Discussion Thread #60 - 14.9.12 ~ the appeal~

[Deleted member 102539]

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

.. oh, sadly back again :-/

Do you need the green bucket?

 

[JudgeJudi]

Done and dusted.

9.30 tomorrow for Masipa's decision.

 

[ColonelMustard]

Roux can't make it tomorrow.

Oh, no. Oldwage.

 

[Interested Bystander]

.. yip .. I kinda wonder if Nel shouldn't be keeping it a bit shorter and snappier for her, I get the impression she's completely lost after a few minutes of listening.

So was I, LOL

 

[ColonelMustard]

Good night, all.

See you tomorrow.

 

[zwiebel]

David Smith @SmithInAfrica · 3 mins 3 minutes ago

Roux on the state: "The problem is they don't like, they don't appreciate your factual finding... I would ask them to read your judgment."

David Smith @SmithInAfrica · 2 mins 2 minutes ago

Roux: Appeal on sentence is at the court's discretion. #Pistorius

David Smith @SmithInAfrica · 2 mins 2 minutes ago

Masipa: I will think about it. We'll return tomorrow at 9.30am. #Pistorius

Adjourned. That was short and not-so-sweet.

 

[Giles]

I'm interested to know what Judge Masipa will make of this. I'm glad they're back tomorrow, not too long to wait.

 

[Lux et Veritas]

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

.. oh, sadly back again :-/

Did you notice that the feed only starting going haywire when Roux began his argument? :lol:

This is a very good sign, I think.

 

[zwiebel]

Nigel Cupido ‏@FrankieNigel 2 mins2 minutes ago

#OscarPistorius Both Nel and Roux stumble when asked if they're available tomorrow. Never expected that question!

 

[zwiebel]

Judge Masipa says she needs time to consider her decision.

Court adjourns to Tuesday at 9.30am South African time (7.30am GMT).

I will post a summary of today’s developments shortly.

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

 

[zwiebel]

Had Roux actually closed his argument when we adjourned, anyone with a live feed?

 

[Giles]

Had Roux actually closed his argument when we adjourned, anyone with a live feed?

Yes, he was fairly quick and to the point.

 

[Val1]

Had Roux actually closed his argument when we adjourned, anyone with a live feed?

I got shut down, not that I was listening to Roux anyway....

 

[zwiebel]

Well, from that, I can honestly say I have no idea if Masipa will allow the appeal or not.

 

[zwiebel]

'Criminal law expert William Booth explains why he believes Judge Masipa will grant the State their appeal request. Watch to find out why.'

(video at link)

http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/LIVE-Oscar-Pistorius-appeal-ruling-20141209

 

[Deleted member 102539]

Stephanie Findlay ‏@SJFindlay 35 Min.Vor 35 Minuten

Roux has his teacher-knows-better voice on for his arguments against the #Pistorius appeal


Stephanie Findlay ‏@SJFindlay 2 Std.Vor 2 Stunden

Nel confuses his argument by peppering his sentences with subordinate clauses while speaking, also ruins most quotes #Pistorius

 

[Lux et Veritas]

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.

Any judgment (and by extension, sentence) based upon a serious mistake of factual finding(s) must be, by default, seriously wrong.

One cannot harvest avocados from a peach tree.

Masipa's house built on sand must fall.

 

[Deleted member 102539]

Rebecca Davis ‏@becsplanb 2 Std.Vor 2 Stunden

Holy moly this is like being at a law lecture at an Afrikaans university in the period after lunch on a Friday #zzzzzzz #Pistorius

 

[Lux et Veritas]

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

Yes, he did, a real rah-rah pep talk LOL - but Masipa runs the real risk of looking like an azz if she does, with zero confidence that her verdict and sentence will stand scrutiny before the SCA.

If she's smart and if for nothing else but to save face, she should grant it.

 

[Jake18]

Roux as smooth and full of faux indignation as ever! Nel's undeniable strength was his ability to cut through the crap on cross - he's not as fluent giving a persuasive argument. That being said, it's pretty hard for anyone to stand before a superior and tell them (with the utmost respect or not) that their verdict was full of sh1**.

I can't understand what Masipa has to consider? Not being disingenuous, genuinely confused. If she believes the DT's "you were right the first time and there's nothing to consider now" argument then she should allow the appeal for validation purposes. If she's retrospectively realised she may have made an error then surely she's honour bound to allow the appeal.

I'm not surprised the assessor is there. Those rhino horns likely ensured that she will be assisting Masipa with her perusal of the heads of argument tonight (and yes, in my opinion, the original decision was a corrupt one).