Trial Discussion Thread #46 - 14.07.7, Day 37

[G.bng]

Could it be that Nel does not want Carla whatever to be called?

 

[JudgeJudi]

Roux has one more witness, Dr Kotze. They have not consulted with her today. Wants a break until 2.00.

Nel says Kotze is clearly the state witness. Doesn't understand how he can confer with state witness. There's a court psychiatrist, defence and state.

Roux says it's not a state witness, one of the panel.

Masipa says she hasn't seen 3 separate reports.

Roux said "It's not your witness. It's a panel witness".

Nel objects to Roux wanting to consult with the psychiatrist appointed for the state.

 

[PrimeSuspect]

Roux wants to consult Carla Kotze, the state-appointed psychiatrist from OP psych panel. Nel says they have no right.

 

[ColonelMustard]

But they weren't talking about the video - they were talking about whatever demonstration OP did for Dr D. And although I haven't seen the video, I still say that Oscar moving quickly on his stumps is not the same as running with two complete legs and feet and tendons and calf muscles, etc

I don't think you'd have much disagreement on that.

To me, the relevant comparison is not between Oscar's sense of running on his stumps vs. someone running on "regular" legs as much as it is between Oscar's sense of running on his stumps vs. Derman's opinion that OP has zero ability to run on his stumps.

 

[JudgeJudi]

I've got to say I'm really fed up with the DT.

 

[zwiebel]

Nel fighting hard on this one: 'They cannot have a bite at every witness being appointed, before they decide which one to call'

Roux says he should state if he (Nel) is going to call a witness or not. it's open for defence to consult otherwise.

 

[Val1]

Wow, the defense really must be running scared to want to consult with the state's people...

 

[JudgeJudi]

Roux says if Nel doesn't call this witness, the DT is entitled to consult with her.

 

[zwiebel]

Nel says if they call Dr Fein, he'll call Dr Kotze, so he can't say now.

 

[JudgeJudi]

Nel disagrees. If the defence calls another witness and that's Dr Fine, in all probability he'll call Dr Kotze.

 

[zwiebel]

nel saying that both he and Mr Roux stated they accepted the reports so defence have no right to call with state's Dr: 'The court cannot order it milady.'

 

[JudgeJudi]

Nel says both sides have accepted the reports and the DT don't have the right. Each entity had a witness appointed.

 

[zwiebel]

Judge: mr Roux, is there precedent for what you're asking?

R: Yes milady, I can get it...

 

[JudgeJudi]

Nel places on record if DT call Dr Fine, he will, in all probability call Dr Kotze. Masipa wants a precedent.

 

[zwiebel]

Roux isn't citing that precedent, as far as I can hear....

 

[katydid23]

OMG I think the defense is going to rest???

OOPS. I guess not. :facepalm:

 

[PrimeSuspect]

Roux isn't citing that precedent, as far as I can hear....

exactly, Judge Masipa asked him for it.

 

[zwiebel]

Judge: You said there are precedents...a case in point?

R: I don't know of any specific case...it's a point in principle....

 

[JudgeJudi]

Masipa agrees with Nel. She asks for a case in point.
Roux doesn't know of any case calling that a panel member ...

 

[Val1]

Does anyone know if the DT consulted with Mangena or any of the other people working with the PT, or did they have their own people, kinda like this issue?