Discussion Thread #61 ~ the appeal~

[Colin de France]

.... if Reeva had gone to the toilet whilst he was on the balcony getting the fan in then it could well have been her who made the noise in the bathroom, this is a normal situation with a couple, where one wakes the other up....what is so unbelievable is that he automatically thought intruder instead of the other person in the room which is completely illogical.......it just doesn't work......

 

[aftermath]

But he never said he thought there were robbers elsewhere in the house. Everything centred on the bathroom. I really don`t think you can go putting possible thoughts into his head in order to try and explain something that on the surface seems a poorer choice than the other options open to him.

What about the other possible reason- that in the panic, with adrenalin kicking in, strategic thinking might have been compromised?

 

[Trotterly]

What do you mean? I didn`t notice the bit in your mate`s post about the possibility of it being Reeva as opposed to knowing for sure it was her. When i read his response I replied that he was right and then you had to be a smart a ss about it. So as I said, go ....

Well Masipa did get slammed for concentrating on DE of Reeva rather than of a person.

 

[GR_Turner]

They had to get down the hallway to get to the bedroom didn't they?

Sure. How long would it take an intruder to do that though. He should probably have just stayed in the bedroom and aimed down the corridor but then again many of these home invasions involved large groups so maybe it makes more sense to get him or them out asap rather than wait for them all to get in. And I'm not sure that logic necessarily holds when you think you might be about to be attacked.

 

[Trotterly]

What about the other possible reason- that in the panic, with adrenalin kicking in, strategic thinking might have been compromised?

Yes. It is interesting to think that had it been an intruder the decision to pick up the gun could have saved both their lives rather than triggering the CH conviction because of his recklessness.

 

[lithgow1]

What about the other possible reason- that in the panic, with adrenalin kicking in, strategic thinking might have been compromised?

But much of his whole defence revolved around his strategic thinking at the time. Instructions to call the police, not making any noise when he got near the bathroom in order to not give his position away, hugging the wall as he made his way down the hallway, peering around the corner, covering this and covering that. The way he told it, his thinking wasn`t compromised. He was scared sure, but he was also in stealth commando mode, doing what was the best thing to protect him and Reeva.

 

[GR_Turner]

.... if Reeva had gone to the toilet whilst he was on the balcony getting the fan in then it could well have been her who made the noise in the bathroom, this is a normal situation with a couple, where one wakes the other up....what is so unbelievable is that he automatically thought intruder instead of the other person in the room which is completely illogical.......it just doesn't work......

It actually does make sense though. If you weren't sure where your partner was you'd look for them or at least consider the possibility they might have gone into the other room. But in OP's case Reeva was in bed on the window side so to get out she'd have to go right over the bed to his side and then down a corridor without him noticing. The very unlikelihood actually works in his favour as it makes his belief that she was still there understandable.

 

[lithgow1]

Sure. How long would it take an intruder to do that though. He should probably have just stayed in the bedroom and aimed down the corridor but then again many of these home invasions involved large groups so maybe it makes more sense to get him or them out asap rather than wait for them all to get in. And I'm not sure that logic necessarily holds when you think you might be about to be attacked.

So now you are saying that he chose the best option to deal with a large group? On his stumps, in the dark, with the possibility of a mini army about to blitz attack the bedroom? In that case, if that thought was going through his mind even though it seems you are the one who has come up with it, not OP, then he is even more stupid to have not got both of them out of there asap and trigger the alarm at the same time.

 

[Colin de France]

It actually does make sense though. If you weren't sure where your partner was you'd look for them or at least consider the possibility they might have gone into the other room. But in OP's case Reeva was in bed on the window side so to get out she'd have to go right over the bed to his side and then down a corridor without him noticing. The very unlikelihood actually works in his favour as it makes his belief that she was still there understandable.

.....no, he was on the balcony occupied with the fan and the sliding door, for her to have crossed over to his side which would of been the direct route to the hallway is the most natural and you fully well know that .....

 

[aftermath]

But much of his whole defence revolved around his strategic thinking at the time. Instructions to call the police, not making any noise when he got near the bathroom in order to not give his position away, hugging the wall as he made his way down the hallway, peering around the corner, covering this and covering that. The way he told it, his thinking wasn`t compromised. He was scared sure, but he was also in stealth commando mode, doing what was the best thing to protect him and Reeva.

Or doing what he perceived in that moment -with the panic/adrenalin/fight-flight response kicking in etc - to be the best thing to protect him and Reeva.

Arguably the best strategy might have been to cover the passage from where he was in the bedroom, whilst asking reeva to alert police/security by phone- possibly even from the balcony.

 

[Colin de France]

Or doing what he perceived in that moment -with the panic/adrenalin/fight-flight response kicking in etc - to be the best thing to protect him and Reeva.

Arguably the best strategy might have been to cover the passage from where he was in the bedroom, whilst asking reeva to alert police/security by phone- possibly even from the balcony.

...exactly, there was no need for him to of gone down the hallway even more so considering the fear that he had ...........he would of been protecting Reeva far better giving her time to press the alarm button...........but that won't work it's far too logical......

 

[GR_Turner]

But much of his whole defence revolved around his strategic thinking at the time. Instructions to call the police, not making any noise when he got near the bathroom in order to not give his position away, hugging the wall as he made his way down the hallway, peering around the corner, covering this and covering that. The way he told it, his thinking wasn`t compromised. He was scared sure, but he was also in stealth commando mode, doing what was the best thing to protect him and Reeva.

But think about how long his actions took and then how long he took to explain them both in his main evidence and particularly under cross and in what detail. Nel wanted to know not only what happened at each point but why he did or did not do this and what was he thinking etc.

As an example if you were explaining how you got up in the night, walked down a corridor avoiding a bag you knew was on the floor your cross might go like this - 'why did you leave the bag there in the first place knowing you might trip on it? Or did you leave it there hoping that your girlfriend would trip on it? Ok, let's assume you're not lying about that for a moment, even though we know you're making all this up - so when you were walking down the corridor why didn't you trip on the bag? Ah, so you were thinking about avoiding it so you were concentrating on every little detail, that's interesting. Or did you put it there later so that you could claim that that's why you took that route along the corridor? Ah that makes sense and helps the state because....' This is exactly the kind of thing Nel did all the time. All insinuation, no evidence.

 

[cottonweaver]

Look it up. If the court had believed OP thought for a split second that it might be Reeva and gone ahead and shot anyway then it would have been DE of Reeva.

I seem to recall everyone loving Masipa when they believed she would do what they wanted . No, I'm not convinced they did prove DE. Your arguments don't hold when you compare with other similar cases.

LOL. I don't need to look it up!

IMO this was however DD ie. with intent ( remember "pre-med" does not exist in SA law and even over here is an abused term) - but no way that DD could be proved. So never expected that verdict.

On Masipa. :thinking: You keep repeating this same point.


As i recall well, lots of posters had faith, oops lots of top SA barristers had faith, quite a few posters were entirely cynical due to her approach, others had concerns due to her lack of experience to be given a position at that level. Concerns were soothed with reasoning re. different approaches in SA law. Research was done- little info. was available because it was true - she had little experience. The back story was good, the oft quoted harsh sentence in a DV case was clung to. That's it. I personally was totally naive in my faith that she would reach the correct verdict. I said so then, said it 30 pages ago - it's not a big deal to me, on any level. I think you're clutching at the wrong straws.

Verdict was delivered . More legal EXPERTS ( remember, not me and you as I said 30 or so pages ago) were confounded , described themselves as "stunned", "embarassed", "disquieted". They are trying to describe extreme surprise and shock at a miscarriage. They're not like little kiddies in the playground pretending that they never thought differently, secure as they are, in their own expertise, Ms. Turner.

 

[aftermath]

...exactly, there was no need for him to of gone down the hallway even more so considering the fear that he had ...........he would of been protecting Reeva far better giving her time to press the alarm button.......

We have the benefit of time to consider best strategic options. That he didn't select what we (from our privileged position of hindsight) might feel to have been the best option doesn't make him a murderer.

 

[Colin de France]

We have the benefit of time to consider best strategic options. That he didn't select what we (from our privileged position of hindsight) might feel to have been the best option doesn't make him a murderer.

.....where do get this stuff from.....i only agreed with your post ....you're making a real mockery of yourself....

 

[GR_Turner]

LOL. I don't need to look it up!

IMO this was however DD ie. with intent ( remember "pre-med" does not exist in SA law and even over here is an abused term) - but no way that DD could be proved. So never expected that verdict.

On Masipa. :thinking: You keep repeating this same point.


As i recall well, lots of posters had faith, oops lots of top SA barristers had faith, quite a few posters were entirely cynical due to her approach, others had concerns due to her lack of experience to be given a position at that level. Concerns were soothed with reasoning re. different approaches in SA law. Research was done- little info. was available because it was true - she had little experience. The back story was good, the oft quoted harsh sentence in a DV case was clung to. That's it. I personally was totally naive in my faith that she would reach the correct verdict. I said so then, said it 30 pages ago - it's not a big deal to me, on any level. I think you're clutching at the wrong straws.

Verdict was delivered . More legal EXPERTS ( remember, not me and you as I said 30 or so pages ago) were confounded , described themselves as "stunned", "embarassed", "disquieted". They are trying to describe extreme surprise and shock at a miscarriage. They're not like little kiddies in the playground pretending that they never thought differently, secure as they are, in their own expertise, Ms. Turner.

The quote implied that there had been negative views of Masipa from early in the trial - I don't think they were widespread at least. How can you say that she had little experience? High court judge since 1998? This seems like quite a lot of experience to me.

 

[cottonweaver]

.....where do get this stuff from.....i only agreed with your post ....you're making a real mockery of yourself....

Aww! I was just about to give you the thumbs up and translate for FromGermany ( who has given up as opposed to given in ) on the phrase "Give Over" which is one of the very best Northern quips and totally apt! ( That's from a Northerner, but no longer there am afraid.)

 

[aftermath]

.....where do get this stuff from.....i only agreed with you ....

It's hard to reply when you keep changing what you have posted! First you say 'give over' then you tell me to try answering objectively, then they disappear and you acknowledge we have agreed on something.

Do you agree again that in itself Pistorius NOT doing what you and I (from the safety of our keyboards) might feel to be the best option, doesn't immediately indicate that he is a murderer?

 

[Colin de France]

Aww! I was just about to give you the thumbs up and translate for FromGermany ( who has given up as opposed to given in ) on the phrase "Give Over" which is one of the very best Northern quips and totally apt! ( That's from a Northerner, but no longer there am afraid.)

....well i'm sorry to hear that FromGermany has quit hopefully those amongst us can convince her to come back i'm sure she's watching .......as for "give over" i took it off as i didn't want to upset the the gang of three......

 

[cottonweaver]

The quote implied that there had been negative views of Masipa from early in the trial - I don't think they were widespread at least. How can you say that she had little experience? High court judge since 1998? This seems like quite a lot of experience to me.

BIB not sure which quote but anyway a couple of posters incl JJudi did the full number on Masipa and analysed the findings. You see, we are not experts on that, that's why it sounded impressive but it actually meant very little.