Trial Discussion Thread #40

[Zim]

This is from Cherwell yesterday.
It has to be the most poignant comment over the last few days. I have 2 x sons and cannot imagine them each killing a woman. Seriously !

 

[Hope4More]

A scenario (suspend your disbelief about specifics) and a question.

OP had a bad few days. Reeva comes over totally into VDay, OP not so much. Not a great night and at some point they fight. A lot. OP goes to sleep. Reeva can't. She goes downstairs and gets a snack, then comes back upstairs. OP wakes up and is angry all over again. They fight again, this time more intensely. Reeva considers leaving, but hasn't decided for sure. Both are tense. OP gets up to do whatever.. move fans, go on balcony, go downstairs... whatever. ( Yes, I know what he said he did, but since y'all think he lied about everything, why believe what he said he did here?)

Continuing. Reeve slips out of bed and goes to the loo. She may have decided to leave, or maybe she just had to pee. In either case she's quiet on purpose because she doesn't want the fight to escalate any further.

OP hears a noise in the bathroom. He is already enraged, has not let go of the fight. He doesn't check for Reeva. His first thought isn't protecting her, its that a SOB might be in his house.

He's angry - very - but he also is feeling vulnerable. Not afraid, but vulnerable because he is at a physical disadvantage. Just reality of the matter, and part of the reason he feels compelled to compensate for that disadvantage by always reaching for a gun.

The thought of pushing the panic button or running the other way never occurs to him. It doesn't because response to the panic button isn't instaneous, because if he turned his back to flee he might be overtaken, because he is OP, who isn't going to back down, and because his reasoning is already impaired by rage, increased exponentially by his perception that an intruder dared to threaten him.

He grabs his gun, runs down the hallway screaming get the f out. Reeva has no idea what's going on and stays silent. OP hears her move, perhaps she reaches for the door handle. He doesnt fire a warning shot because it never occurs to him to do so, not because he's afraid of a richocet.

He shoots once. The noise is deafening. Literally.

He doesn't hear her scream because of the deafening noise. He is also literally pumped on adrenaline, and furious. He pauses for a brief moment because the noise hurts his ears, and because the temporary loss of hearing increases his anger and his fear. He fires 3 more shots. He fires them knowing that he is firing them, and yes, hoping that the shots will eliminate the threat. He isn't trying to kill whoever is behind the door, but he knows enough even in that mental state that he is very likely to cause them serious injury.

Given that scenario ......(please don't argue about the details...its only a scenario) ....do you think he should be found guilty of murder?

 

[patCee]

Interesting that OP is taking Cipralex for depression. Apparently it's used to treat
various related disorders including GAD.

http://chealth.canoe.ca/drug_info_details.asp?brand_name_id=1924

 

[Nausicaa]

Roux made very clear before the judge that the defense is not seeking a diminished capacity defense but was rather suggesting mitigating circumstances, he even gave 2 or 3 concrete examples, the only one I remember is a petite woman defending herself, a reasonable court will be more likely to be receptive to a petite woman using a weapon to defend herself against a large male attacker because her size makes her less physically able to defended herself. Surely it is not hard to figure out a petite woman would be more fearful of a large man attacking her than a large man would be of a petite woman attacking him.

1. When the "large male attacker" exists entirely in the imagination of the "petite woman" and she instead kills someone who is much more vulnerable than she is and who wasn't atacking her anyway, the "reasonable court" is much less likely to be moved to clemency.

2. I very much doubt that OP appreciates his counsel comparing him with a "petite woman".

3. What it comes down to is that the Defence wanted to mik for all their worth OP's physical handicap (though he would be more than a match for most men and doesn't hesitate to square up) and alleged mental condition without going over the border of exposing him to any possible consequences affacting his future freedom. It didn't work because it can't work. Any factor mitigating his guilt in killing a vulnerable innocent non-aggressor necessarily makes him a danger to society. To whatever extent his guilt is diminished, his dangerousness is increased.

 

[Gryffindor]

Interesting that OP is taking Cipralex for depression. Apparently it's used to treat
various related disorders including GAD.

http://chealth.canoe.ca/drug_info_details.asp?brand_name_id=1924

Thanks for that Patcee. That's interesting . . .

 

[CriLondon]

Actually with all respect I do not agree with that. Courts are public in that anyone can go and observe but that's different to being broadcast to an audience of millions. I think all the witnesses and even OP should have had the choice of whether to be filmed when giving their testimony. All have been examined to the nth degree here and in many other places - imagine if people could also disect their mannerisms, body language and hair styles. Might be interesting but they have rights to some degree of privacy IMO. I can't speak for anyone else but I sure wouldn't like it.

Thank you for the polite disagreement and reasoning.
I realize i should have elaborated a bit more and added that i would have liked that myself , for personal preference , so that it could give me a more complete picture.
In a sense that we can all say what we want and in most cases we can control what comes out. But the face ...the face shows what emotion there is and it is very hard to contain/fake.
So , in that respect , i would have liked to see everyone that's been in the witness box. Dr. V being just the latest example , we are relying on what we heard from her ...but Nel would have seen her and maybe was even led on by something she showed that we didn't see.

To address your point :

- I ultimately think it is fair that the Court gave the option to be televised or not (mainly for privacy reasons )
- I stated that the court should allow the trial to be broadcast in its entirety for the purpose of having a more complete picture , and not for the purpose of fairness towards the public or in the interest of justice.

Thank you for pointing that out !

 

[Hope4More]

Too true...or on to the balcony...I know about this from experience !

Which is why when I found OP's story unbelievable at first. But that perspective is about what a burglar would do, not what OP would do if he heard a noise he couldn't identify. The man has a long history of assuming any noise at night is an intruder....that is fact, not supposition or speculation.

 

[CriLondon]

A scenario (suspend your disbelief about specifics) and a question.

OP had a bad few days. Reeva comes over totally into VDay, OP not so much. Not a great night and at some point they fight. A lot. OP goes to sleep. Reeva can't. She goes downstairs and gets a snack, then comes back upstairs. OP wakes up and is angry all over again. They fight again, this time more intensely. Reeva considers leaving, but hasn't decided for sure. Both are tense. OP gets up to do whatever.. move fans, go on balcony, go downstairs... whatever. ( Yes, I know what he said he did, but since y'all think he lied about everything, why believe what he said he did here?)

Continuing. Reeve slips out of bed and goes to the loo. She may have decided to leave, or maybe she just had to pee. In either case she's quiet on purpose because she doesn't want the fight to escalate any further.

OP hears a noise in the bathroom. He is already enraged, has not let go of the fight. He doesn't check for Reeva. His first thought isn't protecting her, its that a SOB might be in his house.

He's angry - very - but he also is feeling vulnerable. Not afraid, but vulnerable because he is at a physical disadvantage. Just reality of the matter, and part of the reason he feels compelled to compensate for that disadvantage by always reaching for a gun.

The thought of pushing the panic button or running the other way never occurs to him. It doesn't because response to the panic button isn't instaneous, because if he turned his back to flee he might be overtaken, because he is OP, who isn't going to back down, and because his reasoning is already impaired by rage, increased exponentially by his perception that an intruder dared to threaten him.

He grabs his gun, runs down the hallway screaming get the f out. Reeva has no idea what's going on and stays silent. OP hears her move, perhaps she reaches for the door handle. He doesnt fire a warning shot because it never occurs to him to do so, not because he's afraid of a richocet.

He shoots once. The noise is deafening. Literally.

He doesn't hear her scream because of the deafening noise. He is also literally pumped on adrenaline, and furious. He pauses for a brief moment because the noise hurts his ears, and because the temporary loss of hearing increases his anger and his fear. He fires 3 more shots. He fires them knowing that he is firing them, and yes, hoping that the shots will eliminate the threat. He isn't trying to kill whoever is behind the door, but he knows enough even in that mental state that he is very likely to cause them serious injury.

Given that scenario ......(please don't argue about the details...its only a scenario) ....do you think he should be found guilty of murder?

Given this scenario , i would say yes. Murder -Dolus Eventualis

JMO

 

[Viper]

OP's torment over killing Reeva is primarily because of the effect it's had on his image, his racing career, and his future earnings potential. I don't know who suggested OP claim he'd climbed into a cupboard during a night fright and Aimee had to come talk him out, but that person needs a psych eval too. I think Uncle Arnold is the puppeteer pulling most of OP's strings and making most of the trial decisions, and we see how that's turned out.

BIB. I know that OP said that in court, and he also said he has nightmares and awakes to the smell of blood everywhere, IIRC. But could he have said that to Dr. V? Why did she not cover this in her report? Perhaps OP did not go that far in his comfortable conversations with Dr. V. Perhaps those are real events that OP only blurted out under the stress of being examined in the court... Hmm, I have no idea what his Observation Results will be at this point. An emotional basket case certainly, today, but definitely not prior to the murder.

It's funny that OP can go from being completely hysterical to calm, cool, and relaxed during the trial. Some say that he is comforted by his lady psychologist over the lunch breaks, and that is why he relaxes in the afternoon sessions. But I don't believe that anxiety disorder works that way. If it did he would just need to talk with her before the morning sessions and he would be fine then too.

Anxiety is a vicious torment of the mind, it takes a very long time, with medications and therapies to find relief. I have a friend who has anxiety coupled with panic attacks, he has lived with it for many years, tried more than a dozen different anti depression drugs of all sorts, tried hypnosis therapy, talked with his psychiatrist on a monthly basis, and still it is there. The only thing that works for him is to avoid contact with people outside his home, but he cannot do that during the work week as he has a career. So he takes Xanax (Zanax) during the work day. It calms him and prevents his anxiety from producing a panic attack. But it also makes him drowsy and affects his thinking capabilities. And the anxiety is still there all of the time, on his mind in his thoughts, it is just that his mind is dulled by the Xanax.

 

[Hope4More]

Britskate...that thread has 64 pages. Take pity. What # post did that discussion begin? Thanks..

 

[Gryffindor]

A scenario (suspend your disbelief about specifics) and a question.

OP had a bad few days. Reeva comes over totally into VDay, OP not so much. Not a great night and at some point they fight. A lot. OP goes to sleep. Reeva can't. She goes downstairs and gets a snack, then comes back upstairs. OP wakes up and is angry all over again. They fight again, this time more intensely. Reeva considers leaving, but hasn't decided for sure. Both are tense. OP gets up to do whatever.. move fans, go on balcony, go downstairs... whatever. ( Yes, I know what he said he did, but since y'all think he lied about everything, why believe what he said he did here?)

Continuing. Reeve slips out of bed and goes to the loo. She may have decided to leave, or maybe she just had to pee. In either case she's quiet on purpose because she doesn't want the fight to escalate any further.

OP hears a noise in the bathroom. He is already enraged, has not let go of the fight. He doesn't check for Reeva. His first thought isn't protecting her, its that a SOB might be in his house.

He's angry - very - but he also is feeling vulnerable. Not afraid, but vulnerable because he is at a physical disadvantage. Just reality of the matter, and part of the reason he feels compelled to compensate for that disadvantage by always reaching for a gun.

The thought of pushing the panic button or running the other way never occurs to him. It doesn't because response to the panic button isn't instaneous, because if he turned his back to flee he might be overtaken, because he is OP, who isn't going to back down, and because his reasoning is already impaired by rage, increased exponentially by his perception that an intruder dared to threaten him.

He grabs his gun, runs down the hallway screaming get the f out. Reeva has no idea what's going on and stays silent. OP hears her move, perhaps she reaches for the door handle. He doesnt fire a warning shot because it never occurs to him to do so, not because he's afraid of a richocet.

He shoots once. The noise is deafening. Literally.

He doesn't hear her scream because of the deafening noise. He is also literally pumped on adrenaline, and furious. He pauses for a brief moment because the noise hurts his ears, and because the temporary loss of hearing increases his anger and his fear. He fires 3 more shots. He fires them knowing that he is firing them, and yes, hoping that the shots will eliminate the threat. He isn't trying to kill whoever is behind the door, but he knows enough even in that mental state that he is very likely to cause them serious injury.

Given that scenario ......(please don't argue about the details...its only a scenario) ....do you think he should be found guilty of murder?

No. Not murder.

 

[BritsKate]

Britskate...that thread has 64 pages. Take pity. What # post did that discussion begin? Thanks..

Apologies, Hope. It seems it starts at post 1010.

 

[DebinGA]

OP has a history of irritation/s causing him to instantly "lose it" and start yelling at people. His constantly interrupting witness testimony with "Liar! or even "That's a joke!" or "Go read the law!" as he yelled leaving court last week wouldn't help his case, so he's taking something to calm him enough to get through testimony until the next frequent break when his cadre of soothers rush in. OP's courtroom demeanor is nothing like he was the months preceding Reeva's death, and certainly not the night he killed her.

 

[Harmony 2]

From you link. Quote:
“GAD is a persistent, intense and excessive worrying of such severity that it interferes with someone’s functioning,” said psychologist Kevin Bolon.

This means it only becomes a problem when your worries take up so much time and energy that you begin to slip up at work and in social responsibilities. For 33-year old GAD sufferer Lara, her worries consume her so much that she feels anxious even where there is no reason to.

“I often have this overwhelming feeling that something terrible is going to happen – my family and friends just don’t get it,” she said.

BIB I don't get how Dr. V could have diagnosed GAD as having been part of OP before the murder, I just don't. If someone was suffering with this condition, it would be obvious to friends, family, coworkers, etc... and they would ask someone, anyone, for help and advice.

responding to the section about the disorder being obvious to others:

I think it depends on whether the person was high functioning or low functioning as notated below. IMO there is more going on with OP than just GAD. When studying Reeva's texts and court testimony, other behaviors are revealed IMO.

High and Low-Functioning - A High-Functioning Personality-Disordered Individual is one who is able to conceal their dysfunctional behavior in certain public settings and maintain a positive public or professional profile while exposing their negative traits to family members behind closed doors. A Low-Functioning Personality-Disordered Individual is one who is unable to conceal their dysfunctional behavior from public view or maintain a positive public or professional profile.

"Not My Fault" Syndrome - The practice of avoiding personal responsibility for one's own words and actions.

Chaos Manufacture - Unnecessarily creating or maintaining an environment of risk, destruction, confusion or mess.

Fear of Abandonment - An irrational belief that one is imminent danger of being personally rejected, discarded or replaced.

False Accusations - Patterns of unwarranted or exaggerated criticism directed towards someone else.


Invalidation - The creation or promotion of an environment which encourages an individual to believe that their thoughts, beliefs, values or physical presence are inferior, flawed, problematic or worthless.

Self-Aggrandizement - A pattern of pompous behavior, boasting, narcissism or competitiveness designed to create an appearance of superiority.

http://outofthefog.net/CommonBehaviors/Top100Traits.html

 

[CriLondon]

No. Not murder.

Could you , respectfully , elaborate as to why not?

In H4M version (sorry still trying to figure out how to multiquote!) he shoots to eliminate the threat.

That to me is intending to shoot at a perceived intruder still, with intention to.

Thank you in advance for the reply

 

[Viper]

Pretty shocking. smh



I wouldn't be surprised OP is allowed conjugal visits. Drats. :notgood:

LOL! True. Joran Van der Sloot is married now, in prison, and has a baby.

I honestly believe that OP has a greater risk of being raped by a female correctional officer than an inmate that he can pay to leave him alone! :floorlaugh:

 

[lithgow1]

Thank you for the polite disagreement and reasoning.
I realize i should have elaborated a bit more and added that i would have liked that myself , for personal preference , so that it could give me a more complete picture.
In a sense that we can all say what we want and in most cases we can control what comes out. But the face ...the face shows what emotion there is and it is very hard to contain/fake.
So , in that respect , i would have liked to see everyone that's been in the witness box. Dr. V being just the latest example , we are relying on what we heard from her ...but Nel would have seen her and maybe was even led on by something she showed that we didn't see.

To address your point :

- I ultimately think it is fair that the Court gave the option to be televised or not (mainly for privacy reasons )
- I stated that the court should allow the trial to be broadcast in its entirety for the purpose of having a more complete picture , and not for the purpose of fairness towards the public or in the interest of justice.

Thank you for pointing that out !

No worries and thanks for the reply. I see your points re the complete picture and it would have been very interesting and probably illuminating to see OP on the stand, especially your thoughts, but we didn't - but there's the psych report to look fwd to!

I know you weren't saying anything about this next bit but it sort of ties in and that's that I find it a bit odd when people complain about adjournments etc (happens much more on my lurker forum) especially when the break is unavoidable in the interests of a fair trial, such as Nel needing time to look over reports he's just been given and consult with his experts etc. Some people, and again not really here, moan about having to wait to 'see more'. I can't deny some of the breaks don't disappoint me but like just about everyone here I see why they are needed. I'm rambling a bit really but it all sort of ties in with some people seeing this as something that should proceed at the pace they want it to. If they want real reality TV then they just have to accept reality doesn't move at Law and Order's speed and quit moaning about it. Again, definitely not yourself or anyone I've had the pleasure to encounter here - just a wider observation.

PS Not trying to sound lofty BTW - I do find the whole thing very interesing and by extension entertaining.

 

[BritsKate]

Could you , respectfully , elaborate as to why not?

In H4M version (sorry still trying to figure out how to multiquote!) he shoots to eliminate the threat.

That to me is intending to shoot at a perceived intruder still, with intention to.

Thank you in advance for the reply

On solely a legal basis, shooting with intention to kill a perceived intruder is indeed murder, until and unless a putative self-defence claim is proven which, in effect, absolves him of the intent required to establish murder. For that reason, he'll be aqcuitted of murder if his claim is believed.

His testimony alone doesn't prove putative self-defence in my opinion. However, ironically, in most self-defence cases in South Africa usually the accused's testimony is, in of itself, sufficient to show state of mind. Considering that, it's very telling just how bad Oscar's testimony really was that the defence felt compelled to bolster it with psychological testimony.

And, a putative self-defence claim cannot be used to any success, regardless of facts, if the accused kills an intruder while they are in the act of fleeing the premises. That Oscar shot through a closed door may be enough on its own to negate his claim.
JMO

 

[Gryffindor]

Could you , respectfully , elaborate as to why not?

In H4M version (sorry still trying to figure out how to multiquote!) he shoots to eliminate the threat.

That to me is intending to shoot at a perceived intruder still, with intention to.

Thank you in advance for the reply

Hi. No worries Thank you. My opinion is the scenario alludes to CH rather than intentional murder.

 

[soozieqtips]

Sorry if this has already been asked, but what's to stop OP taking medication before each visit with psychiatrists? If he's an outpatient, he could take stuff that would relax and keep him calm (rather than being his usual argumentative self), and as such, surely this would result in a 'fake' OP being evaluated, rather than the real non-medicated one.