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

[jilly]

Just finished watching all of Friday's court session and reading 27 pages of WS. Lots was covered, but I'm really surprised no one at all mentioned this, Nel gave Roux a taste of his own medicine by giving him the PT Heads of Arguments just minutes before Roux started to argue his own case.

We've always called Roux out on this and many, myself included will simply feel Nel was responding in kind by delaying the transfer of his HOA to the defence, but I'm surprised there was no mention of it.

Maybe CAs they don't have to do that. I quite enjoyed the stir though on the defense bench when Nel said that OP had no rails in his shower room. The defense had to whimper back that OP had a small bench. I burst out laughing when Nel quipped that he'd personally deliver a bench to the prison.

 

[K.T]

Would you have a link to an article confirming this, I'd like to learn a bit more about the Appeal process?

http://www.biznews.com/oscar-pistorius-trial/2014/07/pistorius-guilty-can-appeal-win/

This article has been posted a few times before. An interview with David Dadic and Ulrich Roux, written before the judgement, therefore it focusing on an assumption the defence appealing a guilty verdict.

Now of course we speculate that the may prosecution appeal the culpable homicide verdict.

In my opinion, I don't think anyone knows what Masipa will sentence and if Nel will appeal - legal experts have varying opinions and have obviously been surprised by quite a few aspects of the trial while journalist's speculation from inside sources still seems fluid.

Anyway, the article gives an overview of what may be part of an SA appeals process.

If you want to research more just look at the defence and prosecution sentencing arguments and then google the case citations. Most appeal decisions are online. I've read a few that the defence use for their arguments on culp.homicide. While I understand the appeals court decisions I've read... but, well, life seems quite cheap in SA.

 

[Lux et Veritas]

Schultz arrived mid-session on Thursday ... and joined Batchelor and Taylor, as well as Jared Mortimer, who has had a run-in with Pistorius, and Schultz's friend, heavyweight boxer Mark Strydom.
http://www.dailymaverick.co.za/arti...ay-of-tears-threats-and-anguish/#.VEH7AaD8wzs

I have a feeling one or more of these boys are gonna figure very prominently in Oscar’s future, should he be forced to suffer cruel correctional supervision at his uncle’s mansion.

All of these figures (including OP) have the same type of personalty, travel in the same upper-class circles (and/or underworld, as the case may be).

They will no doubt find each other - I suspect it won’t be pretty.

Oscar may wish he’d gone to prison under the protection of the State.

 

[pandax81]

In the defence heads, they literally claim that OP is a victim, using those words.

So it wasn't just rhetoric or a characterisation of their argument from Nel, they really do argue it.

The reaction in the courtroom would have been interesting if Roux had the courage to say it out loud.

 

[Lux et Veritas]

... Let’s get something straight. Oscar Pistorius is no hapless hero that a barbaric society is trying to punish because of our bloodlust or savagery. He is no tragic figure like Tom Robinson in To Kill a Mockingbird. We need not pity him or cry for him. He is quite the opposite. He fought against his disability and triumphed, and then he became convinced he was superior to the rest of us. He basked in his privilege, defined by his race and his class.

He projected himself as a figure of moral virtue, while firing guns in public places, and asked others to lie for him about it. He abused his friends, abused the court system and abused our tolerance. He thrived on his megalomania and believes now that the world wronged him, rather than that taking a human life comes with consequences.

He was our superstar, our gold medallist, our flag-bearer, our champion.

He is not anymore.

There is no cheering him as he exits the dock, having dragged this society through a rollercoaster ride of drama and tragedy. If he spends the rest of his days holed up at his uncle’s mansion, fearing the testosterone and lip-gloss coalition of his enemies who lined up in court this week, so be it. If he is confined to a cell in the hospital section of a prison, so be it.

He just needs to get the hell out of our lives. He has insulted this nation’s intelligence and sense of decency enough.

He killed one of us. He does not deserve to be one of us. ...

- Ranjeni Munusamy

http://www.dailymaverick.co.za/arti...-privilege-the-farce-the-insult/#.VEHmi6D8yot

 

[K.T]

In the defence heads, they literally claim that OP is a victim, using those words.

So it wasn't just rhetoric or a characterisation of their argument from Nel, they really do argue it.

The reaction in the courtroom would have been interesting if Roux had the courage to say it out loud.

I think Roux did say something like 'in that regard Pistorius is a victim'? Perhaps anyone here remembers it more clearly...?

Haven't finished all of the 'Accused Heads of Argument of Sentence' but there is too much hubris, manipulation and far too many incorrect statements - quite hard to muster up much sympathy that certain people suggest one should feel for this individual.

 

[ApplesInMyBra]

In the defence heads, they literally claim that OP is a victim, using those words.

So it wasn't just rhetoric or a characterisation of their argument from Nel, they really do argue it.

The reaction in the courtroom would have been interesting if Roux had the courage to say it out loud.

I thought he did say out loud that "the accused then became the victim". If I recall correctly, he repeated it several times. It was very sickening.

 

[Lux et Veritas]

... fame arrived with the inevitable financial success and of course the entourage of hangers-on and bottom feeders who are drawn inexorably to its warm and embracing light. It also brought with it the seeds of its own destruction – delusion and a special brand of social and psychological disorientation that often renders its recipient ultimately unhinged and detached from the demands and rituals of normal life.

Sycophancy corrodes the soul and mind, and to be constantly surrounded by craven fame enablers who magnify your self-reflection or nourish an inflated sense of importance deeply limits to the ability to function normally ...

- Marianne Thamm

http://www.dailymaverick.co.za/arti...d-destructive-modern-attraction/#.VEH2d6D8y-Y

 

[pandax81]

I think Roux did say something like 'in that regard Pistorius is a victim'? Perhaps anyone here remembers it more clearly...?

Haven't finished all of the 'Accused Heads of Argument of Sentence' but there is too much hubris, manipulation and far too many incorrect statements - quite hard muster up much sympathy that certain people suggest one should feel for this individual.

Thanks, that is shocking then. Making an argument is one thing, but you cross a line of respect when you use that word, because you compare yourself to the true victim.

I wonder whether this was just another instance of OP's personality coming through in instruction, or it is laying the groundwork for some further action.

 

[A lucas]

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?

 

[jay-jay]

Thanks, that is shocking then. Making an argument is one thing, but you cross a line of respect when you use that word, because you compare yourself to the true victim.

~rsbm~

Equally as bad was when he compared Pistorius to an abused woman .. (when was it now, I think it was when he was trying to explain that 'slow burn' BS )

 

[Exchange973]

Pistorius should get at least 10 years in prison

“His suggestion prompted gasps from Pistorius's family and further tears from the athlete, who was more emotional in court than he had been for weeks, weeping throughout the sentencing arguments”.

http://www.independent.ie/world-new...get-at-least-10-years-in-prison-30673637.html

Once again, there are only tears when it's about him. If he was truly remorseful:

1. While he was still in his home after the shooting he would have asked Aimee, Carl ... anyone in fact ... to ring June and let her know immediately that he'd "accidentally shot and killed her" and that the police would be seeing them shortly. Can you imagine waking up and hearing it first on the radio or TV?

2. Since the bail application he had just over a year to write the Steenkamps a letter. He could never "find words eloquent enough" or didn't have the time, whatever, to do this. If he was remorseful, he didn't have to find eloquent words, he only needed to speak from his heart. He said they said they weren't ready to meet him. That does not prevent him from writing. Totally disingenuous. And then to apologize in open court in front of the whole world. He's disgusting.

3. He would not have lied, fabricated and tailored his version/s but told the truth to the best of his ability.

4. He would not have made this trial about him and how he's the victim.

I could go on and on but there's no need because we all know what he is, and one thing he is not is remorseful for killing her.

But OP has been crying throughout the trial. He was crying and vomiting when the post mortum photos were shown. I don't understand why those tears were "fake" but these tears are genuine...?

 

[LemonMousse]

But OP has been crying throughout the trial. He was crying and vomiting when the post mortum photos were shown. I don't understand why those tears were "fake" but these tears are genuine...?

Actually, he hasn't been crying "throughout the trial"....he's been crying sometimes.

On Friday, Roux talked about OP's trauma, how he's lost everything, how terrible it had all been for him, how the media have turned on him etc etc....shaking shoulders, sobs, large hankie.

When Nel started talking about how awful it's been for Reeva's family, about how horrifically she died, about bullets tearing through her flesh and how awful her final moments were...not even the slightest hint of a sniff. Couldn't even be bothered looking up.

Very obvious. Very.

And it fits a pattern. Yes, he's reacted to details about her death...but the vast majority of the time that he's been emotional has either been when he's going on about his trauma, depression and insomnia or being faced with a difficult question.

I believe he does regret what happened. But I also believe that he cannot express remorse over his actions that night because he's not a good enough actor to be remorseful about a series of events that never happened.

There was no mistake. No misinterpreted sound. No fear of an intruder.

He murdered her - and he knows it.

IMO.

 

[LemonMousse]

I might be in the minority here, but during sentencing, I felt like a voyeur for the first time during the trial, and uncomfortable as a result.

I should state that I believe Pistorius shot Reeva in a rage, and must face the consequences of his actions, and these have to be a lengthy stretch, as punishment and deterrent.

However, I take no delight in his likely imprisonment. He is obviously an individual with psychological issues, from a family with an odd dynamic, and is someone who has struggled against significant challenges.

It is sad and depressing that Reeva's life and potential was wasted, yet it is also sad that OP overcame all his challenges only to throw his own life away so pointlessly.

My interest in this case was piqued by the absurd defence given by Pistorius but at the end of it all, I will want no part in the vitriolic celebration of his incarceration.

Your opinion is, of course, as valid as anyones, but I'm not sure I like the implications of your last sentence. You probably didn't mean it that way, but it seems to me slightly censorious. The rest of us are not old hags knitting at the gallows baying for our pound of flesh.

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. His has displayed contempt for the process from start to finish and is evidently outraged that the State had the almighty cheek to even charge him in the first place.

In his panic to avoid all responsibility he has attempted to throw virtually everybody under the bus....his legal team, the police, former friends and, memorably, Reeva herself with her untruthful messages.

I shan't celebrate his incarceration if it happens....but I shall feel satisfaction if justice is done for Reeva, and I can't see that there's anything wrong with that.

Pistorius is a victim of no one and nothing. He caused this all by himself and remains unwilling to man up and accept responsibility.

 

[lithgow1]

I believe he does regret what happened. But I also believe that he cannot express remorse over his actions that night because he's not a good enough actor to be remorseful about a series of events that never happened.

There was no mistake. No misinterpreted sound. No fear of an intruder.

He murdered her - and he knows it.

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.

 

[Exchange973]

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 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 was remembering and seeing in his mind's eye something 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 much more haunted by what he did than we've ever given him credit for. It's just the 'bad' side with its hunger for self-preservation that has come out on top.

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?

 

[PrimeSuspect]

Actually, he hasn't been crying "throughout the trial"....he's been crying sometimes.

On Friday, Roux talked about OP's trauma, how he's lost everything, how terrible it had all been for him, how the media have turned on him etc etc....shaking shoulders, sobs, large hankie.

When Nel started talking about how awful it's been for Reeva's family, about how horrifically she died, about bullets tearing through her flesh and how awful her final moments were...not even the slightest hint of a sniff. Couldn't even be bothered looking up.

Very obvious. Very.

And it fits a pattern. Yes, he's reacted to details about her death...but the vast majority of the time that he's been emotional has either been when he's going on about his trauma, depression and insomnia or being faced with a difficult question.

I believe he does regret what happened. But I also believe that he cannot express remorse over his actions that night because he's not a good enough actor to be remorseful about a series of events that never happened.

There was no mistake. No misinterpreted sound. No fear of an intruder.

He murdered her - and he knows it.

IMO.

I would also like to add the time OP read out the Valentine's Card Reeva gave him. He read it like it was school report, no emotion whatsoever, I wouldn't think of it as strange ordinarily if not how he conducted himself throughout the trial.

 

[Susza]

I agree he will hate being a social Pyrrha .
His lack of money doesn't bother me at all but his legal representative trying to use it as justification to reduce his sentence does because we have no way of verifying his comments that some of his fees have gone unpaid something which I find very very hard to believe bearing in mind the family wealth and support during this trial .

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???

 

[LemonMousse]

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 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 was remembering and seeing in his mind's eye something 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 much more haunted by what he did than we've ever given him credit for. It's just the 'bad' side with its hunger for self-preservation that has come out on top.

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.

 

[RosieC]

what on earth does he [Carl Pistorius @carlpistorius] think he's achieving with these ridiculous tweets?

17.9k followers?