I assume that the defence do get to SEE the State's fantasy epic BEFORE finalising their reply?

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

I assume when this is over, Herrie Nil will have to go back to his regular job?

I imagine he works as a bouncer at a low-rent Gay/transsexual bar/clip-joint/knocking shop?

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

For the life of me I will never understand why Roux and Oldwage just pissed away the opportunities to do re-direct. They muffed it with almost every witness--just a couple questions, then they sit down. There can be no better time to hammer home every point you want to re-emphasize and address even a minor inconsistency that the judge could possibly have noted. I just don't get it. This is when you get the last word and as long as you don't introduce new evidence or do an exact replica of your direct, the prosecution is left swinging in the wind with no chance to speak again. And it's easy to frame the questions so objections can't be raised.

To me this actually borders on ineffective counsel. There were so many things either one of them could have straightened out where Nelnuts had twisted witnesses answers. Even with Pistorius, Roux didn't do much re-direct for Christ sake. Roux is no amateur and at times he's pretty clever. But he sure wussed out on the countless golden opportunities that were there to grab like ripe, juicy low hanging fruit. I would have spent hours re-drilling my home run points. This will come back to haunt him in these closing arguments.

Nel gets jizz in his pants every time he can confuse somebody so they will say yes to something they had no intention of saying yes to. And he's done it ad infinitum. But once it's in the record, the slime bag will use it like an old rubber.

Needing 5 weeks to get to prepare closing argument is road apples too. Most attorneys are lucky they get a weekend. Isn't it like they had more breaks than they had trial already? Desert Storm didn't take this long.

I agree with you aavi. Nel "got away with Murder"... maybe the Judge spotted it and will sentence him?

And yes... I maintained faith in Roux being a smart lawyer.. but now that it's all over.. seems he did miss a LOT of opportunities? Be Ok if OP gets off... but I will say "I told you so.. Roux was crap" if OP doesn’t get off .

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

The full Ch7 "Sunday" Doco....

Oscar reenactment video broadcast - Sunday Night 2014 07 06





ETA
This video has been removed by the user.

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

I was tempted to NOT post this "article" (piece of wilful ignorance).

Under "GUILTY" The first two "reasons" are just plain UNTRUE!! How can a "Journalist write shite like this?

Oscar Pistorius: 10 reasons why he is guilty – or innocent
By Aislinn Laing, in Pretoria
8:46AM BST 08 Jul 2014

Oscar Pistorius is on trial for the premeditated murder of his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp. The state say he killed her deliberately after an argument; the athlete says he believed she was an intruder. The following are 10 reasons why the judge might find him guilty, or innocent Oscar Pistorius: 10 reasons why he is guilty – or innocent
Oscar Pistorius is on trial for the premeditated murder of his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp. The state say he killed her deliberately after an argument; the athlete says he believed she was an intruder. The following are 10 reasons why the judge might find him guilty, or innocent

GUILTY
1) Five neighbours told the trial they heard a woman screaming before what they believed were shots fired, suggesting Pistorius knew who he was shooting.

2) Another neighbour heard a man and woman arguing for an hour before there was the sound of four loud bangs.

..more crap at link
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... ocent.html

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

I felt incensed enough to tweet the hack who wrote it

Just a thought.....


What happened to Nil's explanation... police inquiry into missing electrical lead?

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

One of the good photos so far of the duvet on the floor



It shows how far he would have had to walk to drip blood on the duvet. There is no conceivable reason he would be in that area after he had contact with Reeva inside the toilet. Blood that was on her is the only place the blood could have originated from. He would have turned right to go out of the bedroom as he was carrying her downstairs. I want to see Nel explain how that blood got there. This ought to be a real knee slapper.

Note also the small fan is nowhere in sight. Guess where that was plugged in Nel. And nobody moved anything. R-i-i-igght.

Thanks for this Rumpole, and to aavi for the report!

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

A couple of things have concerned me here and there for sure. Most recently when Nel was cross examining the witness who was testifying about Oscar's limited ability to walk in darkness and Nel was trying to get around the objection made because the blue LED on the stereo shed limited light and thus it was not total darkness as Nel was implying. To do so he read the portion of the record about the tiny blue LED on the light switch not providing any illumination at all, and nobody seemed to object or respond to that properly. And it's very hard to imagine Nel didn't know he was using the light switch to try and say something about the stereo. As a bonus, the judge remembered the light as red. Sigh.

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

I'm surprised Nel didn't suggest it was being used by the cleaners, around the time they were busy polishing evidence off the bathroom door.
I wouldn't mind too much if OP's spare prosthetic leg got lost somewhere up Nel's a**e though.

Does the issue now carry any repercussion, or is it just put in court record and Nel get's a slapped wrist? It's a bit worrying if that's the case as we've already had items stolen pre-trial and now an item mentioned in cross-x is unaccounted for.

SAPS need to review chain of custody procedures from this. Knowing the profile of the accused and the coverage the case would receive, you'd expect people to be even more vigilant than normal with regard to evidence. I'd be extremely concerned if I was South African, although I do get the impression that a large part of the population are simply resigned to the fact that the police department is a bit of a shambles.

This gave me concern as well. I was surprised the judge hadn't fully grasped the idea of the blue light by this stage in the trial. Watching the recent reconstruction, I remember there was some info. at the beginning about the furniture and fixtures in the mock-up being identical to those at OP's house. This made me pay particular attention to the stereo to see if there was a blue led light and how bright it was. There was indeed a blue led light, and it was very bright (appearing to light up the whole front panel of the stereo). I'm not sure if they were including identical electrical when they made their comment at the beginning of the reconstruction, but it peaked my interest so I thought I'd check it out in any case.

The frustration and concern about lawyers, Judges (and Juries) not grasping details, or misunderstanding is a feature in most trials. I dont know if it is worse in this case? IANAL but I would think there are a "truck load" of reasons that a negative verdict for OP could be appealed?

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

Pistorius: If guilty, can he appeal? Would he win it?
Posted on July 7, 2014
By Nick van der Leek

If we could sniff or swallow something that would, for five or six hours each day, abolish our solitude as individuals, atone us with our fellows in a glowing exaltation of affection and make life in all its aspects seem not only worth living, but divinely beautiful and significant, and if this heavenly, world-transfiguring drug were of such a kind that we could wake up next morning with a clear head and an undamaged constitution—then, it seems to me, all our problems (and not merely the one small problem of discovering a novel pleasure) would be wholly solved and earth would become paradise.” – Aldous Huxley

What is an appeal? It’s a demand a petition a request. An application – in law – for a case to be reheard.

Is Oscar likely to appeal and if so on what basis? And on what basis is he most likely to be granted an appeal?

Ulrich Roux**: An application for leave to appeal can be made on any grounds where the defence alleges that the Judge made an error in law when applying the law to the facts of a specific case after evidence has been placed before the court by both the State and the defence.

In the event that Oscar Pistorius is convicted I am certain that he will appeal. Many talks have been doing the rounds that the fact that the trial has been televised has rendered it to be an unfair trial. This is of course debatable but certainly a grounds for appeal.

...more at link
http://www.biznews.com/oscar-pistorius- ... ppeal-win/

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

I would consider it generous giving the defense an overall grade of C-.

Starting out giving the prosecution a veritable throttling at the bail hearing to such an extent that Nel says there goes my case. And then to peter out to this dismal exhibition in the actual trial was appalling. Pissing away missed opportunities and sitting on their hands when they should have been objecting, let alone not even taking advantage of repeated missed platinum opportunities they had on re-direct, just befuddles me beyond words.

Fortunately the case for premeditated is so weak from bottom to top that I will still be stupefied if the judges find that this crapola argument myth sways them to believe Pistorius accomplished an intentional pursuit of seeing Reeva in a body bag. I will never believe that and nobody can make me believe it. This mirage Nel considers evidence has to rank in the top 20% of weakest cause to bring Class 6 felony murder charges that exits in the history of juris prudence records. It compares to something you might expect in North Korea, but not in a country which is supposed to follow the laws of requiring a prosecution to prove a case beyond a reasonable doubt.

But is it foreign to these two supposed Armani suit lawyers that come with credentials that if timely objections are not raised to preserve it for the record, that the right to even use them in issues of appeal, are prevented? Why the hell do they sit on their hands when endless compound questions are asked, the same questions are asked five different ways, witnesses are being badgered, a prosecutor is nodding or shaking his head to telegraph the answer he wants, quotes from the record are distorted and taken out of context?

Judges cannot just substitute their own standard of what they would have done had they been trying they case. They're restricted to what the attorney presents or objects to. That's why cases are lost with poor lawyering. Nel is a jagoff that would steal crutches from a cripple. He has no conscience, no morals and no concern for his mandate to seek the truth. You can't leave these things to chance. He should have been snockered at every turn. This judge would have sustained 90% of objections if they had been made. She took initiative to do it several times on her own for Christ sake.

If there ever was a prosecutor who was ripe for objections, it was this one. I don't think there were 10 objections over the entire 4 months. There was no demand for sanctions for withholding the extension cord which should have been done in outrage for playing hide the ball. There was blunders of miscommunication with Oscar. There were defense witnesses who contradicted each other and contradicted Oscar which is even worse. What kind of preparation did they do in preparing witnesses for trial? They don't know that a defense witness is going to testify to something Oscar said didn't even happen?

I was literally dumfounded when Oldwage left two glaring unforgivable blunders uncorrected in Derman's testimony. Nel left the impression because of a compound question that OP broke the door down on HIS STUMPS. Derman knows OP didn't break the door down on his stumps and I'm positive he didn't mean to give that impression. That was done only with the cricket bat. What Pistorius did on his stumps was "charge" the door after he realized Reeva wasn't in the bed. Oldwage doesn't rehabilitate Derman by drawing his attention to this and let him make the correction?

Then the last sentence Derman says "it was my understanding that it was his intention to shoot." WHAT?? This is isn't corrected either. Nel felt piss running down his leg when he tricked Derman into saying that. Even though the doctor had referenced the amygdala and hippocampus controlling fight/flight response numerous different ways and that Oscar wouldn't have cognitive reasoning when he pulled the trigger, this too is left by Oldwage uncorrected like a Republican endorsing an abortion clinic. Nel will reach into these two gift piles of elephant dung and pull this sentence out of context from all the others in his sum-up and try to say this nullifies all the rest of Dr. Derman's testimony. I was literally stunned when Oldwage says I have no more questions for this witness--just no other word for it.


For what he paid, Pistorius should contemplate his arsenal of options and have it handy to petition grievance of ineffective counsel if he's convicted. There certainly is corroboration to support it. I expect that the closing argument by Roux is going to be stellar and I sure as hell HOPE so! Because seldom has an attorney had more to work with than there is in this case. I also have great confidence in the girl assessor that is going to be Judge Masipa's sounding board. She hasn't missed very much which is fortunate for Oscar and I expect her to be extremely influential in the outcome of a fair verdict for Oscar.

But was this impressive as a defense team? It wouldn't rate comparing it to some students just out of law school.

Well said aavi.

All I can add is that I have KNOWN people who piss about with course work all year. Miss handing in assignments, do poorly in ongoing tests etc But eventually do brilliantly in final exam or submit an A++ final report.

Hope springs eternal.. I am expecting an A++ Final Closing argument from Roux.

I have also known toadies like Nil who plagiarise reference books, copy from others assignments to appear like top of the class material... only to fall off when it come to the Final exam.

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

IMO

Some musings on the Channel 7 Australian bit of work.

First the Defense team considered the footage of Oscar on his stumps privileged or this


"We wish to make it very clear that the material that has been aired was obtained illegally and in breach of the nondisclosure agreement with The Evidence Room. Its usage also constitutes a breach of privilege as this material was produced for trial purposes on the instructions of a commissioner, and the ownership of the copyright vests in the commissioner. No permission for the disclosure thereof has been given.”


would not have been included in their complaint. I am under the impression that some information was released and that information was bundled with the footage of Oscar on his stumps to give the appearance it was all part of the same “release” deal.

I think Oscar is consistent, once again, even in his non acceptance of his humanity “I have an addiction to perfection.” His mind must be a true paradox of contradictions, when it comes to his “leg-lessness”.

Anyone who has been traumatized or worked with someone who has been traumatized will recognize the place of vacancy that Oscar goes to when he is reenacting that AM. I don’t think he looks cold I think he looks emotionally unavailable as he is unable to to handle the horror he is reliving.


We had the friend from the reality TV show Phuti Khomo (?) who said if you knew Reeeva the only thing you would think of was love. Excuse me if I am wrong but didn’t Khomo know Reeva for less than 6 months and didn’t Reeva get voted off whatever show she was on? Curious. Why can’t Reeva just have been a normal woman, faults and good points? Why must she suddenly be “Love” personified? Wouldn’t Reeva like to be remembered for who she was rather than an impossible caricature? She achieved great things, overcame a terrible accident, achieved A’s at University, had a law degree, had a small amount of success modeling, there is much positive to focus on, but no one leads an unblemished life.


Part 2 in the next post

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

Hi Carm.... Its a "page turner" so far.... I await part 2 with antici...........................

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

.....................pation !!

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