Trial Discussion Thread #59 - 14.21.10, Day 48 ~ sentencing~

[4MrsB]

And there's also one more person for the Pistoriuses to blame...the attorney Roux met who suggested he read the book on Ubuntu and use it as mitigation.

I found this whole "storyline" of mitigation by Roux laughable & disrespectful to the audience. For several reasons:

A) just the fact he fabricates this "story" of being on a train (or some public transportation) and bumping into attorney who recommends the book on Ubuntu to Roux . . . and then Roux claiming to then go out & purchase book, and during the "Trial of the Century" & the most important trial of Roux's career - at the very peak of it, Roux has extra time on his hands to read a new book. No way...that didn't happen. Please Roux: just talk about the philosophy behind Ubuntu, don't insult us by creating this serendipitous storyline of how this came to be. Please! That did not happen. (Nel had to chuckle about that I'm sure, knowing neither one of them would be finding time in their schedule to even have a meal with their families, much less, read a book suggested by a stranger on a train.)

B) Do not use Ubuntu as a reason for saving Oscar from any time behind bars. It is insulting to Reeva, as Oscar's treatment of Reeva and reason for her life being cut so dramatically short is quite the opposite of the Ubuntu philosophy and way of treating people.

C) Ubuntu places a very high value on the life of a human being. It entails civilized dialogue and tolerance. Harmony, dignity, respect for others and compassion. And "does not favor victory for the most powerful".

So Roux argues Ubuntu for OP, knowing he showed nothing of the sort for Reeva. Not only does OP not embrace this philosophy, he does most everything in his life quite OPPOSITE to it. I don't pretend to understand Ubuntu and it's meaning, but I have read enough to feel, IMO, it's not appropriate to argue it for OP and his crime.

 

[mrjitty]

Comment:

"The NPA will have to appeal this (incorrect) application of the law. Failure to do so will create problems for them in lower courts. To make it even worse, because such a judgment is not binding on other high court jurisdictions, you may have a situation where someone in, for example, the Western Cape, is convicted on exactly the same facts for which Oscar was acquitted, due to the different application of the law to the facts. That obviously offends the principle of equality before the law (s 9 of the Constitution). The SCA will have to make a ruling on this, in order for such a ruling to apply countrywide."

http://thelawthinker.com/judge-masipa-got-it-right-oscar-pistorius-and-the-intention-to-kill/

This is what worries me.

That opinion from Cibane contains a couple of obvious mistakes in my view.

I would not pay to much attention to it given there are better analysis floating about.

 

[foxbluff]

The dust is settled. It’s finally over (at least for the time being).

How do I feel?

Honestly, little more than incredibly, profoundly SAD.

Yes, tearfully sad.

While I, along with millions of others, am merely a long-distance observer, I still feel a powerful sense of loss.

No rational, well-adjusted person can take pleasure in the dire misfortunes and destruction of human life, lost human potential, dashed dreams, crushed futures - no matter the cause or circumstances. The human heart naturally gravitates toward hope, love, the individual and common good. It’s the only way we survive and thrive. I may be passionate, often opinionated, sometimes very angry when discussing this case, but I take no delight in human misery. The destruction of one of us makes us all LESS.

I grieve the loss, the potential, the glittering future of the warm, generous, intelligent, loving Reeva Steenkamp, her family’s shattered lives and lost happiness. A million stories are her story. It breaks my heart on a personal level, as I could have easily been one of those stories.

But if I’m honest, I also grieve the loss of what was once the best of Oscar Pistorius, what he once was, his lost innocence, the best of what he represented, the lives he touched, the hope he did indeed inspire, the great causes he might have championed after his athletic career. No one can ever take away his dedication, his hard work, his successes, his medals, his good deeds. Now just memories.

A rising star, snuffed out.
A blazing star, burnt out.
Two lost lives.
What could have been.

Yes, Oscar will pay dearly for his crime.
But I sincerely take no joy.

Thank you, Lux. Here I was thinking I was the only one here that was feeling sad for the loss of Oscar in addition to Reeva.

I'm sure I've never seen more keenly beautiful and eloquently expressed feelings put into words on a discussion board. (Hopefully I'll be able to find the print button in spite of slightly blurred vision...)

Thank you, Lux.

 

[Paul_1900]

My attacker was jailed. Do I have to be grateful?

As a female victim of male violence, things could always be worse. But despite what society and the media tell us, there are no “small mercies”, and we don’t have to be grateful.

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2014/10/my-attacker-was-jailed-do-i-have-be-grateful

There is some reference to OP in this article which prompts my question: "Should the Steenkamps now feel grateful that OP is in prison?.

It's a heart breaking read and written very well. Thanks for that. I personally have never been exposed to any violence whatsoever, so I can just imagine.

I don't think the Steenkamps will ever feel "gratitude".
Someone posted a photo upthread, and I agree you can see relief on their faces that the trial is over. Nothing more - nothing less.

 

[4MrsB]

The magistrate said Nkuna should date women his age.

“If you continue dating old women, or drinking too much, your level of sexual intercourse will drop and you won’t have babies. Let me give you advice that dating your relative will make you have kids with disabilities in life. Please date 16-valve girls, not skorokoros,” said the magistrate.

In the townships a “16-valve”, derived from the Volkswagen car engine, normally refers to a younger woman, while a “skorokoro” means an older vehicle.

http://www.citypress.co.za/news/magistrate-tells-horny-dog-date-16-valve-girls/

Oh WOW.....another eye opener on the injustice in these courtrooms & everyday rulings from judges. Very disheartening. No words. Thanks for sharing.

 

[Paul_1900]

I found this whole "storyline" of mitigation by Roux laughable & disrespectful to the audience. For several reasons:

A) just the fact he fabricates this "story" of being on a train (or some public transportation) and bumping into attorney who recommends the book on Ubuntu to Roux . . . and then Roux claiming to then go out & purchase book, and during the "Trial of the Century" & the most important trial of Roux's career - at the very peak of it, Roux has extra time on his hands to read a new book. No way...that didn't happen. Please Roux: just talk about the philosophy behind Ubuntu, don't insult us by creating this serendipitous storyline of how this came to be. Please! That did not happen. (Nel had to chuckle about that I'm sure, knowing neither one of them would be finding time in their schedule to even have a meal with their families, much less, read a book suggested by a stranger on a train.)

B) Do not use Ubuntu as a reason for saving Oscar from any time behind bars. It is insulting to Reeva, as Oscar's treatment of Reeva and reason for her life being cut so dramatically short is quite the opposite of the Ubuntu philosophy and way of treating people.

C) Ubuntu places a very high value on the life of a human being. It entails civilized dialogue and tolerance. Harmony, dignity, respect for others and compassion. And "does not favor victory for the most powerful".

So Roux argues Ubuntu for OP, knowing he showed nothing of the sort for Reeva. Not only does OP not embrace this philosophy, he does most everything in his life quite OPPOSITE to it. I don't pretend to understand Ubuntu and it's meaning, but I have read enough to feel, IMO, it's not appropriate to argue it for OP and his crime.

:goodpost:

 

[AW2B]

I have been reading posts that the State cannot appeal the verdict..

Was Judge Grant incorrect?

Tweets:

James Grant @CriminalLawZA · 7h
To clarify - the case of Seekoei 1982 AD does not restrict the state's right to appeal against a decision of law "in favour of an accused".

James Grant @CriminalLawZA · 9h
... s319 relates to "reservation of law" questions - which require acquittal on charge and competent charge - Seekoei is authority for this.

James Grant @CriminalLawZA · 9h
... State's right to appeal arises from s310 of CPA where a decision of law is made "in the accused's favour"; different to s 319...

James Grant @CriminalLawZA · 9h
Respectfully, another mistake of law to claim that state cannot appeal as stated in: "Oscar verdict ‘a done deal’

 

[Paul_1900]

The magistrate said Nkuna should date women his age.

“If you continue dating old women, or drinking too much, your level of sexual intercourse will drop and you won’t have babies. Let me give you advice that dating your relative will make you have kids with disabilities in life. Please date 16-valve girls, not skorokoros,” said the magistrate.

In the townships a “16-valve”, derived from the Volkswagen car engine, normally refers to a younger woman, while a “skorokoro” means an older vehicle.

http://www.citypress.co.za/news/magistrate-tells-horny-dog-date-16-valve-girls/

Hi Estelle

thanks for posting this article. SHOCKING to say the least, but somehow not unexpected from what I have read about women in SA myself. Came across an article today about a lawyer arguing that rape - on a minor ! - wasn't really rape as the guy had used his finger, not his penis . . .

off topic . . but . . I am always interested in a broader view. Some time ago there was big headlines about womens rape in India, the one case that caused such an outrage of public - she was given the name " Nirbhaya" .
Having worked with many Indians and being treated always in a very respectful and caring manner I was struggling to understand what was going on in that country. (Aware that my POV might be somewhat eurocentric and lacking deeper knowledge of the country ). To date I have a lot of hints to help me understand and develop some ideas, but even the wifes of my Indian colleagues, sharing their daily experiences, couldn't help me understand it in a deeper sense.

It's something about macho culture, prevailing cast system (which has some good aspects !) and not viewing women as equal for centuries - obviously so deeply routed in these societies, and so freaking " normal" in their daily lives.

Unfortunately I feel something similar applies to SA culture in regards to treatin women

 

[Lux et Veritas]

Oscar. Reeva. What a horrific waste of two lives.

The guy obviously has serious freakin issues.

When he gets out of prison, I can see him going one of three ways:


1) With zero personal prospects of fully-independent self-sufficiency, become a permanent ‘ward’ of and dependent on the familial generosity of Uncle Arnie, work quietly for the family businesses and/or special projects, shun the public.

2) Defiantly ditch any and all pretense of efforts towards reform and rehabilitation, gravitate toward his underworld buddies (after all, as a killer ex-con, he’d fit right in) and resume his wild, playboy, adrenaline-fueled lifestyle. With no athletics career to anchor him with social and financial security and the glories of his old life long gone, reviled as a social pariah, what would he have to lose? He would fully embrace his official, ex-con ‘Bad Boy’ image and it wouldn’t be pretty.

3) A combination of 1 and 2, the “best” of both worlds. The security of the Pistorius home with frequent, drunken, disorderly ventures to the wild side. (Wonder how long Uncle Arnie would put up with that?) I’m not sure who’s the worst influence on OP - his pathologically coddling, enabling family or his high-flying, dubious-at-best, mafia-esque ‘associates’?

I take that back - there’s a fourth option.

4) Actually get his sh#t together, do a total 180 and re-invent himself in a completely new direction. Turn his self-inflicted losses and horrific, destructive choices into creative tools to share, create, give back and do good. Not only a new-and-improved Oscar, but a genuinely regenerated Oscar. (Hey, way stranger things have happened.) He could actually be an even GREATER inspiration than he was before. What could be more powerful than learning cautionary tales from a transformed man who’s experienced the extreme highs and lows of physical disability, elite sports, mental/emotional issues, prison and conquered his demons? This would indeed be a spectacular success story - the old sports hero Oscar Pistorius would pale in comparison.

What odds do I put on these four options?

1) 33%
He’ll likely go this route initially, if only for public consumption and to lick his prison ‘wounds’. Eventually, though, the sedate, straight-and-narrow lifestyle would chafe him and he would rebel to 2) or 3).

2) 33%
This lifestyle might be extremely tempting to him. As a convicted killer in a nation and world that hates him, he’d think, f### it, might as well go bad all the way. This rough, dangerous crowd represents POWER and STATUS - exactly what he lost, exactly what his arrogance craves.

3) 33%
Equally tempting. He wouldn’t want to lose the Pistorius financial security and family social status but his aggressive, narcissistic, Type-A, thrill-seeking personality (not modified or corrected) would demand he also seek excitement and danger by attempting to re-capture as much of his previously reckless, hedonistic lifestyle as he could outside family confines. The ‘Good Boy’ and the ‘Bad Boy’ would be at continual war.

4) 1%
This should be his #1 choice but I’m afraid Oscar may be too far gone mentally, emotionally and socially to be capable of this daunting option. It would be a massively long haul - years in the effort - and I’m not sure he’s got it in him to conquer his social stigma, to win hearts and new public respect as a truly reformed, better man. It would be a terrific long shot but not impossible.

 

[Susza]

Susza,

but textile IS almost same as TAILORING . . it is SO funny somehow :laugh:

I am working as a technician in garment manufactoring industries, and it would be a complete "NO GO" to buy garments from prison, i.e. forced labour, unless you knew its a special program or some sort of where you can rest assure that workers are treated fairly.

On a serious note I appreciate people can do some useful work when incarcerated.

Oh yes, sure, you're right. I thought of fabricating cloth (Stoffe) when I read "textile".

Concerning your serious note: I agree totally.
I must admit that I even get kind of envious sometimes when I hear about the learning/studying possibilities offered to unemployed people or prisoners as I sometimes dream about just closing the door behind myself and having time learn new skills i.e. making wooden furniture and, you won't believe: tailoring. :laughing:

 

[foxbluff]

He will put on the charm and ask one of the warders to charge it for him.

I got a charge out of that !!

I wonder if OP has to wear an orange jumpsuit. And, if so, is it tailored?

 

[Paul_1900]

Oh yes, sure, you're right. I thought of fabricating cloth (Stoffe) when I read "textile".

Concerning your serious note: I agree totally.
I must admit that I even get kind of envious sometimes when I hear about the learning/studying possibilities offered to unemployed people or prisoners as I sometimes dream about just closing the door behind myself and having time learn new skills i.e. making wooden furniture and, you won't believe: tailoring. :laughing:

oh yes, me too I would love to have time for all the things which don't fit in the daily schedule. But no need for envy on tailoring skills - once you learned it and practice as a job it can be quite boring

 

[Estelle]

I found this whole "storyline" of mitigation by Roux laughable & disrespectful to the audience. For several reasons:

A) just the fact he fabricates this "story" of being on a train (or some public transportation) and bumping into attorney who recommends the book on Ubuntu to Roux . . . and then Roux claiming to then go out & purchase book, and during the "Trial of the Century" & the most important trial of Roux's career - at the very peak of it, Roux has extra time on his hands to read a new book. No way...that didn't happen. Please Roux: just talk about the philosophy behind Ubuntu, don't insult us by creating this serendipitous storyline of how this came to be. Please! That did not happen. (Nel had to chuckle about that I'm sure, knowing neither one of them would be finding time in their schedule to even have a meal with their families, much less, read a book suggested by a stranger on a train.)

B) Do not use Ubuntu as a reason for saving Oscar from any time behind bars. It is insulting to Reeva, as Oscar's treatment of Reeva and reason for her life being cut so dramatically short is quite the opposite of the Ubuntu philosophy and way of treating people.

C) Ubuntu places a very high value on the life of a human being. It entails civilized dialogue and tolerance. Harmony, dignity, respect for others and compassion. And "does not favor victory for the most powerful".

So Roux argues Ubuntu for OP, knowing he showed nothing of the sort for Reeva. Not only does OP not embrace this philosophy, he does most everything in his life quite OPPOSITE to it. I don't pretend to understand Ubuntu and it's meaning, but I have read enough to feel, IMO, it's not appropriate to argue it for OP and his crime.

My impression of Roux is that he is attention-seeking, duplicitous, plays the Judge, tells white lies, sly, knows how to implant false information by alluding to things and I have often thought that he coached OP to cry, spew, have a green bucket handy and a very large white handkerchief, encourage the prayer circles and the hugging and so on as he knew it would work on the Judge and Assessors.....and it did! He would have made a good actor. On a positive note, I found that he spoke more loudly and was easier to listen to than Nel

 

[Fuskier]

We are probably just at cross purposes.

I agree with you in general terms.

But in this specific case, i do not think you can argue both justification and lack of intent. This is really apparent in the original defence pleadings. If one is pleading lack of intent then it should have been in the defence documentation and appeared in Examination in Chief.

I can imagine lack of intent AND self defence applying for example where I am chased by bad guys trying to hurt me and deploy defensive fire to scare them off but end up hitting one of them.

However even then, the lethal capability of my gun is known to me. So my defence is that I did not try to shoot anyone - only to scare them.

BIB The lethal capability of his gun was known to him when he took it and shot 4 times through that locked toilet door IMO.

 

[Estelle]

Hi Estelle

thanks for posting this article. SHOCKING to say the least, but somehow not unexpected from what I have read about women in SA myself. Came across an article today about a lawyer arguing that rape - on a minor ! - wasn't really rape as the guy had used his finger, not his penis . . .

off topic . . but . . I am always interested in a broader view. Some time ago there was big headlines about womens rape in India, the one case that caused such an outrage of public - she was given the name " Nirbhaya" .
Having worked with many Indians and being treated always in a very respectful and caring manner I was struggling to understand what was going on in that country. (Aware that my POV might be somewhat eurocentric and lacking deeper knowledge of the country ). To date I have a lot of hints to help me understand and develop some ideas, but even the wifes of my Indian colleagues, sharing their daily experiences, couldn't help me understand it in a deeper sense.

It's something about macho culture, prevailing cast system (which has some good aspects !) and not viewing women as equal for centuries - obviously so deeply routed in these societies, and so freaking " normal" in their daily lives.

Unfortunately I feel something similar applies to SA culture in regards to treatin women

I am fairly worldly having travelled to over 110 countries by now so I do not think we can generalise about men. IMO there are men in every country who abuse and murder women but some countries seem to have more than others. I have been to India twice and have found the men that I met as I stayed in local homes very respectful of their wives and me but they were middle and upper class men. However, when I was alone in Delhi, I was once near the station and felt terrified as I was surrounded by men with no women in sight. It was just the way they looked at me - a woman on her own. I could not wait to get out of Delhi. I have always wanted to visit South Africa but this case has put me off completely. I had thought Cape Town was safer than Joburg but the Dewani case changed my perception.

 

[Fuskier]

Yes, and to use a word I picked up from Judge Greenland . . . I was gobsmacked . . not only did she NOT REJECT both as being mutually exclusive, she made a mix and match of both in favour of OP. Somebody said at that time it's as if she was inventing his defence for him.

IMO we could almost say that the judge helped create the 'mosaic' which led towards that judgement.

 

[vansleuths]

Is there a silver lining in the culpable homicide verdict?

Before the verdict was read, there were many sleuthers that were concerned that OP would be a flight risk if a murder charge had been handed down. He wouldn't have stuck around for the sentencing phase of the trial. If that was the case, the state would have had to deal with extradition, etc.

We now know where OP is....in prison.

If the PT does appeal and WIN, his verdict could be increased from CH to murder and subsequently, his sentence would be increased. There would be no worries then of OP fleeing.

Just 13 days left now for the PT to make a decision.

 

[Greater Than]

Agreed

I think he just messed up on the stand.

I doubt Roux planned it that way.

After the DT had rested, I posted a synopsis of OP's defense from start to finish. It's alarming to reread it now knowing the verdict. How and why Masipa accepted this wishy-washy, three defense nonsense is beyond me.

This is my take on OP's defense:

In the beginning, OP hears a noise and grabs his pistol. He's the man, so of course he has to protect his girlfriend, and since he's on his stumps, he feels vulnerable and has to protect himself. So in full protection mode, he chivalrously puts himself between Reeva and the danger. He hears movement, feels trapped inside his locked bedroom, so he "fires shots at the door," as specifically stated in his bail application. With no uncertainty, he intentionally fires at the door because, after all, he was protecting Reeva and himself and acting in self defense.

But then OP gets on the stand. He was terrified. He didn't aim. He didn't have time to think. Before he knew it he had fired four rounds of zombie stoppers into a tiny toilet cubicle. Nel asks, "You didn't intend to fire four shots into the door?" "No milady, I did not."

Oh dear.

Now Roux is forced to take a different route because his client doesn't even know what his own damn defense is.

Enter Vorster. Amputation of OP's lower legs was a "traumatic assault," losing his mother at age 14 was devastating, he has a higher level of concern regarding crime and his safety than the average South African, and he has GAD, which may have played a role in OP's actions the night he shot and killed Reeva.

GAD? Nel is all over this like white on rice. He wants OP immediately sent to a mental health institution for a psychiatric evaluation.

Whoops.

NO! NO! NO! Roux objects! He argues in vain against the referral.

No dice. Referral approved.

30 days later - No GAD! No mental disorder! No diminished capacity!

Uh oh. Now what? Roux needs to figure out another way to support OP's testimony.

In comes OP's sports doctor, who treats the court to a thorough explanation of the startle/fight/flight/freeze response, which is unequivocally the length of the average doctoral dissertation. Is his purpose to confuse the court? Who knows! But he reinforces how vulnerable OP is and how he's easily startled, so it's working well enough. But then, when Nel asks him why he thinks OP shot at the door, he replies, "To nullify the threat."

Geeze Louise! That's clear intent!

Oh well. Roux is out of options, so he rests his case.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...-Discussion-Thread-48&p=10758155#post10758155

 

[jilly]

Respectfully snipped for space

1) 33%
He’ll likely go this route initially, if only for public consumption and to lick his prison ‘wounds’. Eventually, though, the sedate, straight-and-narrow lifestyle would chafe him and he would rebel to 2) or 3).

2) 33%
This lifestyle might be extremely tempting to him. As a convicted killer in a nation and world that hates him, he’d think, f### it, might as well go bad all the way. This rough, dangerous crowd represents POWER and STATUS - exactly what he lost, exactly what his arrogance craves.

3) 33%
Equally tempting. He wouldn’t want to lose the Pistorius financial security and family social status but his aggressive, narcissistic, Type-A, thrill-seeking personality (not modified or corrected) would demand he also seek excitement and danger by attempting to re-capture as much of his previously reckless, hedonistic lifestyle as he could outside family confines. The ‘Good Boy’ and the ‘Bad Boy’ would be at continual war.

4) 1%
This should be his #1 choice but I’m afraid Oscar may be too far gone mentally, emotionally and socially to be capable of this daunting option. It would be a massively long haul - years in the effort - and I’m not sure he’s got it in him to conquer his social stigma, to win hearts and new public respect as a truly reformed, better man. It would be a terrific long shot but not impossible.

Lux......I don't really see any of these options. #4 sounds the best but I agree with you, he's "too far gone". It's going to take a lot of psychological treatment to get to this point, which he won't get in prison imo. Since he shot and killed Reeva, I believe that he's totally convinced himself that he did no wrong, just a little negligent. His family backs him, the Judge pretty much supported his claim and that's all that matters. He's crying now, because he's lost his life.

In the meantime, I suspect that Oscar will turn to God. Isn't that what many Convicts do? My guess is that his first request for reading material while in prison, will be a bible.

On a side note, I wonder if the family will do some soul searching and what direction they'll take, in particular, Carl. How will he cope with this.

 

[ApplesInMyBra]

Do you know what her primary language is? Is it English? I have wondered this a number of times throughout the trial.

Her primary language is Northern Sesotho. English is her second language. And she probably speaks/understands Afrikaans as well.