Oscar Pistorius - Discussion Thread #64 ~ the appeal~

[Interested Bystander]

I have reposted my original due to being unable to correct Michele Burger's surname which I had misspelt. Apologies to those who left a thank you:-

The following is a comment made under the video of Burger's testimony. It is clearly from a medic but I have not named anyone. It is there for anyone to read. I don't wish to openly name the poster but I am happy to link to the position where it can be found.

[video=youtube;uadnpxsXaKY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uadnpxsXaKY&index=5&list=PLPWoQvCMB4gIIt8dDH4mZ82NU-PD80VlW[/video]

"As a woman (or man) is screaming loudly and frantically in a continuous scream, she is using her FEV-1 part of her FORCED EXPIRATORY VOLUME first andthen FEV-2..., which is more forceful than her VITAL CAPACITY which isbasically inspiratory and therefore slower and less forceful BUT requiring moreactive pressure or force (roughly ATP<=>ADP+energy release [in themitochondria, duh!] for Actin/Myosin(again, without mentioning the role ofionic Calcium and some other muscle/sarcolemnal proteins) coupling anduncoupling in the striated muscle-in this case, the intercostals &diaphragmatic- which although partially involuntary, are striated too). Whenthe LAST HEAD SHOT hit the victim, her heart will still beat for seconds tomaybe minutes ( bradycardia first, then mixedhypoxic/neuronal/autonomic(parasympathetic or cholinergic part)->>brady/tachy/fibrillatory till complete ASYSTOLE) depending on the impact andextent of the bullet wound (ignoring the Cushing Triad sequence since this isnot a closed Head Injury), she will have NO cognitive functions left and NOinspiration (given that the Medulla Oblongata part of the Brainstem within theRhombencephalon is where the Respiratory Center is located with some higherneuronal connections and control in the Prosecephalon). BUT, her screaming,which is a part of her active expiratory effort or FEV-1 may continue for asecond, maybe 2, maybe 1.5 depending on it's intensity or the end of herEXPIRATORY VOLUME (and not FEV). It could have been drowned in the gunshot soundbecause the gunshot was louder and higher pitched (esp. a 9 mm which is a smallbore round but does travel through a narrower bore pistol than a .45ACP, .357mag or a .38 special but is less loud because less gunpowder in the case andlesser grained bullet) but ALL SOUND travels at the exact same velocity if itis through the same medium (as air in this case and the air here was the samein terms of temperature, humidity and all other physical properties, Ipresume). That much, I can help the prosecution very scientifically and to thepoint with my knowledge and field of expertise, if they happen to read my post.Leave the rest to the....rest. If anybody has questions about my explanationwith 1) the victim's scream or 2) gunshots, firearms or ballistics plz post andI can explain why-the mechanism; and how I suggested the answer. Legal stuff, Ihave no clue!! Leave it to the lawyers to fight it out. "

I am sure the moderators will remove this post if it contravenes any rule.

Apologies, my computer or the website is again leaving out the space between many words. There are too many for me to correct. I hope it is still readable.

Where the writer states that a gun sound could drown out the noise of the scream one must remember the scream would actually have occurred during or slightly after the gunshot sound and therefore Burger could have been absolutely correct about hearing Reeva's last scream after the fourth gunshot.

Professor Sayman,the pathologist who did the autopsy on Reeva, also stated that it was likely she screamedafter being shot in the head. What apity this was not followed up. Thefollowing is from news.sky. I don&#8217;t have time to listen to his testimonytonight but will try to do it tomorrow to confirm at what point he said this. I know many of us will remember it.

http://news.sky.com/story/1223868/oscar-pistorius-had-a-big-love-for-weapons

&#8220;He told thecourt Ms Steenkamp was shot three times - in the head, hip and arm - and thatit was likely she screamed after being shot in the head.&#8221;

 

[cottonweaver]

It's amazing how many members of the public, experts or not felt they wanted to contribute to the State's case isn't it IB.
I found this old article last week - the author used to post here on WS and sent her thoughts to G.Nel.

http://www.biznews.com/oscar-pistor...s-killer-lies-will-little-detail-nail-murder/

It is a shame that the State's team didn't have the resources to cast around for truly expert up-to-the-minute opinions, outside of S.A. (Cost? Thinking they already had enough?) We know the Defence team experts were poor but as you have said, just from your research on sound, it should have been easy to rebut the Defence's Mr. Lin etc. I can't load your recent posts today, except the youtube linked one, but I wonder what stopped the State getting last minute experts like Roux did? ( ie. What the pathologist said about her capacity to emit that scream - why didn't that point drive home? Is that just a Masipa issue?)


Technical difficulties with WS at the moment? I am having great difficulty loading an entire page of this thread too, frustrating...

 

[cottonweaver]

PS. Have WSers had a look at the Defence's/State's heads yet? Any views on their strength or otherwise?

It's on the arguments in these two documents that the SCA will rely.

 

[Deleted member 102539]

It's amazing how many members of the public, experts or not felt they wanted to contribute to the State's case isn't it IB.
I found this old article last week - the author used to post here on WS and sent her thoughts to G.Nel.

http://www.biznews.com/oscar-pistor...s-killer-lies-will-little-detail-nail-murder/

It is a shame that the State's team didn't have the resources to cast around for truly expert up-to-the-minute opinions, outside of S.A. (Cost? Thinking they already had enough?) We know the Defence team experts were poor but as you have said, just from your research on sound, it should have been easy to rebut the Defence's Mr. Lin etc. I can't load your recent posts today, except the youtube linked one, but I wonder what stopped the State getting last minute experts like Roux did? ( ie. What the pathologist said about her capacity to emit that scream - why didn't that point drive home? Is that just a Masipa issue?)


Technical difficulties with WS at the moment? I am having great difficulty loading an entire page of this thread too, frustrating...

Your link:
She did not survive to testify, but she left the State its best evidence: There was no blood in her airways. She could only have breathed a few times.

 

[Deleted member 102539]

I remember vague Nel saying (when? to whom?), he doesn't want to pay too much attention to that what happened after the shots/murder. (Can somebody help with a link?)
But I think:
The mosaic, which should have been built, had a certain scale: it ranged from before the shots (incl. audible arguement between OP and RS) until after the shots/murder (until the first foreign independent witness joined OP), IMO. When these mosaic parts are not 100% added to the whole (fatal shooting until the arrival of the first i-n-d-e-p-e-n-d-e-n-t witness), then there is a very incomplete picture / mosaic that has not enough probative value for the prosecution, IMO.
I admit:
The/a judge has to follow the case in this sense (re mosaic). Otherwise it doesn't help.

 

[Interested Bystander]

PS. Have WSers had a look at the Defence's/State's heads yet? Any views on their strength or otherwise?

It's on the arguments in these two documents that the SCA will rely.

I have read both HOAs again and my opinion is unchanged. I won't go into great detail but whilst I agree with everything the State has to say in their HOA, much of their argument is based on facts and not law. As far as I know, the SC only hears appeals on point of Law. I think much of the State's appeal will be disregarded as being inappropriate.

Sad to say, the Defence, on the other hand, seem to put a reasonable case to reject the State's Appeal with respect to points of law. They seem to belittle the States case.

What I particularly dislike about their Heads is that they quite openly lie, much as happened during the High Court case itself.

1. It is referred to at 22.2 that OP suffers from GAD (generalised anxiety disorder). This was disproved during his assessment.

2. The Defence claims OP did not act with knowledge of the unlawfulness of his conduct which is absolutely ridiculous. He passed his gun licence test and knew full well what was lawful and what was not.

3. The Defence claims that he did not subjectively foresee he would kill the person behind the door (what idiot would not know firing 4 Black Talon bullets into a confined area would likely kill the occupant).

4. Lastly the verdict was supported by the timeline which it patently was not.

I therefore am not holding out much hope. I think Nel would have been OK if the law allowed an Appeal on Facts (as do other South African countries) but I think he is up against it in SA.

I DO HOPE I AM WRONG!

My hope is that in the future the law will be changed to allow Appeals on Facts as was mooted some 13 (or was it 20) years ago but fell by the wayside.

 

[soozieqtips]

~snipped~

1. It is referred to at 22.2 that OP suffers from GAD (generalised anxiety disorder).
This was disproved during his assessment.

BIB - Wasn't it Vorster who claimed OP suffered from GAD at the time of the killing? Is that where Roux took his incorrect information from? Not that it matters, seeing how the evaluation found he didn't suffer from any mental issues at all when he shot Reeva dead.

 

[JudgeJudi]

I have read both HOAs again and my opinion is unchanged. I won't go into great detail but whilst I agree with everything the State has to say in their HOA, much of their argument is based on facts and not law. As far as I know, the SC only hears appeals on point of Law. I think much of the State's appeal will be disregarded as being inappropriate.

Sad to say, the Defence, on the other hand, seem to put a reasonable case to reject the State's Appeal with respect to points of law. They seem to belittle the States case.

What I particularly dislike about their Heads is that they quite openly lie, much as happened during the High Court case itself.

1. It is referred to at 22.2 that OP suffers from GAD (generalised anxiety disorder). This was disproved during his assessment.

2. The Defence claims OP did not act with knowledge of the unlawfulness of his conduct which is absolutely ridiculous. He passed his gun licence test and knew full well what was lawful and what was not.

3. The Defence claims that he did not subjectively foresee he would kill the person behind the door (what idiot would not know firing 4 Black Talon bullets into a confined area would likely kill the occupant).

4. Lastly the verdict was supported by the timeline which it patently was not.

I therefore am not holding out much hope. I think Nel would have been OK if the law allowed an Appeal on Facts (as do other South African countries) but I think he is up against it in SA.

I DO HOPE I AM WRONG!

My hope is that in the future the law will be changed to allow Appeals on Facts as was mooted some 13 (or was it 20) years ago but fell by the wayside.

The HoA isn't the be all and end all of the appeal. Remember there will be legal argument as well and the State will have an opportunity to rebut what the Defence says. The State's case is a mixture of fact and law, but they have to explain the facts in order to show how Masipa erred in her interpretation of the law.

As you can see from Roux referring to GAD, this too is fact, not law, and Nel will set the record straight.

The 5 judges need to know what the facts are in order to make a determination one way or the other. I too am not holding my breath and I think politics is playing a role somewhere in the background. As for me, I'm of the opinion that it was murder, and hopefully the appeal won't be the end of the story. As the saying goes, it ain't over till the fat lady sings.

 

[JudgeJudi]

Karyn Maughan &#8207;@karynmaughan · 2h2 hours ago

BREAKING: #OscarPistorius parole review now set for 5 October - not the 2nd, as previously indicated by correctional services @eNCA

 

[Interested Bystander]

The HoA isn't the be all and end all of the appeal. Remember there will be legal argument as well and the State will have an opportunity to rebut what the Defence says. The State's case is a mixture of fact and law, but they have to explain the facts in order to show how Masipa erred in her interpretation of the law.

As you can see from Roux referring to GAD, this too is fact, not law, and Nel will set the record straight.

The 5 judges need to know what the facts are in order to make a determination one way or the other. I too am not holding my breath and I think politics is playing a role somewhere in the background. As for me, I'm of the opinion that it was murder, and hopefully the appeal won't be the end of the story. As the saying goes, it ain't over till the fat lady sings.

Hi JJ. I am pleased to see you still have retained a level of confidence. I do realise there will be argument and that facts will need to be discussed. However, having read the State’s HoA several times I cannot help but think a change in the verdict is a very long shot. I felt the State seemed to be grasping at many straws rather than having dealt a killer blow . I hope I am completely wrong or perhaps that is not what happens. I am a novice at this, never having followed any Appeal to change a verdict of murder. Perhaps the “Mosaic” is the way to go. I am hoping the appeal will be televised so that we can see how the argument is presented.

Like you I am 100 per cent sure it should be DE and I feel the High Court constructed a defence for OP. Maybe there has been pressure applied for Masipa to hand down a weak verdict and it could only have been done by ignoring important points in the case. Nothing that happens in SA any longer surprises me.

 

[JudgeJudi]

Hi JJ. I am pleased to see you still have retained a level of confidence. I do realise there will be argument and that facts will need to be discussed. However, having read the State&#8217;s HoA several times I cannot help but think a change in the verdict is a very long shot. I felt the State seemed to be grasping at many straws rather than having dealt a killer blow . I hope I am completely wrong or perhaps that is not what happens. I am a novice at this, never having followed any Appeal to change a verdict of murder. Perhaps the &#8220;Mosaic&#8221; is the way to go. I am hoping the appeal will be televised so that we can see how the argument is presented.

Like you I am 100 per cent sure it should be DE and I feel the High Court constructed a defence for OP. Maybe there has been pressure applied for Masipa to hand down a weak verdict and it could only have been done by ignoring important points in the case. Nothing that happens in SA any longer surprises me.

Hi IB. I can assure you my level of confidence is pretty low but I haven't given up hope. I've neither seen nor heard of anything remotely like this trial, and I must say that nothing I've seen or heard to date inspires confidence in the forthcoming appeal.

Since sentencing I've gone over many aspects of the trial countless times and given many things a great deal of thought. Perhaps I'm in the minority, but now more than ever I think it's dolus directus, but let's just say DE would be a better outcome than what we've had thus far. One human life has got to be worth more than 10 months' imprisonment. The scales of justice are totally out of balance.

 

[Interested Bystander]

~snipped~


BIB - Wasn't it Vorster who claimed OP suffered from GAD at the time of the killing? Is that where Roux took his incorrect information from? Not that it matters, seeing how the evaluation found he didn't suffer from any mental issues at all when he shot Reeva dead.

I think you are right. It hasn't stopped Roux et al from including it in his argument but am I surprised - NO lol ! Roux played a lot of crooked balls during the trial.

 

[Colin de France]

....if there is a way forward it's to get him stuck that he knew she was in the WC.....and then take it from there...

 

[cottonweaver]

I think you are right. It hasn't stopped Roux et al from including it in his argument but am I surprised - NO lol ! Roux played a lot of crooked balls during the trial.

On the subject of Vorster's GAD.
We know that the MHEval team disproved that he had this disorder, (although agreed he suffered from anxiety.)

I have looked again at her judgment, at both Heads.

I have just been through Masipa again to see how whether she accepts GAD. In my reading, she does accept his GAD

The best example of this, from Masipa is here: Page 39
"This court also accepts that a person with an anxiety disorder as described by Dr Vorster, would get anxious very easily, especially when he is faced with danger. It is also understandable, that a person with a disability such as that of the accused would certainly feel vulnerable, when faced with danger."
She sums up the psych eval results ( but she doesn't point out GAD was disproved at WEskoppies.) and finishes that both state and def accepted findings.
My understanding is that the SCA have to go along with this disproved diagnosis of GAD now, it is a finding of fact- unappealable. ( Roux must hope he can slip it by, he runs with it using "anxiety" etc many times and as IB points out GAD at 22.2 .) State doesn't mention psych issues at any point in their Heads or make a point of her included unproven facts.
Can anyone here clarify this?

 

[cottonweaver]

deleted post

 

[Interested Bystander]

On the subject of Vorster's GAD.
We know that the MHEval team disproved that he had this disorder, (although agreed he suffered from anxiety.)

I have looked again at her judgment, at both Heads.

I have just been through Masipa again to see how whether she accepts GAD. In my reading, she does accept his GAD

The best example of this, from Masipa is here: Page 39
"This court also accepts that a person with an anxiety disorder as described by Dr Vorster, would get anxious very easily, especially when he is faced with danger. It is also understandable, that a person with a disability such as that of the accused would certainly feel vulnerable, when faced with danger."
She sums up the psych eval results ( but she doesn't point out GAD was disproved at WEskoppies.) and finishes that both state and def accepted findings.
My understanding is that the SCA have to go along with this disproved diagnosis of GAD now, it is a finding of fact- unappealable. ( Roux must hope he can slip it by, he runs with it using "anxiety" etc many times and as IB points out GAD at 22.2 .) State doesn't mention psych issues at any point in their Heads or make a point of her included unproven facts.
Can anyone here clarify this?

BIB

(1) That is certainly how it seems.

(2) Clearly she is accepting GAD here. OP was anxious – very anxious that his lies would be detected and that he was going to be found guilty of murder but GAD it was not according to MH assessment.

I don’t recall that the State accepted that GAD was proved but accepted that OP was anxious after the event. So why did Masipa choose to mislead the court in her judgement? This is where I think it begins to show her verdict was constructed with the intention of allowing her to hand down CH.

My guess is that during the Appeal the State will bring up the point about GAD being disproved but whether it will do any good, I doubt. As we know, Facts are not appealable but as JJ points out certain Facts will be discussed.

In my post where I write that the Defence lied, this was, of course, not new for the Heads. It was a reiteration of previously held points of view of the Defence and seemingly accepted by the Judge.

 

[Deleted member 102539]

EWN Reporter &#8207;@ewnreporter 10 Min.Vor 10 Minuten
#SAPSpromotions Phiyega: Krejcir is going to spend a long time behind bars. He knows it, which is why he is trying to escape. BB

Attention: Did he instruct OP in how to escape ...? We will see.

 

[cottonweaver]

I don’t recall that the State accepted that GAD was proved but accepted that OP was anxious after the event. So why did Masipa choose to mislead the court in her judgement? This is where I think it begins to show her verdict was constructed with the intention of allowing her to hand down CH.

My guess is that during the Appeal the State will bring up the point about GAD being disproved but whether it will do any good, I doubt. As we know, Facts are not appealable but as JJ points out certain Facts will be discussed.

In my post where I write that the Defence lied, this was, of course, not new for the Heads. It was a reiteration of previously held points of view of the Defence and seemingly accepted by the Judge.[/SIZE]

Sorry Bystander- my post was unclear.
I meant both State and Defence accepted Weskoppies findings not Vorster's findings.

Yes the SCA have to read through the entire submitted record. (I know they won't have the opportunity at the outset to read the entire trial record due to Mpati's ruling recently, but that's incidental to my point. )

The question I am seeking clarification on is this: does the SCA now have to agree the finding of fact ( by Masipa) that OP suffers from GAD?

I can imagine a couple of results could ensue from this, not necessarily in OP's favour but there's no point me babbling on about them here without further clarification from someone who knows more about Appeals.

 

[cottonweaver]

EWN Reporter &#8207;@ewnreporter 10 Min.Vor 10 Minuten
#SAPSpromotions Phiyega: Krejcir is going to spend a long time behind bars. He knows it, which is why he is trying to escape. BB

Attention: Did he instruct OP in how to escape ...? We will see.

Yes I noticed that he had been planning an escape. What a shame that he was moved to Zonderwater a few weeks ago.

Here's what they discovered at Zonderwater, significant items and points about police corruption "to defeat the ends of justice."

"The Sunday Independent reported that amongst the items found in Krejcir’s cell were a pistol, ammunition, a knife, an item that looked like a Taser, a pepper spray gun, screwdriver steel blades, 10 cellphones, a memory stick and a diary which contained the names of witnesses and investigators in his cases.

The newspaper quoted a source as saying that the raid took place on Saturday, after police had received information from an informant that Krejcir was planning to escape before his next court appearance in October"

Meanwhile, the Sunday Times reported last month that two new criminal cases were lodged against Krejcir after a previous raid on his cell in June uncovered evidence of seemingly corrupt connections he had with officials.

“There was a high-level investigation into Krejcir’s extensive network of police contacts,” police spokesperson Lieutenant Colonel Solomon Magkale confirmed at the time.

The newly-opened cases apparently include charges of interfering with a police investigation and defeating the ends of justice.

Previously, News24 reported how Krejcir derided his conviction in the Bheki Lukhele case, telling journalists as he walked down to the holding cells that "the lies and the hate won over the truth and the love".

Last BIB - Radovan got that slogan from Carl's Twitter account. LOL

 

[cottonweaver]

This is illuminating if interested in how the smuggling is done by the guards.

http://www.pressreader.com/south-africa/move/20150610/281805692538896/TextView

Might it explain how he got the hard drive?