To have a problem with the Trial Judge in the Pistorious case

[Charliebitmyfinger]

I think it has been hugely irritating to listen to her summing up today. She has stumbled over words quite a lot and been quite longwinded in the issues of the lesser Firearm charges OP was accused of, I actually fell asleep(not kidding). I woke up an she was still droning on about the Restaurant incident. Then... She gave the verdict we have all been waiting for.... Culpable Homicide. But that part was so brief one could almost have missed it. Surely she could have prepared her statement last night and could have been a little more polished or does the Court hand her the statement as the session started this morning? Excuse my ignorance of The SA Courts. I also do not understand her reason behind extending OP's bail. I am not questioning her judgement as that could be a separate thread. I just think her delivery has been fairly clumsy today..

YABU. Legal judgements are not delivered for the purposes of entertainment.

I have more of a problem with her verdict than the delivery of it.

Where's your nearest grip shop? Go and get y'self one.

A woman was shot to death ffs!

Yabu. It's real life not a tv drama!

I get that part Janine, and yes you are right. I am more concerned that she seemed somewhat hesitant and a little unprepared and I do not think she inspired confidence with her faltering delivery.

I hear what you're saying op altho I wouldn't imply it was boring and long-winded as that is rather disrespectful. It seemed to me, possibly erroneously, that she was leaving what can only be described as dramatic pauses at times. I found it odd to watch too.

I would say YANBU to my surprise.

No it's not a TV drama but it has played out to the whole world via the TV. And people have been gripped by it for month. She knows that she has an audience of - I don't know how many - lots of people, worldwide, and she could have been polished about it (I haven't followed it, but assuming ops is an accurate portrayal)

Basgetti I do too.

Perhaps the fact that this is such a high profile case, that the verdict would inevitably lead to a lot of speculation, judgement and potentially antagonism aimed at her, not to mention the eyes and ears of the world being upon her as she delivers the verdict all contributed to her stumbling a little over her words as she delivers news which will affect so many people. I can't say I blame her.

From the off she didn't inspire confidence. I think the whole thing has been a complete and utter fail. The lack of professionalism from her, the legal bods, the witnesses... all terrible.

I have no idea how RS's family have coped with this - it's not justice, it's a circus :(

Concernedabouttheboy you have expressed it much better than me, and yes I agree I could have been less disrespectful

Not sure if you are aware of the fact most murder trials, unless the defendant has plead guilty, can go into days of verdict summing up. Contrary to your view, many legal professionals, spectators and experts have mentioned that Judge Masipa has actually been fairly swift with her summing and eventual verdict.

Had she decided to discuss the nature of some witness testimony, we could have easily been waiting for a verdict next week.

The lesser firearms charge were addressed because he was guilty of one of the charges, and she had to explain why she felt the other charges were worthy of acquittal, much like she did with the 3 hour (or so) justification of her verdict regarding the murder charges.

As for her stumbling over reading - sorry, I didn't realise people have to learn verbatim their opinions. I think anybody reading from paper is subject to mistakes and hesitation. In a legal environment, there can be huge ramifications if a statement is given incorrectly regarding the freedom/conviction of another human. Therefore, reiteration or amendment will always occur.

Televised trials always receive some degree of criticism, but to comment on the fluidity, coverage and choice of words in a legal matter seems very inconsiderate and unreasonable considering the significance of what was at stake for Steenkamp's family AND Pistorious.

Didnt see anything wrong with what she said or how she said it. Its a trial not a film. Think its a bit sad that some people are so taken with appearance over substance.

What?! As others have said this isnt a TV show for your fucking entertainment, its a murder trial. They can't just cut out the boring bits because you are getting bored by it!

I know nothing about court cases, but I assume that it is the same in any court in most countries, including England - loads of boring shit that has to be said read out for legal reasons etc.

I don't know if there are any lawyers on here that can verify, but I was under the impression that the majority of time spent in courts is nothing like what we are shown in films/TV shows, I imagine its quite boring? I may be wrong though.

If you are that bothered then just watch the 'highlights' later in the day.

FFS

She is anything but underprepared.

Eauneau I was listening on the radio, (perhaps that was my problem). As I said I do not know much about the SA Legal system and I accept that is also my problem. Also I did not intent to diminish the gravity of the case, perhaps I have watched too many movies and I was expecting more 'gravitas' and less hesitation.

My cousin went on FB last night to rant about how he had OBVIOUSLY been planning it for months and had made up his story, and how stupid the judge was not to be able to see it. THEN she posted a picture of the McCanns and wrote "More murderers that got away with it!"

I have no idea if he meant to murder or not - I just want to grab her and shout "EVIDENCE!?!!?" in her face.

My point is that in the face of stupidity and subjectivity like that (and there is A LOT of that about) it is hugely refreshing and reassuring to see the judge looking carefully and objectively at the evidence that is available to her.

YABU

Just wondering NOW why O P's uncle has been allowed to make a statement to the Court, I hope the Steencamp's were given the same opportunity to do so. As I said I do not know much about the SA's legal system though..

YABU, as others have said, it is not a TV drama. I have attended court a few times (though not for a murder trial) and yes it can sometimes be boring.

This a very serious matter, a young woman lost her life. The judge wants to get her words right, as she should. I would hope she is aiming to get everything right legally and procedurally rather than worrying about the cameras and the 'audience'.

I believe OP's uncle was allowed to make a statement because he is standing as surety for his nephew. OP is staying with his and it is a condition of his bail that he continue to. Uncle will have to consent to that.

for what it is worth, i thought the judge was very meticulous and well prepared. If i was reading a statement of that length, i would sometimes trip over my tongue too. I dont think the odd verbal stumble should infer a lack of professionalism.

BTW, i predict he is will receive a mahoosive fine, probably equivalent to every penny he owns, and will serve a max of 1 year if not a suspended sentence.

Scotch thanks for that, I understand now about the bail and Surety. And yes re the Judge far better to be meticulous. I guess I have so much to learn about these things. I hope O P does not do a runner (and I do not mean that as a joke!)

Try viewing the verdict at "I find him guilty because..." rather than "I find him guilty". Oh, and as a serious legal opinion rather than entertainment.

I think legal arguments are quite boring for onlookers. They have to be detailed, objective and exact.

Unless the S African court system is completely different to every other civilised country, it will be HER judgement, not something she's handed by court officials! She's the judge, and in this system the jury too. She decides whether he is guilty of each charge and what the penalty is. (Legacy of apartheid - to avoid the risk that prejudice or fear of reprisals would affect jury decisions.)

yabvu

it is not an episode of Law and Order it is not entertainment what did you want a drum roll. Did you not listen to her summing up for over three hours yesterday. I found it very interesting though confusing at times (I did not listen to it all). It was confusing as she spoke about what she had and had not taken into account the complexities of the case and other accounts that did not match with the timmings

Yabu- legal judgments are often long. Try attending a criminal case at the Old Bailey
This case is not an entertainment show.