Oscar Pistorius - Discussion Thread #62 ~ the appeal~

[Colin de France]

......who would say anything, certainly not Pistorius.....i can tell you the examination he had done regardless of all the frills was extremely lightweight...

 

[GR_Turner]

I just reacquainted myself with psychologist Stoltzs part. His report is here -

https://juror13lw.files.wordpress.com/2014/07/scholtz-report.pdf

After a quick scan what comes back to me is
a) the lack of interviews Stoltz did - of course he some of OP's family members eg sister

b) Stoltz has only done 90 forensic assessments across his career of 23 years. ( 4-5 a year, in high profile US cases - the forensic appointed for an NGRI would have done hundreds within that time frame. )

c) "Inconsistencies". eg. taken at face value and reported in it are comments form OP to Stoltz such as he doesn't drink much except "odd social occasions." He "never reacted to the offers from beautiful women models" . Obviously we have all seen the photos of models he has dated.

"Inconsistencies". aka economical with the verite

Don't know if i can be bothered looking at the rest - would be so much easier to bring my up old posts from 2013 but you cant do that any more with WS.


And lest we forget, no-one ( ie Pros) refuted the MH assessment precisely because it's result what the Pros needed to head off the Defence moves- he could not be NGRI for want of a better term. If you recall, at the time the Pros requested this report Vorster was claiming GAD. OP's defence was veering to automatism and even later Derman was trying to claim a startle response as if OP was physiologically different.
No one refuted it - it didn't matter - it just resolved a possible escape plan of the Defences based on Vorster.

Now I do have to ask myself - why am I bothering? It's as I said 2 threads back - time-wasting!

You're changing the argument. I'm talking about a posters comments about his personality. Much of the states case involved trying to convince the court that op was the kind of person to kill Reeva deliberately and this evidence goes entirely against this. The prosecution could have queried it and didn't.

The point about mental illness is a totally different point. I don't think the Defence really intended to claim he was mentally ill tho they then shouldn't have had Vorster as a witness as she went too far. I think they just screwed up judging by rouxs reaction.

 

[aftermath]

You're changing the argument. I'm talking about a posters comments about his personality. Much of the states case involved trying to convince the court that op was the kind of person to kill Reeva deliberately and this evidence goes entirely against this. The prosecution could have queried it and didn't.

The point about mental illness is a totally different point. I don't think the Defence really intended to claim he was mentally ill tho they then shouldn't have had Vorster as a witness as she went too far. I think they just screwed up judging by rouxs reaction.

I agree. Roux was very clear that they were not arguing any kind of mental incapacity. They made it clear before the 30 day assessment that Pistorius knew right from wrong and wasn't claiming mental illness as a factor. I think Vorster herself even said that GAD was not an illness as such...

 

[aftermath]

So... Police compromise the crime scene but thankfully not the photos that suggest a duvet could have fallen on the floor.. ;a police chief expresses disappointment that watches were stolen, but it wasn't police it was amy pistorius/carice stander based on no evidence at all; Pistorius’s auntie prepped him on how to fool a panel of qualified psychologists/ psychiatrists....; pistorius also faked ptsd symptoms at key moments; the judge suddenly became incompetent when on her initial appointment people were happy with her integrity, competence and hard line on DV; the Pistorius family- like some kind of illuminati 'disappeared' urine and blood samples; a panel of psych experts were fooled by Pistorius's charm/acting or dazzled by his former powerful status; pistorius - who (it was claimed) has a pattern of stroppy tantrums, decides this one night to stalk reeva in virtual silence as no angry male voice is heard. Worse than this, he has the brazen nerve to call for help before shooting his girlfriend- so confident that he can kill her through a door before anyone nearby calls for help. They have a blazing row for almost an hour before this but only reeva is heard. (Although they both go silent at the moment the security go past on their nightly rounds...)...

Just a few of the odd things that make up the arguments against Pistorius. ..

 

[Trotterly]

So... Police compromise the crime scene but thankfully not the photos that suggest a duvet could have fallen on the floor.. ;a police chief expresses disappointment that watches were stolen, but it wasn't police it was amy pistorius/carice stander based on no evidence at all; Pistorius’s auntie prepped him on how to fool a panel of qualified psychologists/ psychiatrists....; pistorius also faked ptsd symptoms at key moments; the judge suddenly became incompetent when on her initial appointment people were happy with her integrity, competence and hard line on DV; the Pistorius family- like some kind of illuminati 'disappeared' urine and blood samples; a panel of psych experts were fooled by Pistorius's charm/acting or dazzled by his former powerful status; pistorius - who (it was claimed) has a pattern of stroppy tantrums, decides this one night to stalk reeva in virtual silence as no angry male voice is heard. Worse than this, he has the brazen nerve to call for help before shooting his girlfriend- so confident that he can kill her through a door before anyone nearby calls for help. They have a blazing row for almost an hour before this but only reeva is heard. (Although they both go silent at the moment the security go past on their nightly rounds...)...

Just a few of the odd things that make up the arguments against Pistorius. ..

We will see another 5 judges suddenly becoming incompetent as well.

or bribed

or senile

or too inexperienced

or uncle Arnold's mates

etc

etc


etc......


*sigh*

 

[aftermath]

We will see another 5 judges suddenly becoming incompetent as well.

or bribed

or senile

or too inexperienced

or uncle Arnold's mates

etc

etc


etc......


*sigh*

Worrying time to be an appeals judge.
.

 

[GR_Turner]

I just reacquainted myself with psychologist Stoltzs part. His report is here -

https://juror13lw.files.wordpress.com/2014/07/scholtz-report.pdf

After a quick scan what comes back to me is
a) the lack of interviews Stoltz did - of course he some of OP's family members eg sister

b) Stoltz has only done 90 forensic assessments across his career of 23 years. ( 4-5 a year, in high profile US cases - the forensic appointed for an NGRI would have done hundreds within that time frame. )

c) "Inconsistencies". eg. taken at face value and reported in it are comments form OP to Stoltz such as he doesn't drink much except "odd social occasions." He "never reacted to the offers from beautiful women models" . Obviously we have all seen the photos of models he has dated. he was buying a house for him & RS. He had never taken a woman to a big sporting event before( remember Nel's cross x of Van Zyl re Sam Taylor as OP had wanted ST to go to Olympics with him previously.) Anyway that's from interviews with OP! TBH a huge chunk of it is like a doctored biography.

"Inconsistencies". aka economical with the verite

Don't know if i can be bothered looking at the rest - would be so much easier to bring my up old posts from 2013 but you cant do that any more with WS.


And lest we forget, no-one ( ie Pros) refuted the MH assessment precisely because it's result what the Pros needed to head off the Defence moves- he could not be NGRI for want of a better term. If you recall, at the time the Pros requested this report Vorster was claiming GAD. OP's defence was veering to automatism and even later Derman was trying to claim a startle response as if OP was physiologically different.
No one refuted it - it didn't matter - it just resolved a possible escape plan of the Defences based on Vorster.

Now I do have to ask myself - why am I bothering? It's as I said 2 threads back - time-wasting!

He did 16 interviews. We only know he interviewed OP's brother and sister and Jenna Edkins - we don't know who the others were. It's 90 more assessments that any one on here for sure! And 90 sounds like a lot to me.

 

[cottonweaver]

I think people here waffling on about GAD need to go and improve their knowledge & understanding!

 

[cottonweaver]

Ooops - Jenna Edkins - now why might she not be seen as a credible interviewee in relation to her alleged place in events night of 13th Feb.

 

[GR_Turner]

I think people here waffling on about GAD need to go and improve their knowledge & understanding!

All the arguments about GAD are coming from the 'OP is guilty' side of things so yes I agree.

 

[GR_Turner]

Ooops - Jenna Edkins - now why might she not be seen as a credible interviewee in relation to her alleged place in events night of 13th Feb.

Oh yes I forgot, information from a person who dated the accused on and off for 5 years is worth nothing if they talked for a few minutes early in the evening of the shooting. Talking on the phone - damning stuff. I guess she's another one totally taken in by him and his (frankly amazing) charm and who is keen to lie to help him out.

 

[Trotterly]

I think people here waffling on about GAD need to go and improve their knowledge & understanding!

As I recall GAD was desired by the defence and their expert diagnosed it. The evaluation did not return GAD but put OP in the same ballpark which I think ultimately had the effect of branding OP as jumpy with the advantage of the diagnosis being seen as independent.

 

[cottonweaver]

He did 16 interviews. We only know he interviewed OP's brother and sister and Jenna Edkins - we don't know who the others were. It's 90 more assessments that any one on here for sure! And 90 sounds like a lot to me.

Ok. It's like your "Masipa was well-qualified " point all over again, because you plucked a "since 1998" comment out and that sounded to you like a heap of relevant experience at a relevant level. It doesn't work like that for Judges in most Western, developed countries. But, see my post 2 thread 62.

One must surely compare info. eg. Compare the quals, experience, papers, professional bodies, citations ........not against posters on this site obviously because that's meaningless comparison, it doesn't even deflect effectively
As i said yesterday - WE are not experts you or I.

So take a big trial recent / current today in another country you're familiar with- UK, US wherever. ( Op's was SA's "big" trial. ) Who are the main players and experts? What level are they at? Standards they need to meet?

Then look at the someone operating as a "big name" forensic psychiatrist or psychol but working in the public sphere, for the State. How many hundreds of psyc and competency evals have they done? Are they helping draft guidelines for conducting sanity exams, even helping draft revisions for the DSM. Are they certified forensics? What do their reports look like, how do they read, how many hundreds of pages are they?

So I'm sorry , instead of supplying the examples and links I have in front of me there's a few pointers instead of the direction needed for making a more effective comparison. It won't make one an expert but it might be illuminating.

 

[cottonweaver]

FPS

The evaluation confirmed no mental defect at the time of the commission of the crime- that was the issue at hand.

 

[cottonweaver]

All the arguments about GAD are coming from the 'OP is guilty' side of things so yes I agree.

Nah - aftermaths post that GADs not even a real disorder acc to aftermath and Dr Vorster, acc to aftermath. It's only a page or 2 back!

I think Vorster does at least know her DSM versions!

 

[lithgow1]

So... Police compromise the crime scene but thankfully not the photos that suggest a duvet could have fallen on the floor.. ;a police chief expresses disappointment that watches were stolen, but it wasn't police it was amy pistorius/carice stander based on no evidence at all; Pistorius’s auntie prepped him on how to fool a panel of qualified psychologists/ psychiatrists....; pistorius also faked ptsd symptoms at key moments; the judge suddenly became incompetent when on her initial appointment people were happy with her integrity, competence and hard line on DV; the Pistorius family- like some kind of illuminati 'disappeared' urine and blood samples; a panel of psych experts were fooled by Pistorius's charm/acting or dazzled by his former powerful status; pistorius - who (it was claimed) has a pattern of stroppy tantrums, decides this one night to stalk reeva in virtual silence as no angry male voice is heard. Worse than this, he has the brazen nerve to call for help before shooting his girlfriend- so confident that he can kill her through a door before anyone nearby calls for help. They have a blazing row for almost an hour before this but only reeva is heard. (Although they both go silent at the moment the security go past on their nightly rounds...)...

Just a few of the odd things that make up the arguments against Pistorius. ..

Lots of things worth discussing so let`s start with one. We don`t know for sure who took his watch but we do know who took the deceased`s handbag from the crime scene. Aimee Pistorius barely knew Reeva Steenkamp and AFAIK didn`t know her mother at all so what do you think that was all about? Bit of a coincidence too IMO that the only day she was not in court was the day Carice Stander described that incident.

 

[cottonweaver]

You're changing the argument. I'm talking about a posters comments about his personality. Much of the states case involved trying to convince the court that op was the kind of person to kill Reeva deliberately and this evidence goes entirely against this. The prosecution could have queried it and didn't.

The point about mental illness is a totally different point. I don't think the Defence really intended to claim he was mentally ill tho they then shouldn't have had Vorster as a witness as she went too far. I think they just screwed up judging by rouxs reaction.

I've only just seen your reply - I was working backwards through the posts - it was starting to make more sense! ( Joke)

Ok - i get your meaning re OP personality. But I do actually think OP was messed up- before the crime. However I couldn't give a fig whether he comes down with x, y, or z subsequently.
I appreciate you personally don't think he killed her deliberately. But this is a very loose term isn't it?

Most of the world disagrees with you and I know that, in and of itself is irrelevant to you. As I said previously - even his old pals in SA think it was directus - they'd seen his rages, he was notorious for it. Of course it's not evidence, legal proof etc etc. But directus based on DV, where the bloke ( usually in SA) regrets it later - oldest story in the book.

As said half-jokingly earlier even Roux knows it. And so he can slap himself on the back for not being able to string a sentence together coherently and obfuscate til the cows go home or Masipa nodded off.

 

[cottonweaver]

Lots of things worth discussing so let`s start with one. We don`t know for sure who took his watch but we do know who took the deceased`s handbag from the crime scene. Aimee Pistorius barely knew Reeva Steenkamp and AFAIK didn`t know her mother at all so what do you think that was all about? Bit of a coincidence too IMO that the only day she was not in court was the day Carice Stander described that incident.

AFAIK - sister met RS once at grandpa's funeral - unless someone wants to correct that?

 

[cottonweaver]

Oh yes I forgot, information from a person who dated the accused on and off for 5 years is worth nothing if they talked for a few minutes early in the evening of the shooting. Talking on the phone - damning stuff. I guess she's another one totally taken in by him and his (frankly amazing) charm and who is keen to lie to help him out.

Whilst i don't like to reply late and clutter Lithgow's current points on the next page - I only just saw your post.

If it's correct that she was sleeping with OP at the same time that Op was sleeping with RS, you may well find it has a bearing.
Damning stuff you say? Well yes, it could be the blue touch paper couldn't it?
If she was a source of arguments that night - that's the word amongst their circle of friends. Acc to the psych interview with Stoltz i just read Babbi Shooz was indeed the love of his life. Other than support him in this interview, I'd want to keep my head down if I was in her shoes. Oh, she has done.
Keen to help him out you say incredulously.....see my previous point and I admire your "sheltered" life experience if you have never seen this kind of thing before.

 

[Trotterly]

Lots of things worth discussing so let`s start with one. We don`t know for sure who took his watch but we do know who took the deceased`s handbag from the crime scene. Aimee Pistorius barely knew Reeva Steenkamp and AFAIK didn`t know her mother at all so what do you think that was all about? Bit of a coincidence too IMO that the only day she was not in court was the day Carice Stander described that incident.

Might be because I'm tired but ....why is this a coincidence?