Just came across the defence opening.. OP's version read by Olwage

Pistorius Trial: Opening - Defence Read Pistorious Statement

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

FWIW I think Nel is a miniature weasel and playground bully. I abhor his cross examination style.

I agree Minor, his style is not to get at the truth but to manipulate and confuse the person in the box into misspeaking until they get close to Nel's truth and then Nel announces what that truth is even if it is not what the person has said.


Quite ugly in my opinion.

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

Oscar Pistorius Who Has Been Accused of the Murder of Girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp, Trials in South African Judicial History
By Nico Bougas/ Assist News On June 8, 2014

In recent weeks, South Africans have been glued to the events taking place in a Pretoria courtroom at one of the most dramatic trials in South African judicial history, that of Oscar Pistorius who has been accused of the murder of girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp.

I have not seen much of the live TV coverage of the trial, as during it I have been traveling extensively. However I must admit to a certain bias in that I once conducted a telephone interview with Oscar and found him to be most polite, articulate, and friendly. And I know of others who are personal friends of his and speak highly of him. I certainly hope and want to believe he is innocent and this is all a tragic mistake.

Sick Humor

I am appalled by the jokes and sick humor surrounding this case. We are talking about a life that has been cut short, about a two families that have been devastated. How can anyone find this tragic situation funny? This is not some make-believe soap opera. These are real life, human beings that have experienced the deepest shock and sorrow. I think it is the depth of callousness to joke and ridicule the accused about such a heartrending event.

I know I am in the minority, but I actually believe Oscar is telling the truth and has given a substantially true version of what took place. It seems that everybody has an opinion about the case. So whilst I have no legal expertise I am as entitled as everybody else to throw in my few cents worth.

......more at link
http://crossmap.christianpost.com/news/ ... tory-10814

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

I am not religious.. so the religious points and the last section of the article "God's Perspective" is superfluous as far as I am concerned... but otherwise a reasonable perspective shown in the article.

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

A voice of reason in the dark quagmire of media, both Main Stream and social “crime forums” in their frenzied suckling on the teat that is the most sensational and grotesque so that they can regurgitate and fabricate scenarios to meet the criteria of their own sick fantastical thinking.

Kudos to an author for having an independent opinion rather than voicing shrill collective incompetent conclusions as indisputable facts. And a double kudo to him for voicing his concerns over the hypocritical laughs that are being had over any part of the horrific death of Reeva by those who claim to be victim advocates. Sick.

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

Just thought I'd post this. It's not my work, but I thought it was quite a good read...

Thanks Steve....

That ties up all the loose ends




I "sleuthed" the source.... comment to counter a daft article at biznews.com:)

http://www.biznews.com/oscar-pistorius- ... s-believe/

Commenting on the BizNews article........

Nikki - State's Version of Events

And a comment on Nikki's comment...

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

Just on the point raised that Defence expert should have used a light meter to measure how dark it was in OP's bedroom.
(The same argument is applicable to "should have used a meter to measure dB in cricket bat on door sound tests)

It is not only "not essential" to use scientific instruments to measure light and sound in this crcumstance... but it is totally WRONG to do so.

What is in question is not an absolute value, but rather what a human person might PERCEIVE. That can only be determined by testing what a human does perceive... it can not be measured on an instrument. Human perception is NOT about absolute data... but rather about interpreting and "making sense" of data based on prior history, and expectations.

Any one of countless examples of "optical illusions" will demonstrate the point. Human perception is OFTEN wrong.. it simply is. That perception will steadfastly STILL be wrong even when an observer KNOWS he is wrong. I just found one example on YT. Furthermore... where one person perceives something WRONG it is not a matter of "well 5 people will not all get it wrong"... they most certainly will. If it is an illusion in sight or sound then it applies to all observers. So NO PROBLEM at all for me to accept that 4 witnesses were wrong in percieving screams as being female when they were in fact OP.

Incredible Shade Illusion!

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

Someone leaked Nel's closing argument? Naughty naughty

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

What a steaming load of azeala fertilizer that biznews article is. Nel has indoctrinated this parrot prevaricator just like James Jones did to the kool-aide drinkers did at Guyana. They were just as stupid and gullible.

The prosecution galloped full speed in a blind stupor hell-bent to take down a star athlete on a premeditated murder charge and put the Pretoria showboating prosecution team in the South Africa prosecutions Hall Of Fame. The whole world would be watching since it was being compared to the trial of the century that acquitted even though the glove fitted.

They were resolute and absolutely convinced that a spontaneously evincing argument out of the blue spiraled a few terse texts into a murder plot that was hatched by a guy who had no more use for the woman 1,700 other texts showed he adored.

They were positive he blew up in a rage, put on his prosthesis, got his Parabellum 9 mm, marched 25 feet in a rage, propped himself up against the back of his sink basins, aimed at the level of--and directly at-- the toilet and purposely fired 4 deadly rounds of ammo into the toilet door with the sole intent to assure Reeva would go out in a body bag. And on every material facet of their contention in the bail hearing, they were proven

WRONG !!

So now they had their pants down around their ankles. They have a lead detective who was an international embarrassment and the lead prosecutor is heard to say in the bail hearing.."THERE GOES MY CASE." That prosecutor's name was Nel. A slug. The slug who decided instead of then doing the right thing, decides to morph the original WRONG theories into the new facts like a kid with silly putty.

A prosecutor who has the only witness who even claimed to hear a woman's voice, is deposed again and the first statement is admittedly no longer able to be deemed by the prosecution as reliable. It is now no longer a fight she heard but reduced to hearing only loud talking. But did that stop the slug in charge? No. Did this witnesses own husband contradicting her saying the voice was Oscar's, stop the death march to conviction? No. Without that fragile thread of manufacturing an argument, there couldn't possibly be a nexus to Oscar wanting to kill her. Even though only one person is heard in an "argument", the railroad job continues.

It has now become a matter of hobbling together any bullshit necessary to save face. Instead of a search for the truth, it's a search to do everything possible to obfuscate the truth. Instead of admitting a rush to an over zealous prosecution, it's a rush to cover their ass. It's an overt conspiracy to patch the dike by any unethical means necessary. This includes withholding evidence, manufacturing evidence, or contorting evidence. Nel turns my stomach.

We already know that the Standers were originally put on the State's witness list. First they're later told, well we've decided only ONE of you will be called. Then guess what? Surprise! Neither one of you is desired. Hmmm, could that be they didn't like what you had to say? Unlike the Burger contingent who volunteered to embellish her story with a definite bias to putting the screws to Oscar, the two of them were platinum witnesses. They molded just fine as part of the silly putty. I thought we were looking for the truth Nel.

But this manure pile goes deeper.

Could you POSSIBLY think of a reason why the closest thing to a smoking gun witness wouldn't be called? Look at this.

A witness that would say he "preplanned the murder." Whoa, what else could you possibly ask for? This is the Gold Ring--the proof you've been claiming all along. She is also on the State's witness list. But we don't see her on the stand for the prosecution either? ...What ???

http://www.enca.com/south-africa/new-de ... oscar-case


Maybe you can explain that one Nel. I think I can. I'll take bullshit again for a thousand Alex. Just like what your whole trumped up case is.

Then there's more....Frank. The Frank that every Oscar hater is sure holds the key to this murder. He's ON the witness list. CERTAINLY he had to hear an argument right in his own house if a neighbor 105 meters away could hear one. You could have subpoenaed him regardless of what he said to the officers. You could have grilled him like a Russian KGB agent--exactly like the kind of prosecutor you are Nel. He would have had two choices, answer the questions or take the Fifth. But he wasn't called.

Right there at number 10 ....... http://www.pod702.co.za/Eyewitnessnews/ ... ctment.pdf



Another one Justin Devaris...on YOUR witness list. Just happens to be Sammantha's boyfriend.

http://pbs.twimg.com/media/BaQWEO8IMAAtb6K.jpg:large



Why all these people on the prosecution witness list Nel that were never called? I know why. You were trying every ploy to keep them as far removed and as difficult as possible for them to become defense witnesses and they were devastating to your case.

Because here's what that lovely couple had to say at the bail hearing in their statements.

(Justin)

14:21
They were both taking it slowly as they had come out of previous relationships... They really complemented each other.

14:23
Oscar would often tell me how much he loved Reeva and she was a fantastic person who understood him. She could be 'the one'.

14:24
Oscar told me Reeva could be the girl he would one day marry. Pistorius [is] in [the] dock struggling to hold back tears, tweets David Smith.




(Sammantha) the one who allegedly says Pistorius "planned" the murder.

14:28
Greyvenstein: Reeva told me that she really liked Oscar and they both clicked and understood each other. Pistorius treated her "like gold".

14:29
Reeva said she would marry Pistorius if he asked her. She said he was intense but she loved him.

14:30
Reeva confided in me that even though she and Oscar had not been together for very long, she really loved Oscar.

Greyvenstein: In my experience Oscar and Reeva had nothing but love for each other.


Nel and this prosecution is the very reason that Lady Justice is blind. I want to see the shame that he is to the legal profession and the sham that this trial is, exposed to the whole world for what it is.

The people who write tripe like that biznews article should stick to science fiction.

perfect I especially like the reference to the rabbit figurines

Thanks aavi.... so you are not that keen on Nel then?


I am all for prosecuting bad guys vigorously... but it worries me when I see overzealous and devious (dishonest) prosecutors... we certainly saw that in the GZ case.. and here now in this case. When I see such examples of overcharging a defendant... I assume it is a ploy.... a device to get to a lesser charge really all along. ... I wonder if "lesser included" charges should be BANNED... either the prosecutor proves the case he charges or the "perp" walks free.

New Rumpole rule for prosecutors: "Piss, or get of the pot"

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

Nel is not a prosecutor he is an interrogator and not a very good one as all his nonsense only confused Oscar but it didn't make Oscar confess to a crime he did not commit which in my mind was Nel's goal.

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

I totally agree.

This is probably Nel's police background showing through. He has little or no evidence so he's likely to try anything to sucker the accused.

The tactics used by him of constantly bating OP to show remorse, and the forceful way in which he made OP look at the head wound pictures were typical of what you'd expect to see in an interrogation with a sole purpose to extract a confession.

Yet we're led to believe that the state advocate's role is to search for the truth, not secure a conviction at any cost. Hmm...

This is probably Nel's police background showing through.

Exactly on the nail.

Masipa seems to be aware of Nel's tactics.



IMO Nel is looking to secure a conviction at any cost, justice and truth be damned.

A little go , as if Nel were a preacher,

"You are damned, say that you are damned, everyone knows that you are damned," says preacher Nel

"But I didn't know exposing my shoulders was a sin" whispers Lolita (in a low voice)

"So there we have it you have admitted that you are a whore, and not only a whore a whore who kills puppies!" Preacher Nel

"What?" says Lolita

"What and Whore, both start with WH do we really need anymore proof of your lies? It is so improbable to ask us to think you are not a whore or puppy killer that I must stop you here before you further offend me. You are by your own words a whore"

"Huh?" Lolita

"Yes Hubba hubba indeed."

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

To quote: "It's not good for you Mr. Nel." When he's being a bully and employing transparent tactics to create facts and summon weight to evidence out of thin air it just underscores the case he doesn't have. If he would appear more honest with the case he does have I think that would serve the state a lot better.

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

Respectfully, don't like one side-edness on either end. IMO Oscar had a track record of not treating women very well, of being possessive, jealous, at least somewhat controlling, and quite capable of screaming at his girl friends.

Their relationship on both ends doesn't seem particularly healthy to me. That doesn't mean he was abusive, much less violent, but likewise, his many lovey texts don't mean squat either. Words, words, words and all that.

The overcharging IMO was to accuse OP of premed murder. That's nuts... But , it's not unreasonable to ask whether or not OP is guilty of killing another person in a situation where many others would not.

And therein lies the rub, Nel has painted himself into a corner with his zealousness, an ordinary person without a disability and without a history of overreacting to noises in his home would indeed be held to a higher standard. Oscar’s mental “unwellness”, his extreme reactions to perceived threats and his vulnerability while on his stumps simply does not permit the judge to say, able-bodied Al would have acted as such in the same situation and therefore disabled Oscar should have acted as such.

Did Oscar over react to an extreme degree if his version of that AM is true? IMO yes, did he act prudently? No. Were there mitigating factors that will render his actions less lawfully culpable before the judge, yes I believe that there are extreme extenuating circumstance that will be considered as subjective circumstance that put Oscars over response into a class that is not defined by dotted i's and crossed t's.

I am of the opinion that Oscar's bullying treatment of women is sensationalized media biased and manipulation, and mostly unsubstantiated rumor.

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

Carm.....

Right. Equalling culpable homicide, IMO. Not a free pass, but definitely not premeditated murder.

It's the extremes either way that I don't accept. I don't see OP as a monster or a murderer, but I also don't see him as a wholly "innocent" man either.

I believe people should be held responsible for themselves and their actions. OP had to have known he wasn't OK in some basic ways. His friends tried to get him help as did others. He should have listened.

That's not being me being judgemental. That's me having seeing first hand what it looks like when folks in dire need of help don't listen and having experienced first hand the cost of cleaning up after the fact. Leaves me with zero patience for after the fact excuses.