Trial Discussion Thread #44 - 14.07.1-2, Day 34-35

[PrimeSuspect]

O sounds better speaking Afrikaans than English.

Laughter in court. Judge just told him he must repeat in English.

Yes he does. It's a nice language.

 

[kaos]

There was a woman where I live who was born without arms or feet and she was well known for attacking people without any provocation. I'll maybe email Judge Masipa to let her know about her fight or flight behaviour.

 

[zwiebel]

He is arguing Mrs K is an academic 'source' for their expert witness!

 

[zwiebel]

O is citing acts from 1988 now, so we are progressing....

 

[zwiebel]

Can't believe judge is letting him get away with this.

 

[JudgeJudi]

Oldwage is just so full of himself and loves the sound of his own voice. How long is he going to go on for.

 

[kaos]

The judge surely has to adjourn and consult her law books before letting them continue?

 

[jimmy73]

Oldwindbag takes pompous straw-clutching to a new level.

 

[asanque]

Top reasons that you are struggling with your defence

1. Relying on someone else's story from the Internet as it is more convincing than your own.

 

[katydid23]

I thought he was just translating the bit he said in Afrikaans. He has been rambling on for 15 more minutes...lol

 

[zwiebel]

O: Probative value, nature of (the evidence).....etc etc....final word in submission....not hearsay evidence......

He lied about 'final word' because he is still talking....

 

[AlexUK]

Mr 'Wonderful' Oldwage has the knack of making even interesting stuff seem really dull.

*rocks gently back and forth whilst singing to self*

 

[AlwaysShocked]

Gahhhhhddd!! "At the risk of repeating myself,,,"

 

[zwiebel]

N: I've now heard that I never made an objection....Mr O takes exception to my objection. Strange, he's obviously prepared for it.

 

[zwiebel]

N: ...on a test for hearsay, it's hearsay. What is the purpose of it? At the end, he said 'to support the prof's findings'.

 

[AlexUK]

Are we about to have an adjournment for Milady to have a little think?

 

[zwiebel]

N: Milady, I've been waiting. I've been waiting....says the prof will not rely on the 'truth' of these emails. You cannot supplement a finding with something that's not true, so it is being presented as true.

 

[PrimeSuspect]

Nel : On the test for hearsay, it's hearsay. We're hearing evidence from a witness we can't cross-examine.


http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/Oscar_Pistorius/Live/LIVE-UPDATES-Day-36-Pistorius-trial-20140702

 

[katydid23]

Nel: it's statements from a non-witness that we cannot cross examine

If it is not presented ' for the truth' , then what is the purpose of it? Is it to supplement the witnesses findings? How can it be if it is not the truth?


[well said]

 

[Viper]

This is too difficult a decision, it might hurt someone's feelings. I'm giving 10 to 1 odds that M'Lady takes a Tea Break. LOL!