OP was actually standing when he shot. I'd always assumed that it was directly in front of the toilet door. But some reconstruction videos I've watched have suggested it was closer to the passageway from the bedroom, and therefore quite a bit away from the door. Anyone able to help me out?

Here's a link to Juror13's website: look at photos 440 and 441 to see the firing position based on the laser trajectories. It appears to be at the end of the short hallway entrance to the bathroom, where he was partially shielded by the end wall of the sink counter.

https://juror13lw.wordpress.com/2014/10/08/pictures-from-behind-the-doorone-tragic-night/

 

[Susza]

I agree, I haven't even followed since the judge ruled against murder ... due to current health concerns(I have somehow developed high blood pressure for the first time in my life though it could be at least partially due to the osteo my doc said I have vis a vis a degenerative shoulder joint also newly diagnosed) so I just can't take the emotional rollercoaster that this trial took me through. This was surely especially emotional for anyone else who'd experienced any kind of relationship abuse too so I'm not surprised at the public response to the judge's decision and only hope she ends up doing the right thing for RS.

May those who preach "forgiveness" remember that atonement is the first step to that end.

Val, good to hear from you. I missed you.

 

[Susza]

I've been thinking about this issue of remorse.

I do think he has horrible memories and is traumatised. I do think he has massive regret over it all, but....

...when did he ever direct even the smallest shred of criticism at himself for what happened that night? As far as I can tell, never. His testimony was all about justification - "It was dark. I was scared. I wasn't thinking. I wish Reeva had screamed, but she didn't..." and so on.

If it had been an accident, truly, then it was a shocking one. A normal person would hate themselves...."WHY did I grab the gun? WHY didn't I check Reeva was safe? WHY didn't I stop and think for half a second? What the hell is wrong with me that I would do that?"

Yes, he acknowledged his responsibility when confronted by Nel "Of course I shouldn't have done that....", but he never, ever volunteered it. He displayed NO criticism of himself for any of what he claims happened and an honest person who'd made a terrible mistake would.

And the only explanation I can see is simply because none of it happened. It would take more acting ability than he has to convincingly react to a series of events that are pure invention.

I do believe he's horrified by what he's done....but he can't properly verbalise that because he can't/won't actually admit what he did do. He's had to manufacture events and also manufacture the emotions that go along with them - and they are unconvincing.

Again, JMO.

Well said, LemonMousse, I agree.

 

[Fuskier]

Here's a link to Juror13's website: look at photos 440 and 441 to see the firing position based on the laser trajectories. It appears to be at the end of the short hallway entrance to the bathroom, where he was partially shielded by the end wall of the sink counter.

https://juror13lw.wordpress.com/2014/10/08/pictures-from-behind-the-doorone-tragic-night/

Thank you Marfa Lights for posting this link. Scrolling through those pictures brings home the seriousness of this crime, that a human being was shot to death & had their brains 'blown out' whilst locked in that small toilet cubicle that night. The walls and floors are covered in porcelain tiles - all hard surfaces. OP had full consciousness & was able to forsee the potential for richochet and being hit by the projectile. IMO he was conscious and knew exactly what he was doing. He was an experienced gun handler.

 

[soozieqtips]

Pistorius may well have psychological issues - most people who find themselves up on a charge of murder generally do. His issues and odd family dynamic are not responsible for him standing up in court, swearing to tell the truth....and then lying, lying, lying and lying some more.

~snipped~

BIB - swearing to tell the truth, and then saying "I'll try not to lie"! I thought that was the strangest thing to say. It's as if lying is such a part of who he is, that he has to make a conscious effort not to do it, not that that worked too well for him. I agree with you that he's unable to show remorse for events which didn't happen. On Friday, when Roux was painting a picture of a broken man who had nothing left, OP was blubbering away at this 'tragic' image of himself, and then, like you said, as soon as Nel got onto the subject of Reeva's painful death, and how her family was broken, he lost interest. I think he may even have been playing with his phone. And when Kim was talking, I barely recall him glancing up.

Nel told Masipa that this was negligence bordering on intent. I hope she takes that into account when deciding on a punishment. To let him loose with all the anger issues he has is quite dangerous, in my opinion. Since he doesn't really see any of this as his fault, he will seethe over the 'unfairness' of it all (remember him little black book of journalists who have been negative about him?), and he'll need some way to unleash all that anger. He had a short fuse when he was rich and successful. How much shorter will it be now?

 

[Gbtaketwo]

BBM: This seems just absurd to me.
Op choose his defence team hoping to have the best one (the one he hoped it will allow him not to go to prison). This team is expensive and might actually not have been able to prevent him going to prison.
Now, because this team is soooo expensive, this should be a reason not to go to prison???

Not sure exactly what you find absurd if you have read all previous posts.
I have certainly never been of the opinion that because he has spent a fortune on legal fees he should not go to prison and have never indicated this in any posts .
His legal team however have tried to garner the sympathy of the judge by hinting that because he is now allegedly broke and grief stricken that OP has already been punished enough and should not receive a custodial sentence .
I certainly do not share that opinion and hope for a custodial sentence .

 

[emirates1957]

I must confess I skipped over Roux's summation. Is it worth 1 hour of my ear-time?

That would be a big fat negative ….not unless you are into goats !!!

 

[soozieqtips]

That would be a big fat negative ….not unless you are into goats !!!

The goat story! A villager steals a goat and has to return it and do something useful for society.

OP guns down his girlfriend in a confined space... (can't return her) but should still do something useful for society.

All through the trial, I felt that Roux minimised what OP did, even though he was there and heard all the lies and different versions that we all did. But he surpassed himself when he said, "There was an accused and a victim, and the accused became a victim." I have no idea how Reeva's family must have felt when they heard that her killer was now a victim.

ETA - Internet trolls face up to two years in jail under new laws

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-29678989

The law is an *advertiser censored*. You can be jailed for offensive tweets, and if you kill someone, maybe some light cleaning duties.

 

[Fuskier]

RSBM: very good and insightful post but the bit I've snipped really stuck out for me and reminded me of two of the most potent moments in the trial which stemmed from two questions by Nel when OP was on the stand. The first was when he was asked if, whilst he was standing in front of the toilet door, Reeva had said anything and there was a long pause, excrutiatingly long it seemed, before he answered 'no, I wish she had'. I recall one of the courthouse reporters saying that the whole court seemed to sit forward and hold their collective breaths and later, when discussing it in the bar, some felt he had been on the edge of a confession. One article put it very evocatively in saying that, at that point, it seemed Oscar Pistorius, standing there in front of them all, was remembering and looking at something in his mind's eye that only he could see.

The other was the infamous 'Get the f..k out of my house' which many, myself included, believe is what he was screaming at her, not some intruder. Perhaps those two powerful moments were the closest we came to any honesty from him about what really happened that night and if so, perhaps whatever decency may lurk inside him is more haunted by what he did than it would appear. The dark side of the man, with its hunger for self-preservation, has come out on top.

Reeva was an intelligent & educated SA woman. If OP did yell: "get the f **k outta ma house" then I'm sure Reeva would have quickly yelled: "It's me in here!" or words to that effect. Her reported silence is not acceptable to me. IMO she was more likely to have screamed in fear if she knew what was coming, or as an automatic reaction once hit in the hip. Was there a time delay between the first and subsequent bullets? There could have been. We only have OP's versions.

 

[soozieqtips]

Reeva was an intelligent & educated SA woman. If OP did yell: "get the f **k outta ma house" then I'm sure Reeva would have quickly yelled: "It's me in here!" or words to that effect.
Her reported silence is not acceptable to me.

BIB - nor me. Her "silence" started just after OP first heard the "noise". He didn't ask her if she'd heard it. She didn't ask him what the noise was. She said nothing as he reached under the bed for his gun. She didn't ask why she was supposed to call the police. She didn't respond when he whispered / said in a low tone, to "get down". And he never wondered why.

 

[4MrsB]

Sometimes after conviction you hear about stuff that was not admissable in the trial. Stuff like previous rapes or murders. I am not expecting anything of that scale in this case of course but I wonder if there was anything at the scene, like real evidence of a fight or new phone records that may come out of the woodwork?

I have wondered that as well.

If OP is sent to prison, maybe we are more likely to hear stories from ex's or previous friends, athletes, etc about "OP stories". But I would imagine if he is not sent behind bars, many will remain keeping quiet for fear of the wrath of OP and the Pistorius family, fear of a lawsuit from "deep pocket" Uncle Arnold, etc.

I am hoping one day Nel (once retired or if ever moves over to private practice) writes a book. He, I believe, would have some very interesting tidbits of information about the evidence that was not allowed in, the arguments held in front of the Judge but in the privacy of her chambers or plain old evidence he had & felt 99% certain of what it pointed to - but knew he couldn't submit it for one reason or another.

I would definitely purchase that book if ever printed.

 

[jilly]

Yes, that's true. He did have to explain what happened and why it did, so the justification is still necessary. But it's the total absence of criticism of himself alongside it that is very telling for me.

It was also quite clear from Nel's final questions to him "Who is to blame? The government? The bullet manufacturers?" that Pistorius either genuinely doesn't blame himself at all or cannot admit that he is to blame.

Which is an idiotic stance. Even if it was an accident, he would still be blaming himself.

Somewhere along the line he learned 'the best defense is an offense' and denial. Add to that his disability plus family wealth, conceit and power.

He was the 'accident' waiting to happen. It's heart breaking that Reeva, had to pay the price.