Oscar Pistorius Trial Part 6

[Roussette]

here is Part 5 but we are ready (nearly) for a new one.

That there has been ample opportunity for him to run and hide (we think) and he hasn't done so, makes me think he is being responsible about turning up each day in court

"I believe someone shoved something at him - not sure if it was a book or a bit of paper - and he signs it "thank you for your love and kindness""

I noticed yesterday a woman basically stood in his way and shoved herself at him to hug him. He awkwardly hugged her back. It's a bit difficult because he can't really shove these people away can he? I mean, he doesn't want to alienate any of his supporters (even if some of them outside the court are a bit over the top, shall we say) and if he did, then no doubt the tabloids would jump on it.

If I was facing a lengthy time in a SA prison and I had the means I would flee.

The fact he hasn't makes me think he may be telling the truth

Maybe he hasn't fled so far because he genuinely thought he would get off. If he is found guilty, that will be very different. That's really why I was wondering if he would be free between verdict and sentence. I wonder what standard procedure is.

"She's not a witness though, so it doesn't actually matter. If he thought it, so what. Not surprised there are witnesses confirming what he said ( although that's third hand) - people love to be involved in a bit of drama."

Nerf according to SKY NEWS (my italics)

"Pistorius' alleged intimidation was not heard by nearby reporters.

A police photographer saw him lean towards Ms Myers and later asked the family what had occurred - leading to a complaint being made."

But as you say, she's not a witness so it can't be classed as intimidation can it?

I think out of respect for the Steenkamps, and the Pistorius family, the "welcoming committee" should not be allowed to ambush him. It's all very unbecoming, I find it inappropriate. But then, these will likely be white balloon holders and to them he is innocent

Do we know if there is a gap between verdict & sentence?

Bearing in mind the judge is responsible for both rather than jury for verdict, judge for sentence in UK, I'd say it was conceivable both could be handed down on the same day.

Makes sense, member. I wonder how long between the summings up and the verdict.

I don't think him not running/fleeing is any indication of him telling the truth necessarily. Surely it could also mean he started off with a slightly arrogant attitude thinking he would get off all charges. I think that feeling has stuck with him as he seems to have changed his defence to involuntary manslaughter.

Interestingly, I read somewhere that his mother lived on her own in fear and kept guns all over the house, including one under her pillow. It's in this article. He had a love of guns for sure, but that article does go some way to explaining why he may have shot at a perceived intruder. I would be there understanding it a little more and almost believe him, if only he had listened for an answer from Reeva at some point before firing off the four bullets. That was my sticking point the first time I posted on these threads and nothing has changed.

It is a sticking point to not have listened for a response but adrenaline can produce unusual responses when acting out of fear, make hearing go funny, throwing normally rational, lucid, common sense behaviour out of the window....

.... which then takes us back to was it fear or were they arguing (only OP really knows)...

.... which then also takes us back to - if he was acting out of fear - the lack of robustness with security (I can understand the open balcony door and asking Reeva to close it, but not the broken downstairs window)....

.... only OP knows what happened, why he did what he did.

Very true Jill. If you read that article I've just linked to - he has grown up with fear and if it was real, wouldn't your house be like Fort Knox? Or maybe, because you are continually on the firing range honing your skills with target practice, you feel invincible with your gun always at your side.

Just the women. I honestly can't understand what the point was.

If there was any point, I would suggest it was to imply that the way that Oscar was crying, could have sounded like a woman scream.

That's why I asked if it was only the women. If he had asked the man to emulate the scream, it would have sounded much more masculine.

If I was facing a lengthy time in a SA prison and I had the means I would flee.

The fact he hasn't makes me think he may be telling the truth

Oscar Pistorius is pretty identifiable. More so, because he's is likely to need certain services, such as someone to make or repair prosthetic legs for him. I don't think it's one pair for life. He would need a distinct destination to go to and means to survive in said destination (a job or bank funds provided by someone), and would also be relying on nobody recognising him and reporting him.

If he were to flee now, what would that say about his innocence or guilt? And if he did flee, and was found and brought back, how would he possibly avoid a sentence in a SA prison.

He'd have to do an Assange, and find a country that was willing to hold him without extraditing him, and he's not a person accused of political intrigue - he's a person who's accused of murdering his girlfriend. I'm not sure many countries would find they were able to justify it.

The only hope he has to avoid SA prison is to be found innocent of all charges at this trial.

Again, I think it's a leap too far for me to go from 'he hasn't done this illegal and highly difficult thing' to 'that means he must be innocent of the other, entirely related thing.'

That's just my opinion; I can see why other people might see if differently.

I believe up to two months between summing up & verdict was mentioned on an earlier thread, so looking at July.

Two months! Juries don't take that long and they have to argue it out among 12 people. Yet more freedom for OP. Come to think of it, is there a time limit for juries to reach a verdict?

Interesting Louise. I wonder why he leaned toward KM at all, given that according to OP he didn't speak to her at all?

I expect it does matter to KM since if he gets off, she could be next on the list!

"Oscar Pistorius is pretty identifiable. More so, because he's is likely to need certain services, such as someone to make or repair prosthetic legs for him. I don't think it's one pair for life. "

Looking apparently his everyday pair are pretty old (and very beat up) but it's not just the prosthetics. I have read that he was going to have an op on one of the stumps so there are other issues too. He'd need medical attention from time to time.

I expect it does matter to KM since if he gets off, she could be next on the list!

I'm sorry, YNK, but I think this is really crass. To suggest that there is a hit-list, and that he is bound to kill again is pretty unpleasant, particularly given that we haven't even heard all the evidence yet, let alone a judge's verdict.

Looking, exactly what I was going to say!

Roussette that is a very good article.

I can see how a gun could be regarded as a safety blanket (!) but by virtue of its ability, it is a nightmare of a safety blanket.

Guns beget guns. That's all there is to it. If you own one, you should expect to fire one. And know what that means. And be responsible. And be accountable.

They make me shudder. They are so destructive. So final.

I am so thankful that I do not live in that kind of environment.

Will this ever change though?

YNK - will you accept the judge's verdict and sentencing, if she decides on less than 25 years?

I think YNK was joking. Lighten up people.

I don't know if there is a time limit on jury deliberation written down in law, but if the judge thinks that the verdict is taking a long time, they can direct that they'll accept a majority verdict rather than a unanimous one.

Been searching NPA/South African Judiciary sites to see whether judgement & sentencing happen at same time but can't find anything.

"I think YNK was joking. Lighten up people"

One can never tell. Anyway it's wasn't remotely funny

I forgot to say earlier, when we were discussing the legal point of 'subconscious bias' in Standars testimony - this was probably what Nel and Masipa spoke to each other about.

Roux was feeding Nel the bait here and if Nel had taken it Standars testimony would have not been inadmissible.
The fact that Nel didn't bite was what led Roux to say the early adjournment would not have happened if he had asked more questions/

On one of the you tube links put up yesterday (or possibly late last night) a group of Siuth African legal experts were discussing the court session on Monday, I think it was from the dedicated SA channel for the trial.
Anyhow, it was discussed at the end of that clip about time scales. The experts were an ex judge (firm a different but not distant African country, don't remember which I'm afraid), a SA advocate and a SA legal academic.
They indicated that likely time scales where that the defence would rest next week and then they would be given between 3 and 5 working days to write their arguments, these would then be either submitted into evidence or read onto the record (they said that most often they would simply be submitted but due to the unusual nature and publicity of the case it is very likely they will be read onto record) and then the judge and assessors will take between 2 - 4 weeks to make a verdict. That would put us at a date around the beginning of July for verdict which fits with the previous indications.
Given the huge amount of evidence and the massive amount of information the judge and assessors need to go through, decide how much credence each statement by each witness needs to be given, make sure that they have no gaps in their understanding of both the state and the defences case I think we are going to be looking at the maximum of those time scales. Every single t must be crossed and i dotted, the verdict when given must be tight and there must be no errors or oversights that allow for appeal (from either side). This is not a case that the country of SA can afford any ambiguity about. Naturally every case that goes before a judge needs this, OP us nothing special in that respect but politically there just can't be any mistakes, the judge and assessors are more then awere of this and it will take as long as it takes (within reason) and I can't see how anybody could argue against this, it's not the finally of some TV show people are waiting for and I have to say that some of the whining in things like twitter comments (thankfully haven't seen much of that here) I have seen about the wait is very distasteful.

When it comes to sentice if found guilty if any charges I don't know, haven't heard it talked about. In theory sentence could well be handed down at time of verdict but I don't know if SA has a system of sentience mitigation that allows a defendant found guilty to submit evidence in the form of charicter witness, phycological assessments etc and also victim impact statements. I know that is part of sentencing in the UK but don't know about SA.