Discussion Thread #60 - 14.9.12 ~ the appeal~

[zwiebel]

Ah, yes, gotta use sports anaolgies...

I noticed that too; hurdles, starting blocks...

 

[zwiebel]

David Smith @SmithInAfrica · 4 mins 4 minutes ago

Roux: The state has no right to appeal on an error of fact. Even if it's wrong, and we say it's not. #Pistorius

 

[jay-jay]

Roux up .. now watch Masipa's expression change ..

.. yep, looking much more interested now .. taking in what Roux is saying .. unbelievable how much bias she is showing.

 

[zwiebel]

Courts have to draw inferences, Roux says. Often these inferences are based on circumstantial evidence.

A “proven fact” is not simply a fact that is before the court, Roux says. It is a fact that is proven to be true by the court in its judgment.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/li...e-verdict-live#block-5485dc88e4b0251e38c7f47c

 

[zwiebel]

Nhlanhla Sehume ‏@sehume_n 1 min1 minute ago

Roux refers to case law: seldom in a murder case is there direct evidence related to accused’s state of mind… #OscarPistorius @KayaNews

 

[zwiebel]

lse De Lange ‏@dLangeIlse 3 mins3 minutes ago

#OscarTrial. Roux: Court's inferences on Oscar's state of mind when he shot Reeva is an inference based on facts. #citi

 

[ColonelMustard]

...Roux ...does have a more confident and powerful tone then Nel had earlier.

Nel is trying to make important points that may impact SA law in a significant way.

It's easier to butter the bread with bu!!$h!t, which is what Roux does.

 

[zwiebel]

It’s rare in a murder case for there to be direct evidence of the accused’s state of mind, Roux says. The court must draw inferences. This is not a question of law, as the state has claimed. Even if the court had made an error, Roux insists, it would be an error based on a point of fact, not a point of law, and so cannot be grounds for appeal.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/li...e-verdict-live#block-5485dc88e4b0251e38c7f47c

Me: I'm sure Roux's twisting Nel's argument here, but I can't quite work out how...

I've got a live feed again! Yay!

 

[zwiebel]

Roux:...if they cannot get over that hurdle, get out of the starting blocks, you CANNOT find Doelus eventualis....it cannot be...

My live feed went again and that may just have been an old clip. But it was 'so Roux', I had to post it.

 

[zwiebel]

Pumza Fihlani ‏@Pumza_Fihlani 1 min1 minute ago

Barry Roux sounding exasperated "Ma Lady, you absolutely, correctly dealt with dolus eventualis". #OsarPistorius

 

[jay-jay]

It’s rare in a murder case for there to be direct evidence of the accused’s state of mind, Roux says. The court must draw inferences. This is not a question of law, as the state has claimed. Even if the court had made an error, Roux insists, it would be an error based on a point of fact, not a point of law, and so cannot be grounds for appeal.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/li...e-verdict-live#block-5485dc88e4b0251e38c7f47c

Me: I'm sure Roux's twisting Nel's argument here, but I can't quite work out how...

I've got a live feed again! Yay!

BBM .. good grief, would you believe Roux has just said that the state are trying to twist it! How does this guy sleep at night ..

 

[PrimeSuspect]

Roux:...if they cannot get over that hurdle, get out of the starting blocks, you CANNOT find Doelus eventualis....it cannot be...

My live feed went again and that may just have been an old clip. But it was 'so Roux', I had to post it.

Yep, that's Roux, alright. lol

 

[jay-jay]

Masipa: 'what paragraph?' :floorlaugh:

 

[katydid23]

Roux is giving My Lady the confidence she NEEDS to deny the application.

 

[JudgeJudi]

seekoei means ‘hippo’ in Afrikaans

 

[zwiebel]

David Smith @SmithInAfrica · 2 mins 2 minutes ago

Roux: "You can only reserve a question of law if it is a question of law... They must first establish it is a question of law." #Pistorius

 

[jay-jay]

Originally Posted by Judgejudi View Post
Mandy Wiener @MandyWiener · 7m 7 minutes ago

Still reckon we'll be done by lunchtime. Barry Roux gives an assurance he will be 'very short'. Looks pensive, considering Nel's argument

BBM .. I believe that when I see it!

.. oh for god's sake shut up, Roux .. she's with you anyway, you don't need to protest anything .. not sure how much longer I can listen to him.

 

[jay-jay]

Well, my feed has decided it for me coz it's gone !

.. oh, sadly back again :-/

 

[zwiebel]

Roux refers to the state’s heads of argument – you can read them in full here: http://www.theguardian.com/world/li...e-verdict-live#block-5485d9ebe4b01a03d3323fb7

He says the prosecution has got it wrong: it is trying to get the court to reconsider its own factual finding, “and you may not do that, my lady”.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/li...e-verdict-live#block-5485dc88e4b0251e38c7f47c

 

[zwiebel]

David Smith @SmithInAfrica · 4 mins 4 minutes ago

Roux: The court made a factual finding that he did not foresee the possibility. Even if it's a serious mistake of fact, we cannot interfere.