Trial Discussion Thread #38 - 14.05.13 Day 31

[04009margaret]

I'm sad. An expert on whoopwhoop said he doesn't think she'll grant the application, so now I'm, pessimistic. ;o(

The guy said that , in the end, none of this bears on the merits of the case. He also has worked with Nel. While there may be additional reasons, he said Nel gains a GREAT deal because Nel is allowed all the records of everything OP talks about or says to anyone, which he can use.

I'll be very sad, as will - I think - June Steenkamp, if it's not granted. As many here have said, she was smiling as Nel spoke. It's also true that RS's sister said, after OP's testimony, that the family thought he was a "disgusting liar." I think they'd be willing to wait just to see this guy get tossed into a rubber room. They think he'll look good in a extra long-sleeved, white ensemble, decorated with lot of buckles.

Legal round table is saying the opposite LOL The professor said that if it's "the or other" that Roux wants it ruled under, then it's at the judges discretion & she will not refer. But, if she rules under how Nel wants "mental illness" then she has no choice, she has to refer, especially with her adding that he was a danger into the equation.

 

[whiterum]

I think Nel put forth a very good argument, but if the application is denied then I think Vorster's testimony should be stricken from the record. MOO

Reminds me of the nursery rhyme

Dr Vorster went to Gloucester
In a shower of rain
She stepped in a puddle
Right up to her middle
And never went there again.

 

[Greater Than]

I'm sad. An expert on whoopwhoop said he doesn't think she'll grant the application, so now I'm, pessimistic. ;o(

The guy said that , in the end, none of this bears on the merits of the case. He also has worked with Nel. While there may be additional reasons, he said Nel gains a GREAT deal because Nel is allowed all the records of everything OP talks about or says to anyone, which he can use.

I'll be very sad, as will - I think - June Steenkamp, if it's not granted. As many here have said, she was smiling as Nel spoke. It's also true that RS's sister said, after OP's testimony, that the family thought he was a "disgusting liar." I think they'd be willing to wait just to see this guy get tossed into a rubber room. They think he'll look good in a extra long-sleeved, white ensemble, decorated with lot of buckles.

Whether or not the application is granted Nel won big here. It is now on record that he applied for the psych eval so this "disorder" can't be used as a basis for acquittal or appeal. Roux shot himself in the foot with this witness.

 

[BritsKate]

bbm1
if there is a wide spectrum from 'not serious' to 'can be dangerous', then the 30 day assessment will remove any doubt as to which end of the spectrum op is at.

bbm2
if there is any doubt, best to clear it up. after the 30 day assessment the doubt will be completely removed - one way or the other.

to this point imo the judge has been very careful to err towards caution, and remove any possibilities of appeal or mistrial, i think she will continue along this path.

Very valid points, of course. We'll see tomorrow. I agree she's been very cautious. And as I said, using the word dangerous, throws a huge spanner in the works.

I really won't be surprised either way. I also don't really see it as a loss for the State either way - better if he does win his argument, of course, but not earth-shattering to his case if he doesn't.

JMO

 

[ColonelMustard]

The "experts" say that if she declines it Gerrie may very well reopen the case. That would be an ok consolation prize, for me.

 

[soozieqtips]

NastasyaTay Nastasya Tay - Legal experts say this sort of testimony usually comes during sentencing
for mitigation. So why’s Vorster been called now?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...759350/Oscar-Pistorius-murder-trial-live.html

Exactly. She's given her opinion that OP's disorder (that no one knew about till a few days ago - including OP himself) could be linked to his actions on the night of Feb 13th. She was there to give another version, because OP's others contradict his own evidence.

 

[patCee]

Whether or not the application is granted Nel won big here. It is now on record that he applied for the psych eval so this "disorder" can't be used as a basis for acquittal or appeal. Roux shot himself in the foot with this witness.

That sounds such a good reason to me why M'lady may refuse the application.

But....I do think she has to take Dr V's assertion about OP being dangerous with a gun very seriously. So at the moment .:fence:

 

[turaj]

Anxious about losing a relationship!!!! ooooooooooooo

Out of the blue she offered that!!!!

this witness is a joke. After that comment about argument possible his relatives were shaking their head as if to lead her to someone take that back....I am convinced that Uncle Arnold found this "hired gun" as he has a certain look on his face as if she is totally accountable to him personally. She is unbelievable tailoring every response not to truth but to her client.

 

[Budgie]

What does everyone think the Judge will say?

I vote no. But Nel has made very sure that the mental illness/disorder won't be part of the defence's case, IMO. My main reservation is around the appeal process but it would be a brave lawyer who'd reintroduce psychiatric issues after this palaver. All IMO and I have no strong opinions either way.

Jake, I'd say it's too tough to call. This is the first big decision Judge Masipa has had to make. I don't envy her one iota.
However, Nels argument ( for me) was stronger and she may rule because of case law he highlighted. Or she may just want shot (no pun intended) of this and move to closing argument phase if or after this mystery next witness of Roux's takes the stand.
I can certainly see why Nel is doing this and why Roux is so opposed.
Nail biting I must say and I can't wait for tomorrow.

 

[turaj]

That sounds such a good reason to me why M'lady may refuse the application.

But....I do think she has to take Dr V's assertion about OP being dangerous with a gun very seriously. So at the moment .:fence:

To my way of thinking Roux has failed on so many levels and this witness is the worst yet.

 

[salberg7]

As do I. I think she will order the referral, what choice does she have? I myself cannot believe Roux would open this can of worms. As far as Vorster, how can you base an assessment on interviews done 1+ yrs after the murder & after OP's disasterous testimony? Big mistake by Roux. Who wouldn't be anxious? Now he has three defence theories. Grasping at straws... Exasperating.

 

[Viper]

I tend to think that Masipa will issue the Order. I do not want her to, not completely anyway, for my own selfish reasons. Namely, I would like this trial to end sooner rather than later.

I base my opinion that the Order will be issued because of my respect for Mr. Nel. I don't believe that he would pursue this if it were not very important to the prosecution; to remove any claim of diminished capacity that could be considered and affect the decision of his guilt or innocence and the length of his sentence. In addition, to remove an appellate opportunity that would certainly follow.

 

[turaj]

His brother Carl was also responsible for the death of a woman...as you look at him it seems like this is just old hat for him...OP will get off too he is thinking because we are "priviledged".

 

[soozieqtips]

Nel: One thing I agree with Mr Roux on is that we should not be emotional. (Roux smiles broadly at this)

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/oscar-pistorius-murder-trial-live-3533390

I saw him smiling but didn't realise he was smiling at Nel. Awwww.

 

[sleuth-d-]

We'll see tomorrow. I agree she's been very cautious. And as I said, using the word dangerous, throws a huge spanner in the works.

I really won't be surprised either way. I also don't really see it as a loss for the State either way - better if he does win his argument, of course, but not earth-shattering to his case if he doesn't.

JMO

i agree with you up to the point about it not affecting the state's case either way. imo, if she rules against an assessment, the slim corridor of doubt will be left in the air [whether the gad has contributed], and the defence will use this. so in effect this option weakens the state's case. moo.

aside from all this, with such a high profile case, where a heavily backed defence was likely to throw everything to aid acquittal/obtain minimum sentencing... i am still amazed that no assessment to show op was fit to stand trial medically/mentally was not done pre-trial. then we would have had non of this.

 

[BritsKate]

I tend to think that Masipa will issue the Order. I do not want her to, not completely anyway, for my own selfish reasons. Namely, I would like this trial to end sooner rather than later.

I base my opinion that the Order will be issued because of my respect for Mr. Nel. I don't believe that he would pursue this if it were not very important to the prosecution; to remove any claim of diminished capacity that could be considered and affect the decision of his guilt or innocence and the length of his sentence. In addition, to remove an appellate opportunity that would certainly follow.

RBBM

That can't be stressed enough. Apart from what the accused's defence actually is - they're still entitled to submit evidence of diminished responsibility to mitigate a sentence if he's convicted. I keep neglecting that, Viper, thank you for reminding me.

 

[BritsKate]

The "experts" say that if she declines it Gerrie may very well reopen the case. That would be an ok consolation prize, for me.

For my own purely selfish reasons, I hope he reopens regardless. I want to know if my armchair dx is accurate.

 

[turaj]

too funny...strange smell in courtroom...could it be the garbage that is being put forth by this witness?

 

[Murphys_Law]

He said the next witness is going to testify about another disorder OP has relating to the fight vs flight reaction.

And yet another reason to have him referred to an unbiased assessor if the DT is introducing another psychiatric factor for consideration.

Nel put forth a very strong scholarly legal argument, the expert (MV) agreed that a second opinion would be beneficial, the expert opined that a person with GAD in possession of a gun would be dangerous....

IMO, granting the request has only an upside for all parties involved. It would be an error of law to deny the prosecution's application for a thorough independent assessment, not to mention it would be unfair to the accused.

 

[zwiebel]

RBBM

That can't be stressed enough. Apart from what the accused's defence actually is - they're still entitled to submit evidence of diminished responsibility to mitigate a sentence if he's convicted. I keep neglecting that, Viper, thank you for reminding me.

Yes,, and Nel did make a point of asking if her report was compiled with the intention to be used for sentencing too, and Dr V did say 'if required'.