Blade Runner becomes Blade Gunner **Mod Warning Read OP""

namloc1980

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

This only speaks to the fact that he shot her, something which he has never denied.

It says nothing whatsoever about his intent or who he thought was behind the door.

Simply being present at the time does not prove anything. My father was there when my grandfather died, it doesn't mean he murdered him.

He intended to shoot at the person in the toilet. He has already conceded in his evidence that he approached the door with intent to face the "danger". He shot Reeva with intent. He tried to get out of it in his evidence by saying it was a mistake and he didn't mean to do it but Nel took him to the cleaners on it. He's going to go down.

Muff Richardson

BQQ wrote: »

He's clearly lying.
Neither side wants to put him on the stand to perjure himself.

What? I don't understand why not? If some lowlife is dumb enough to blatantly perjure themselves and strengthen the prosecutions case in the process why wouldn't you put them on the stand?

I thought it was because it just seemed totally futile to do so, as in if there's no evidence of him being there he can just keep with the I was asleep line. Either way I'd say he's a nice little pension fund for himself compliments of the pistorius's.

Muff Richardson

By the way exercise some caution on a google image search for frank chiziweni, you'll get results on the first page from everything to oscar looking fairly glum to an mixed race Asian Middle Eastern family looking extremely pleased with themselves to a semi decent spread eagle brunette with a great set of baps.

I was expecting to see an extremely nervous looking tight lipped benson like character.

Jesus Wept

Muff Richardson wrote: »

By the way exercise some caution on a google image search for frank chiziweni, you'll get results on the first page from everything to oscar looking fairly glum to an mixed race Asian Middle Eastern family looking extremely pleased with themselves to a semi decent spread eagle brunette with a great set of baps.

I was expecting to see an extremely nervous looking tight lipped benson like character.

Thanks for warning muff. Despite reading it, I managed to make the same mistake, even clicked through onto the page it originates from and confirm there is more nudity.

Deise Vu

Muff Richardson wrote: »

What? I don't understand why not? If some lowlife is dumb enough to blatantly perjure themselves and strengthen the prosecutions case in the process why wouldn't you put them on the stand?

I thought it was because it just seemed totally futile to do so, as in if there's no evidence of him being there he can just keep with the I was asleep line. Either way I'd say he's a nice little pension fund for himself compliments of the pistorius's.

The 'fact' that he slept through the whole episode though would be strong evidence that there was no row. It is extraordinary that he was not called by the defence. He presumably could also give evidence about how OP was always such a lovey dovey guy and it was all sweetness and light with Reeva.

The prosecution cannot call him because he allegedly has no evidence to give (He would have to have been interviewed and he must have stuck rigidly to the 'sleep' line.) They cannot call him on spec that he will crack under pressure. They would just be accused of fishing by the defence and the cross-examination would be terminated by the judge.

When this case is over expect to hear further from Mr Chiziweni, especially if some tabloid can trump the Pistorius family 'pension'.

robinph

Mr Freeze wrote: »

This is a bit like Dixon all over again, except not anywhere near as embarrassing, but in terms of the cross examination really making the defences ballistics experts look quite bad, and makes OPs version look less plausible (imo).

I'm not sure why the defense need to bother with a ballistics expert, they are clearly in short supply in SA anyway. But the prosecution ballistics didn't contradict the OP version anyway and did a pretty good job on his own of showing himself to be incompetent. All they are doing with the extra "experts" is making SA out to be even more useless at investigations than we've already seen.

Muff Richardson

robinph wrote: »

I'm not sure why the defense need to bother with a ballistics expert, they are clearly in short supply in SA anyway.

as mentioned before on this and elsewhere, SA has an abundance of very capable experts that won't touch this case due to OP's utterly ridiculous tale of horsesh*t. It'd be career ending for anyone worth their salt in their field of expertise to go on the record with a load of conjecture, impossible nonsense and humiliate themselves in the process as these two beer buddy clowns have done so.

robinph

Muff Richardson wrote: »

as mentioned before on this and elsewhere, SA has an abundance of very capable experts that won't touch this case due to OP's utterly ridiculous tale of horsesh*t. It'd be career ending for anyone worth their salt in their field of expertise to go on the record with a load of conjecture, impossible nonsense and humiliate themselves in the process as these two beer buddy clowns have done so.

Did you see the prosecutions ballistics expert?

He was very high up on the numpty scale as well, wasn't sure what happened to the door, stuffed it in a body bag and then in a van that was too small for it, lost part of it until he was shown standing infront of a missing bit in a photo, then didn't know where that ended up. Also the prosecution seemed to be taken by surprise when what he said didn't meet the version that they were trying to put about OP having his legs on when shooting.

There is masses of incompetence from everyone on this case. It is certainly not unique to the defence.

Mr Freeze

robinph wrote: »

Did you see the prosecutions ballistics expert?

Granted, but he did stand up to cross examination a lot better than the defences ballistics experts.

Moving on...

What do ye make of today's new witness for the defence? Dr Merryll Vorster, a specialist psychiatrist.

Nel has started cross examination but now has an hours adjournment to study her report.

State could ask for Pistorius' mental health to be assessed
Nel says he wants to use the adjournment to study the provisions of Criminal Procedures Act, to see whether the prosecution might consider making a request for Pistorius to be assessed by the state:

Nel asks for break. He is considering state launching application for OP to be mentally evaluated in state hospital. This is big @eNCAnews

— Karyn Maughan (@karynmaughan) May 12, 2014
Minimum mental observation might take about thirty days before a new application for an extension, if it's needed. Phew!

— Milton Nkosi (@nkosi_milton) May 12, 2014

What are the implications of this? Is this a back fire on the defences part or a good move of theirs?

I've been following it here:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/12/oscar-pistorius-trial-reeva-steenkamp-murder-12-may

AudreyHepburn

Mr Freeze wrote: »

Granted, but he did stand up to cross examination a lot better than the defences ballistics experts.

Moving on...

What do ye make of today's new witness for the defence? Dr Merryll Vorster, a specialist psychiatrist.

Nel has started cross examination but now has an hours adjournment to study her report.



What are the implications of this? Is this a back fire on the defences part or a good move of theirs?

I've been following it here:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/12/oscar-pistorius-trial-reeva-steenkamp-murder-12-may

It might actually work in their favour if she can prove that Pistorius anxiety disorder affected him in such a way that he could not be expected to act as rationally as a most normal thinking people would.

NipNip

There's not a thing wrong with him.

robinph

Mr Freeze wrote: »

Moving on...

What do ye make of today's new witness for the defence? Dr Merryll Vorster, a specialist psychiatrist.

Nel has started cross examination but now has an hours adjournment to study her report.



What are the implications of this? Is this a back fire on the defences part or a good move of theirs?

I've been following it here:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/12/oscar-pistorius-trial-reeva-steenkamp-murder-12-may

I don't think it could back fire on them. If they find that he is psychologically fine then they are just in the same position as they are now and needing to find reasonable doubt about who he thought was behind the door. If they do find psychological issues, and I mean ones from prior to the shooting, then it adds some weight to the OP claims of believing it to be an intruder behind the door.

He'll still get hit with the murder/ culpable homicide charge, and the storing the ammo which carries the same sentence for some reason I've not figured out.

123balltv

Nel creating application for Oscar to be observed for mental observation for 3 days Oscar furiously passing notes to Roux throw him in jail now :mad:

brimal

Very interesting battle between Nel and Roux just now.

Defence's psychiatric expert let slip on one or two answers and now Nel has interpreted her answers in a way so that he will be applying for OP to get further psychiatric evaluation over the next few days.

Roux is fuming, doesn't want this to go ahead.

NipNip

brimal wrote: »

Very interesting battle between Nel and Roux just now.

Defence's psychiatric expert let slip on one or two answers and now Nel has interpreted her answers in a way so that he will be applying for OP to get further psychiatric evaluation over the next few days.

Roux is fuming, doesn't want this to go ahead.

Interesting how this will work out!

Mr Freeze

Is this good or bad (for OP)?

Can OP now get off on some mental health condition? What is going on there today?

robinph

Mr Freeze wrote: »

Is this good or bad (for OP)?

Can OP now get off on some mental health condition? What is going on there today?

She seemed quite adamant that it wasn't a mental condition she was talking about and was a psychological issue and so won't result in him getting off. If there is a psychological issue though then it counts as evidence for the "reasonable doubt" that they are looking for to counter the prosecution claims of him knowing who was behind the door.

It would only help with the pre-meditated murder charge and can't see it having any bearing on any of the other charges.

Da Shins Kelly

He's guilty as sin. Nothing wrong with him at all.

Dubl07

robinph wrote: »

She seemed quite adamant that it wasn't a mental condition she was talking about and was a psychological issue and so won't result in him getting off. If there is a psychological issue though then it counts as evidence for the "reasonable doubt" that they are looking for to counter the prosecution claims of him knowing who was behind the door.

It would only help with the pre-meditated murder charge and can't see it having any bearing on any of the other charges.

It matters a lot in the hands of Nel. He will deliver Mr Pistorius to a mental institution for the rest of his natural life. The very notion of that will make Roux reverse tactics extremely rapidly come morning.

brimal

It will be interesting to see what Nel has in store. Roux was absolutely fuming at Nel applying for OP to be sectioned.

Defence wanted to wrap up their case by tomorrow but this has thrown a huge spanner in the works.

Dubl07

brimal wrote: »

It will be interesting to see what Nel has in store. Roux was absolutely fuming at Nel applying for OP to be sectioned.

Defence wanted to wrap up their case by tomorrow but this has thrown a huge spanner in the works.

Roux fuming? Oscar was writing a novel and passing it in increments to the front bench. I don't think he really sees himself in a straitjacket.

NickD

I think I may have said this already, but I frickking LOVE Gerrie Nell

AudreyHepburn

brimal wrote: »

It will be interesting to see what Nel has in store. Roux was absolutely fuming at Nel applying for OP to be sectioned.

Defence wanted to wrap up their case by tomorrow but this has thrown a huge spanner in the works.

Couldn't Roux could turn this to his advantage and use the results of a psychiatric evaluation as proof of diminished responsibility ie so that Pistorius can't be held criminally responsible for what he did?

Assuming of course it is shown that Pistorius has a mental disorder.

123balltv

Anxiety disorder yet he loved speeding in fast cars, guns, public attention, etc I have anxiety if I brought a gun into a restaurant surrounded by children I'd be shaken like a leaf Oscar is a man in control with a lot of arrogance.

Mr Freeze

I think the judge won't be taking into account this GAD when coming to a verdict, it seems very shaky under cross examination.

Vorster says the GAD diagnosis would be relevant if the court found he shot at what he thought was an intruder. If the court were to find that he deliberately shot Reeva Steenkamp, it would not be.

Vorster: I wouldn't expect him to remember with crystal clarity …

Nel: But he said to you that he fired at the noise. And he never said that to the court.

Vorster: But that can be explained … in a fear situation, I wouldn't expect him to remember each and every detail.

Nel: There is another explanation. He could just be lying.

Vorster: Yes, he could be lying.

shamrock55

How this fella can sit there sobbing and lying his way through court tells you all you need to know about what kind of character he is, a blind man could see he is guilty

brimal

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Couldn't Roux could turn this to his advantage and use the results of a psychiatric evaluation as proof of diminished responsibility ie so that Pistorius can't be held criminally responsible for what he did?

Assuming of course it is shown that Pistorius has a mental disorder.

I think everyone (including the defence) know this anxiety disorder diagnosis is a load of rubbish. The defence expert only spoke to OP for the first time 11 days ago. Why did the defence wait until so far into the case to assess his mental state?

Defence expert said he had a extreme fear of burglary and crime.
Why did OP have the balcony open?
Why did he have a ladder leaning against his house?
Why did he not get the broken window fixed immediately?
Why didn't he get the burglar alarm fixed immediately?


Defence are just throwing this out there hoping it will stick - Nel has called their bluff and Roux and Co. seem genuinely surprised and wrong-footed by the move.

Dubl07

brimal wrote: »

I think everyone (including the defence) know this anxiety disorder diagnosis is a load of rubbish. The defence expert only spoke to OP for the first time 9 days ago. Why did the defence wait until so far into the case to assess his mental state?

Defence expert said he had a extreme fear of burglary crime.
Why did OP have the balcony open?
Why did he have a ladder leaning against his house?
Why did he not get the broken window fixed immediately?
Why didn't he get the burglar alarm fixed immediately?


Defence are just throwing this out there hoping it will stick - Nel has called their bluff and Roux and Co. seem genuinely surprised and wrong-footed by the move.

This particular psychiatrist saw OP recently. The defence don't have to disclose any previous psychatrists who said 'Frankly, lads, he's a lying sociopath."

Mr Freeze

Dubl07 wrote: »

This particular psychiatrist saw OP recently. The defence don't have to disclose any previous psychatrists who said 'Frankly, lads, he's a lying sociopath."

Because who wouldn't be anxious after getting cross examined by Nel?

Seeing him after the cross examination was the perfect time to diagnose him with GAD, he was probably a wreck after the grilling he got and how badly it went for him.

Kaycee2

Mr Freeze wrote: »

Because who wouldn't be anxious after getting cross examined by Nel?

Seeing him after the cross examination was the perfect time to diagnose him with GAD, he was probably a wreck after the grilling he got and how badly it went for him.

My thoughts exactly, of course he's falling apart now he's no way out, how could they possibly prove he was in the same mental state he's in now when he killed Reeva

Mr Freeze

Defence opposes application for mental health check.

The test for referral is "low", Nel says. The court does not want this case to be sent back by the appeal judges because it has not considered the psychiatric diagnosis.

It falls 100% within the definition of mental illness … It is in the interests of justice for the accused to be referred.

11.20am BST
"At this stage my lady, we say that certainly the court is entitled to know what the accused's defence is."

Nel says the court has so far heard "three defences": putative self-defence, automatonism and now a psychiatric disorder.

OP having 3 defences is a bit of a joke now in fairness. The Defence should be made to stick with one defence surely, it can't have 3.

The Defence seem desperate at this stage.

NickD

So what is the general consensus Boardsies? Is Milady going to send OP for observation?

NipNip

NickD wrote: »

So what is the general consensus Boardsies? Is Milady going to send OP for observation?

I think so. She doesn't strike me as someone likely to take the chance of having her ruling appealed. She will look at the letter of the law and then decide I think.

Roux actually hung Pistorius there today by emphasising that the psychiatrist said that his anxiety ABSOLUTELY DID NOT mean that OP could not tell right from wrong. :P

Thought it was hilarious actually when Roux said that Nel's interpretation of case law was unfortunate and Nel replied 'I was the Counsel referred to'. :pac:

Deise Vu

NickD wrote: »

So what is the general consensus Boardsies? Is Milady going to send OP for observation?

What choice does she have when the defence introduce a psychiatrist?

I have no idea what Roux is at bringing in his psychiatrist and then objecting to an independent assessment. Was he hoping for grounds for an appeal? When all else fails, go for the insanity route? It would be surely better than going to jail in South Africa, especially when your family can afford the best hospitals. Plus there's always a chance he could be 'cured' like your man Gallagher in Sligo.

robinph

Deise Vu wrote: »

What choice does she have when the defence introduce a psychiatrist?

I have no idea what Roux is at bringing in his psychiatrist and then objecting to an independent assessment. Was he hoping for grounds for an appeal? When all else fails, go for the insanity route? It would be surely better than going to jail in South Africa, especially when your family can afford the best hospitals. Plus there's always a chance he could be 'cured' like your man Gallagher in Sligo.

I expect that they will send him for assessment as well. Have to do everything possible to ensure there is nothing left to be queried later.

But if they come back and say that hes not mentally ill then the prosecution will say "told you so", but the defence will then say "yes, we know, we never claimed that anyway, why did you just waste the courts time?".
The alternative response from the assessment is that they agree with the defence witness.

Mr Freeze

If the judge does not allow Gerrie Nel's application to have Pistorius assessed, the defence is expected to plough straight on with further witnesses:

#OscarTrial Roux has indicated he intends calling two or three more witnesses. BB

— Barry Bateman (@barrybateman) May 14, 2014

#OscarTrial Roux’s next witness is Oscar’s orthopaedic surgeon Dr Gerry Versfeld, the ex-husband of Annemarie [no-last-name]. BB

Roux to call 2 or 3 more witnesses, I thought he only had one more left? and would have to call it today due to the all the time taken up with this mental assessment.

NipNip

Mr Freeze wrote: »

Roux to call 2 or 3 more witnesses, I thought he only had one more left? and would have to call it today due to the all the time taken up with this mental assessment.

If OP is to be sent for evaluation, proceedings will be stalled immediately.

NipNip

robinph wrote: »

I expect that they will send him for assessment as well. Have to do everything possible to ensure there is nothing left to be queried later.

But if they come back and say that hes not mentally ill then the prosecution will say "told you so", but the defence will then say "yes, we know, we never claimed that anyway, why did you just waste the courts time?".
The alternative response from the assessment is that they agree with the defence witness.

Either way - it will mitigate the risk (if found guilty) of his 'diagnosis' forming a basis for appeal....

Mr Freeze

NipNip wrote: »

If OP is to be sent for evaluation, proceedings will be stalled immediately.

I don't think he is going to be sent for evaluation.

Processings will continue, but its going to drag on another day or 2, if Rous is calling 1 or 2 extra witnesses.

Based on yesterday, I thought he only had one more to call.

Mr Freeze

Judge grants order for mental health assessment

Masipa says she is satisfied the conditions of the application have been met. The decision is not taken lightly, she says.

This is bad news for OP ya?

stefan idiot jones

Nail him up. Nail him up I say.

robinph

Mr Freeze wrote: »

This is bad news for OP ya?

I don't think so.

It's not good news being sent for mental evaluation I'm sure, but I don't think that anything extra they discover could be bad for him.

It is good for the result of the case though and that the verdict is safe when she comes up with it.

NipNip

Sounds like an outpatient assessment is likely.

Mr Freeze

robinph wrote: »

It is good for the result of the case though and that the verdict is safe when she comes up with it.

That is my thinking too, the Judge/State is removing an option that OP may have used to appeal a guilty verdict.

The trial will be delayed for at least a month now.

He may be treated as an outpatient, which I am sure he would prefer, but SA journalists are reporting that inpatient waiting lists are months long.

I'm sure somewhere will squeeze him in though.

NipNip

He'll have some craic trying to lie his way through this evaluation process lol.... He'll tie himself up in knots. He'll probably need inpatient treatment by the end of it!!

Deise Vu

NipNip wrote: »

He'll have some craic trying to lie his way through this evaluation process lol.... He'll tie himself up in knots. He'll probably need inpatient treatment by the end of it!!

And this is why Roux didn't want the assessment. At a minimum it his highly unlikely that an independent expert will agree that an Olympic standard athlete has an anxiety disorder serious enough to cause him to fire a hail of bullets into his own bathroom. This nails another lie by the defence. If the assessment goes further and assesses OP as a narcisstic, ego-driven individual with anger management issues, it could be fatal.

How Roux thought he could introduce a psychiatric assessment without the prosecution getting a chance for expert rebuttal is beyond me. Is he really the Johnny Cochrane of SA law? There must be thousands of innocent people in SA jails if he is the best defence attorney around.

robinph

Deise Vu wrote: »

At a minimum it his highly unlikely that an independent expert will agree that an Olympic standard athlete has an anxiety disorder serious enough to cause him to fire a hail of bullets into his own bathroom.

Studied many Olympic athletes for psychiatric disorders have you? The evidence from the Dr that was given seemed very balanced and not at all biased. Nel tried several times to get them to go down the diminished responsibility/ mental illness line which might have been a way for OP to get off, but they didn't go for that, they insisted that OP knew the difference between right and wrong at all times.

It appears likely that Pistorius could receive his treatment in Sterkfontein psychiatric hospital.

Sterkfontein is a specialist forensic psychiatric hospital, part of the University of the Witwatersrand. (Dr Vorster is vice-dean of the university.)

Likely that the assessment will be done by some of Dr Vorsters staff then. Que some conspiracy theories...

Mr Freeze

robinph wrote: »

Likely that the assessment will be done by some of Dr Vorsters staff then. Que some conspiracy theories...

And rightly so I suppose.

It should be a different institute if she is involved there in the interest of fairness and to not allow any conspiracy theories (not the court is worried about those).

I do think his narcissism and anger issues could show up during an assessment.

Deise Vu

robinph wrote: »

Studied many Olympic athletes for psychiatric disorders have you? The evidence from the Dr that was given seemed very balanced and not at all biased. Nel tried several times to get them to go down the diminished responsibility/ mental illness line which might have been a way for OP to get off, but they didn't go for that, they insisted that OP knew the difference between right and wrong at all times.



Likely that the assessment will be done by some of Dr Vorsters staff then. Que some conspiracy theories...

If you think an athlete could function at a low level, let alone olympic level, with a debilitating anxiety disorder you clearly have never been on a starting line waiting for the starters gun to go off.

NipNip

robinph wrote: »

they insisted that OP knew the difference between right and wrong at all times.

Dr. Vorster did however allege that while he knew the difference between right and wrong, his anxiety disorder would have been present at the time and may have affected his ability to act in accordance with his comprehension of right and wrong.