Ah... I see your problem Carm.

You do not fully comprehend the "dynamics" of True Gossip Forums (Lynch Mobs generally).

First DECREE a victim... just a stepping stone to finding a perp and assuming him (or her) GUILTY... so that you can get on with the core business of Forums.... HATE!!!

Canonising the "victim" helps to intensify the hate. It makes the crime so much worse if the "victim" was attractive, talented etc. So much so that I don't think an UGLY victim would work out at all well. I assume murdering ugly stupid people is OK? Not sure how that works?

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

The documentary was a smidge above the perpetual gutter level of a Nancy Grace flatulation. At least they had one attorney that saw through the mist about the screaming and one girlfriend who knows him well that takes the same position I do on his guilt.

But they have him standing right in front of the toilet door about 4 feet away firing the gun instead of where we know he was and even the prosecution had to be shamed into admitting. Plus they show him walking straight into the bedroom from the balcony with the fan as if he went onto the balcony to get the fan and then marched right in facing the passageway.

They only had about 2 months time to get the actual facts right as per the testimony in the trial for their national airing of this Monday night goof-fest.

This is the danger of getting any trial information second hand. Tomorrow all the uneducated Jane and Johnny Does who trust this crap will be experts on why he is guilty. They will all say how could he not see Reeva bringing in the fan?

The FCC might as well throw those network TV station licenses in the trash. Because that part of "not abusing the public trust" is only valid on C-Span.

FWIW Full episode available here:

Oscar Pistorius: Shots in the dark

http://www.tv.com/shows/48-hours/oscar- ... k-3034249/

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

"At least they had one attorney that saw through the mist about the screaming..."

That would be Joe Tacopina. He does often crop up as a "voice of reason"

He is (perhaps) best known as Joran Van der Sloot's US lawyer at the time of the hysteria following Natalee Holloway's disappearance on Aruba. He was also a "consultant" for Knox family during at least early part of The Amanda Knox saga.

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

I think 48 Hours needs Moderation... they wandered Off Topic with the OJ stuff

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

Monday night goof-fest.

Very succinct analysis.

A solid waste of an hour, especially with the OT OJ thrown in

Still trying to figure out how anyone who heard Oscar testify can not imagine how easily that his voice could be mistaken for a woman's voice

Strange world.

_________________
If your mind is agitated you will find agitation everywhere. Where else will you find peace if not within you? __ Papaji

Yes... I often feel like I see "The Twilight Zone" all around me.

That Doco was far from "succinct" it covered some of the issues relevant to the outcome of the trial.. but also included irrelevant drivel. Little sign of any INSIGHT.. apart from good old Joe. Even Dershowitz (who I normally rate) was having a "bad hair day"

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

Does he ever have a good hair day? Granted I haven't seen much of him, but

_________________
If your mind is agitated you will find agitation everywhere. Where else will you find peace if not within you? __ Papaji

Dersh was on the money with GZ case... especially his very public spat with Prosecutor Angela Corey. He called her out on the fictional Probable Cause Affidavit.
He also made some good points in Regard the Dunn case... I recently reposted a clip of Dersh in the Dunn thread.

But generally... as a legal "talking head" my impression is that he is logical and insightful....but I certainly do not agree with him all the time.

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

I didn't hear him speak about either of those cases so I will take your word for it that his daft opinion on the Oscar case was an anomaly. If he came out against Corey, kudos to him.

_________________
If your mind is agitated you will find agitation everywhere. Where else will you find peace if not within you? __ Papaji

I watched it last night as well. Found it pretty formulaic as 48 Hours usually is. It's usually presented something like this:

X is swell (thanks Carmelita! ) and it's really unlikely that X did it
But wait!
X did all this stuff that nobody knew about! And look at the evidence! I think X probably did it.
Hang on though...
It's not so clear after all! Which is great, because then our report really can't be wrong either way. Have fun mulling, viewers!

_________________
Gotta kick at the darkness 'til it bleeds daylight. ~Bruce Cockburn

Good to see you Junebug, I think you are swell with no qualifiers


Re-watching I see that one of the main commentators is a Vanity Fair writer, (who is the first person I’ve heard say that Oscar had a “the world owes me” mentality) what are his qualifications, other than being a writer for a Gossip/fashion magazine? . Strange commentator choice by my way of thinking.

Also Dr. Francois Vanderwatt’s words certainly make it seem as if the “blades” were invented for Oscar when in actuality they were invented in 1984 by an engineer named Van Phillips. Vanderwatt tweaked and customized Oscar’s blades specifically to fit Oscar but Oscar was far from the first to have the customized blades for speed.

_________________
If your mind is agitated you will find agitation everywhere. Where else will you find peace if not within you? __ Papaji

I think perhaps I have read an eye opening article which has given me some insight into why there is such emotion invested into the Oscar Pistosius case and why so many people can’t separate opinion from evidence. I have come across a glimpse into why it is so important for so many people that the “Blade Runner” fit their version of that horrific AM regardless of what the evidence of the case may be.

I understand a person passionately wanting justice for Reeva.I agree with wanting justice to prevail, always. But what does that objectively mean? Isn’t it dependent on what the actual events of that AM were? Not, "what if, it seems to me, and the only conclusion I can draw". Those subjective and often myopic opinions are not enough to draw justice from. I did not until now, understand why some people seem to want what they determine to be justice, rather than objective justice. You know the old “justice is blind” and all.

It is horrific and undeniable that women are killed by their lovers, boyfriends and husbands in terrible domestic violence incidences. It is also undeniable that people are killed accidentally by their loved ones. Each event holds it’s own particular horror, one is certainly far worse than the other and deserving of a more punitive justice.

Oscar is the only living person who knows exactly what happened that AM.And I would suppose that his recollections not precise given the extreme emotions and the terrible fact that he killed Reeva, willfully or not. His story in my mind is not inconsistent with the evidence. So I have been perplexed by the endless opinions and blogs that have been set forth by so many people, that condemn Oscar and have closed their minds to any further investigation of the evidence. Or even different points from which to view the evidence that has been presented.

Than I read some of Mike Luicia’s article. In all honesty I could not get through all of it but I do believe that I got the general gist. It is summed up here in Mike’s own words


No matter what, though, we always come back to the same things, the shock and surprise we feel because we got conned or conned ourselves into thinking we really know these people because we see what they do and admire what they do and thrill to what they do.And once again confuse sports heroes with real heroes.

Somehow we kid ourselves into thinking we know the celebrities and immortals of sports because of the bones they throw us, when they pull back the curtain and let us into their world on Twitter. Fans actually imagine a personal relationship, even as more and more their sports heroes are nothing more than products of their handlers, or the crisis managers they hire when they get into trouble.


Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/more- ... z35VAh6oG5

Wait, what? I was not conned by Oscar, I knew very little of him other than he was a great advocate for the disabled and he was the first double amputee to compete in the Olympics. I have never thought that “celebrity” establishes any bar for moral character. Do people really believe that they have a personal connection with celebrities ? That they know the moral fiber of those that they have elevated in their own minds to "friend" and or even "moral beacon" ? It seems as if people feel a personal betrayal because Oscar is no longer in their mind who they created him to be. I simply have a different world view or perception of "celebrity" and their place in my life. Celebrities do not know I exist and I have no delusion that a single one of them is my "friend" or that I "know them." They are not my heroes.

People feel a “personal relationship” has been established because of a twitter account? This is bizarre to me but it does explain why a discussion about the evidence of the Oscar Pistorius case is always trumped by the emotion attached to the case, it seems that people feel personally betrayed by Oscar Pistorius.

Only one person was betrayed by Oscar, in my opinion that betrayal was not one of malice but of a horrific mistake and rash behavior due to abject fear. Reeva's family and friends certainly have a justifiable grievance against Oscar, for them it is personal. And the world at large should grieve the loss of any life, including Reeva. Reeva's death is horrible, she should be alive today, sun on her face, laughter in her eyes. She is not, and even justice can do that which we would all like, return her to life.

But even condemnation of Oscar is not necessarily justice for Reeva. It is not an indisputable fact that Oscar with malice shot Reeva in cold blood. Let the trial continue and Judge Masipa give her verdict.

People who feel personally betrayed or "conned" by Oscar need to examine what their connection with the celebrities "in" their lives really is, as the "relationship" is nothing more than a one sided admiring (or not) of a persona, there is nothing personal about it.

It is a very strange world in which we live.

_________________
If your mind is agitated you will find agitation everywhere. Where else will you find peace if not within you? __ Papaji

Well said, Carm.

I think Mike Luicia’s article describes a section of the (now) Mob in this case and you have answered that point.

However, a lot of the Mob that I see posting are behaving as they do for EVERY case. Like you and I, they knew little of OP before this trial. Their hatred and condemnation of OP has nothing to do with a "betrayed" delusional connection with a celebrity.
I have "studied" forum posters for 6 years now To paraphrase Bob Dylan "I used to be among the crowd they are in with..." I have been part of the "Lynch Mob" (the Anthony case), but more often found myself trying to debate (argue) against the prevailing Mob notions. The driving force is just plain old "HATE". They are driven by it. Blinded by it. Not open to debate because of it. Willfully ignorant of facts. Their world view is very simplistic. If somebody is dead, then somebody has to pay. Hence it's always "Justice for *victim*". Very basic resolution of COGNITIVE DISSONANCE is a driving psychological underpinning. The "victim" is viewed only in positive terms and so canonized. The "Perp" is viewed only in negative terms and so is "demonized". These perceptions spill over to ANY person associated with either side. Witnesses, family members, legal team members etc... all transmogrified by Mob members, into "Saints" or "sinners", to the point of a delusional view. The fact that the forum members are part of a "Mob" compounds the effect. "Group think" takes over individual reasoning. Mass Hysteria abounds.

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

I have to agree with you when it comes to the Oscar case, that the motivating force behind much of the certitude of Oscar being a monster is an underlying unbridled hate for him. And it seems to me that many of the "crime forums" have a culture of hate that goes beyond the current subject of their pitchforks and torches. Sad.


In the Oscar case in particular here is a simple minded understanding of the reliability of “ear witness” testimony, there is a dismissal of evidence that throws much of the State’s testimony into doubt and there is perpetually an ignorant mantra of how one would most definitely act in an extreme situation. Unfortunately hate gives a person tunnel vision and suddenly theory becomes fact and any view that disrupts that fact is scoffed at as ignorant. Not because the differing view is ignorant or wrong but because it upsets the absolutist’s reality. So it is easier to dismiss evidence or lack thereof than address it, or, God forbid admit one might have to adjust their point of view.

I have been reading a bit of blogs and different web sites and find a lot of misinformation about Oscar and the whole case. I do find the canonization of Reeva seems to also be prevalent. Nothing wrong with honoring the dead, but making her a caricature of a Disney Princess demeans the real Reeva.

A lot of what is out there in crime forums confirms the Asch experiment, there is a lot of hand wronging when even a minute difference of opinion is brought up. The unspoken rule of some crime forums seems to be, hate first, theorize second, then find facts that you can conform and twist to fit your theory. Of course it is essential to dismiss opposing viewpoints with prejudice and lots of group hugs and affirmations.


I think it is such a curiosity how quickly a group of people can spew hatred toward not only Oscar, but also at anyone tied to him in any way. A hypothetical ; I wonder if Oscar had shot Frank by mistake and Reeva was defending Oscar, how much of that vitriol would be directed at her.

_________________
If your mind is agitated you will find agitation everywhere. Where else will you find peace if not within you? __ Papaji

Oscar Pistorius trial set to begin again on Monday after six-week psychiatric assessment
June 25, 2014 by The Trial Diaries

The Blade Runner, 27, has been a day patient at Weskoppies mental health hospital to see if the state of his mind played a role in the shooting dead of Reeva Steenkamp

The trial of Oscar Pistorius is set to resume again on Monday as the athlete comes to the end of a 30-day psychiatric assessment.

Pistorius is currently a day patient at Weskoppies mental health hospital where he is being observed to see if he has Generalised Anxiety Disorder.

The findings will then be used as evidence for whether or not the disorder played any role in the shooting of girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp on February 14, 2013.

He has three days left of monitoring by four psychiatrists which has been ongoing for the last six weeks.

...more at link
http://thetrialdiaries.com/2014/06/25/o ... ssessment/

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

"The prosecutor said he had no option but to ask for it after an expert witness for the defense said Pistorius had GAD".

Bunk !

Nel didn't have any legal requirement that he make application for the referral because Dr. Vorster wasn't put on the stand for the purpose of showing a mental defect. This was made infinitely clear during the initial argument over Dr. Vorster's testimony being "sprung" on the prosecution at the last minute.

All he would have had to do is have a stipulation from Roux that a mental defect was not being asserted and that no such claim would be used in an appeal in the event of a guilty verdict. That would have eliminated any need for Oscar to be evaluated and the testimony of Dr. Vorster could be given whatever weight the judge thought it deserved. You do realize you got the right to cross examine the doctor right Nel? Or had that brainwave escaped your cerebellum.

I have already stated that the nefarious reason for referring Oscar in my unwavering opinion was that Nel was counting on the fact that it would be TWO YEARS in the loony bin for Oscar while he was awaiting evaluation. He knows his premeditation case was going right in the same place that Reeva hid. This was a despicable backdoor way to slam it to Oscar. Only after the application was made did he found out Masipa would go against all normal court precedent and the inevitable public cries of outrage of special treatment for Oscar and keep this trial on track.

Good try Nel. Just like all your other crop circles of illusion and deceit. Monday I think you're going to find out your case has just got even worse.

It couldn't happen to a more repulsing guy.

Yes aavi... well said.

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

I am very curious about what is left for defense witnesses. Any guesses? I am hoping they do more with the scream testimony. We all know there are recordings and if that is left dangling I think it will be strange.

Most of us here lean towards Oscar believing he was shooting at an intruder. The keys for me thus far has been the likely order of shots followed by bats and Oscar's own past behaviour being more suggestive of aggressive response to perceived danger rather than an eruption of murderous domestic violence towards his girlfriend of just weeks. What aspects of the case though give you pause? I struggle a bit with the positions of the fans and the duvet, the time gap between the sets of sounds and how long Reeva may have lived after her injuries. I wish there were more definitive explanations for those things.

_________________
Gotta kick at the darkness 'til it bleeds daylight. ~Bruce Cockburn

I wouldn't think there's a great deal more to hear from defence witnesses, at least nothing that would be have a huge impact regarding what we already know. We heard in court that there was a further witness that would testify about OP's physical vulnerability and the 'fight or flight' principle, so whether they'll decide to still use this expert witness once OP returns from evaluation I'm not so sure. It's now been reported that one of the psychiatric assessors has unfortunately suffered a heart attack - hopefully this shouldn't delay the resumption of the trial.

Any bets on how long it'll be before it's claimed OP had a hand in this incident as well?

I think two of the aspects that you mention above can be clarified by a simple matter of incorrect testimony regarding the time of the shooting. I can't bring myself to accept that the incident lasted approx. 15 minutes from initial shots until somebody called security. I'm absolutely convinced that the first sounds were heard nearer to 3:10am, and the whole incident was over in 7 minutes or so. This would be far more logical in respect of witnesses reactions and their calls to security. This would also make logical sense regarding Reeva's fatal injuries, and remove the huge improbability of her surviving for such a long time.