Discussion Thread #60 - 14.9.12 ~ the appeal~

[JudgeJudi]

Masipa and her "mercy"! Any excuse to help OP skate.

WHY should any sentence be required to have an "element of mercy"? Where in the law is this stated?

All too many killers deserve NO mercy.

I think Masipa grossly confuses mercy and justice.

Masipa handed down a 252 year prison sentence to a man who raped three women in the course of home burglaries. She also gave a life sentence to a policeman who shot and killed his estranged wife in an argument over their divorce settlement. “You are a killer,” Masipa told him.

“Her perspective could prove crucial in the Pistorius case, in which the prosecution has told a story of a man, quick to anger and reckless with guns, shooting his girlfriend after a quarrel, while the defense has drawn a picture of a boyfriend who loved Steenkamp and so would never hurt her, and tragically mistook her for an intruder. Both might see something in a comment that Masipa made ... in the rape case: “The worst, in my view, is that he attacked and raped the victims in the sanctity of their own homes, where they thought they were safe.”

As shocking as rape is, you still have a life, but Reeva is dead. Where was the so-called mercy for either of these two men? 252 years for 3 rapes!!! She shows an inordinate amount of mercy to OP by sentencing him to 5 years which equates to 10 months for murder!!!

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/the-woman-who-will-judge-oscar-pistorius

 

[ochreblue]

Is Oscar there?

No - OP not there.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Val1]

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 persual of the heads of argument tonight (and yes, in my opinion, the original decision was a corrupt one).

BBM Yup, I didn't hear Roux say anything to the judge in anything but his "I'm right don't listen to him" singsong, slightly whiny(to me) voice, whereas Nel definitely came across as too deferential imo, especially given that he obviously strongly believes she(and/or her "fact" finders) erred in some of their decisions when recognizing/reconciling the facts with the law.

 

[L2L]

I'd love to know what she says to Nel and Roux when she asks to see them in chambers! Does she hug Roux and then slap Nel?

 

[zwiebel]

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

Agreed about the subordinate clauses. They work okay written down with proper punctuation, but when he's speaking, the original point of what he's saying sometimes gets lost by the end. Roux did the same and worse during the trial, but wisely seems to have avoided doing it today so much.

 

[Estelle]

I just signed into twitter and read that Dewani is trending in South Africa at No 5 but this appeal hearing is not.

 

[sleuth-d-]

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

yes roux! whatever the facts at the time of the shooting, his state of mind at the time is still an inference.

would be v interested to discuss how the facts of the shooting can lead to knowing 'oscar's state of mind'.

 

[Interested Bystander]

Nigel Cupido ‏@FrankieNigel 2 mins2 minutes ago

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

I suspect JM is not up to speed with the intricacies of SA law and needs to confer with her hand-holding assessor/s before expounding. IMO a competent judge would have known exactly what to do in this situation. She has seen it coming for weeks.

 

[Interested Bystander]

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

There was a move a few years ago to enshrine the right for Prosecutors to appeal factual findings in SA law but somehow it has got lost along the way and has never been incorporated in their CPA. Maybe this will give the powers-that-be the impetus to get this aspect moving again.

http://www.iol.co.za/pretoria-news/opinion/oscar-should-thank-his-lucky-stars-1.1755639

 

[Estelle]

 

[Estelle]

 

[JudgeJudi]

His delivery today has been disappointing. For as intelligent as he is, he sometimes struggles with articulation. He seems a bit overwhelmed with the details that he needs to present.

He was the same when delivering his heads of argument re conviction. He rushed it and didn't hammer home crucial points, and in fact didn't verbalise all that he raised in his heads. I think he left too much to Masipa and the assessors to adjudicate. Roux on the other hand, with much less to work with IMO, made the most of every single point and scored well with Masipa even after that disastrous statement of comparing OP to an abused woman. I'll never forget that moment.

Nel had a completely different mindset however when delivering his argument re sentence. It was perfect - slow, precise and covered every aspect.

Masipa needs to be spoon fed, and this is exactly what Roux does. Then of course she got backup from du Toit.

I still believe the language barrier plays a big part of Nel's unease when he's addressing the court. Roux on the other hand seems quite at home using English. I think there's more to it than that though, but I'm not quite sure what it is. Perhaps it's the genuine care he feels for the victim's family and the importance of getting justice for them that affects him. Remember how his voice broke when he was arguing re the sentence. For me, that was a such a poignant moment in the trial.

 

[Interested Bystander]

View attachment 65150

LOL. I think this expression also shows she really doesn't follow the argument though I do feel some pity for her as I found Nel very difficult to follow today. I think my expression may have been much the same . It is no wonder to me that she was quiet all through the trial. Was Nel's problem the occasion or something else? Did he find it so difficult to appeal her judgement that it caused his lack of fluency? I suppose it may cause a relationship problem in the future but I always felt JM had a "down" on Nel. I think she is a sucker for a smooth talker; something he is not.

 

[mrjitty]

You guys are overlooking the nature of appeal procedure.

These sorts of applications are on the papers. There is no wide ranging legal argument at this stage.

Nel knows the Judge does not agree that her decision is incorrect. Of course she does not.

It would be dangerous for the prosecutor to grandstand before the Judge under any circumstances, let alone on leave to appeal.

His job is only to summarise the States case - not to try and convince the judge which would be a hopeless case.

If and when he gets in front of the SC judges, you will see his efforts to be persuasive.

 

[JudgeJudi]

But could he if wanted to just to have a change of scenery and get out of prison for a day?

All I can say is it's not customary. The norm is it's just the legals.

 

[mrjitty]

I'd love to know what she says to Nel and Roux when she asks to see them in chambers! Does she hug Roux and then slap Nel?

Remember its just a job for these people.

Back of house they can cut to the chase.

Also the standings come in to play.

Roux is a famous defence lawyer with a brighter star than any journey man judge.

Both Roux and Nel will be more "at their level" in the supreme court

 

[mrjitty]

I suspect JM is not up to speed with the intricacies of SA law and needs to confer with her hand-holding assessor/s before expounding. IMO a competent judge would have known exactly what to do in this situation. She has seen it coming for weeks.

I agree she already decided - but she needs time to finalise the written decision, following the oral submissions. I don't see anything unusual.

Back home it works a bit differently.

The Judge may give an oral decision swiftly - from notes - but the written judgement may take some time to arrive.

My one and only appearance on the commercial list was an application for leave to adjourn a proceeding to a later date.

I said a whole load of bollocks - which the judge had in writing anyway - and hoped he wouldn't ask anything else.

The Judge simply said "granted" and asked the clerk to arrange a new date

There is no real need to get excited at these things as there is no jury to play to.

 

[Interested Bystander]

You guys are overlooking the nature of appeal procedure.

These sorts of applications are on the papers. There is no wide ranging legal argument at this stage.

Nel knows the Judge does not agree that her decision is incorrect. Of course she does not.

It would be dangerous for the prosecutor to grandstand before the Judge under any circumstances, let alone on leave to appeal.

His job is only to summarise the States case - not to try and convince the judge which would be a hopeless case.

If and when he gets in front of the SC judges, you will see his efforts to be persuasive.

BiB

I admit falling into that category. She obviously has the appeal document to refer to and perhaps it is unreasonable to always expect to understand what the lawyers are saying in a televised trial. Somehow I think we will not be seeing any more TV trials from SA in the near future.

 

[mrjitty]

He was the same when delivering his heads of argument re conviction.

Do you really think a better closing delivery would have changed the result?

The Judge will have reached her conclusion on the key facts long before closing.

 

[mrjitty]

BiB

I admit falling into that category. She obviously has the appeal document to refer to and perhaps it is unreasonable to always expect to understand what the lawyers are saying in a televised trial. Somehow I think we will not be seeing any more TV trials from SA in the near future.

There is an big iceberg effect.

The judge might have asked any number of difficult questions and you better believe Nel had to have answers for them. So lots of preparation work goes unnoticed.

What I found usual in Nel's closing statement was the lack of detailed legal argumentation around the case law.

However I think this might reflect the difference in systems