Oscar Pistorius Trial Part 7

[Roussette]

here is Part 6. Nearly time for a new one.

I think the point Looking was making is that witnesses have the option to give evidence in the language of their choosing and it is the courts responsibility to ensure that translators are available to assist with this.
I think that what Looking meant is that the trial is held in the first language if the accused to ensure that the acused always fully understands what is happing around them.
I do admit that the translators at times have seemed to have problems, I wouldn't blame poor translators as much as the fact that there are not always direct translations, some languages will have several words to differently discribe something while another language will just have the one general word (the old saying that the Inuit language has many different words for snow springs to mind).
Translation is not an exact science and is in it's self subjective. I think that a witness giving testomony in a UK court in a language other then English would likely have the same problems with the way a translator takes their words. What the SA people have that somebody in this country may not is a high rate of bi, if not tri linguistic people. If a person giving evidence speaks no other language then the one they give evidence in they would not know if the translator had translated their words in a way that was not the intended meaning of the words. It does make you wonder how much if any damage has been done in courts due to language differences between the court and witnesses.
All that in mind I don't think it is fair to be critical of the translators in this case or to state that it is a fault of the SA legal system.
The main point made that I agree with is sub justice. The lack of this has caused so much miss information to filter in to people opinions and can at times make it hard to look subjectively at evidence. I find it highly bazaar that both the state and the defence have used things posted on YouTube in their evidence.
That said however as the system is not jury the judge can well be trusted to not be influenced by all the chatter of things that have gone on with the lack of sub justice. I think we in the UK find it so shocking is that we are used to and conditioned by our own system.
I have found this close look at a system that shares so much with our own yet deviates in some massive ways quite enlightening. I have said it before but should I ever be acused of a crime I didn't commit I would have much more confidence that I would be exonerated if I was before judge and assersors rather then jury. I would rather have three people with extensive knowledge of the law decide my fare rather then 12 people with no previous expirence of the system or the law.

Re the 'black intruder/invader' theorising
OP would still have been prosecuted as his actions are not acceptable in any way and he would have still shot and killed someone. We would and should feel the same.

I do wonder how the press would have reacted?
OP the hero protecting his beautiful girlfriend from the 'black invader'?
My guess is that that would be the lightly hidden narrative

I hate myself for even considering that

Yes Ronald - yet it appears it wouldn't have gone to court if the intruder had been black, according to what I linked. That is quite unbelievable.

Thanks Roadkill

I think that as there are I think 11 official languages ( might be 12 ) they expect the translators to be fluent in 5+ languages
Better IMO to have a - e or whatever that are actually fluent but unworkable for all the languages on all the days in court. I think that the accents have foxed people too

I hate to say it but had there actually been an intruder that had been killed then there would have been a trial although it wouldn't have been televised, the press interest wouldn't have been so high, what would have been in the press would have been the life history of the intruder, that persons life would have been picked apart, the victim would have been blamed and blaimed some more. The press would have gone with the heroic Oscar image.
I think that if OP had been found guilty his sentence would have been close to the minimum, a fine and a suspended sentence. OP would have lost some of his spinners but not all, he would have been able to go back to his career and a year or so down the line it would have been remembered of a black time in Oscar life and touted as yet another thing that Oscar had faced and overcome. It would have been a small subheading on his Wikipedia page within two years.

I think that is nonsense tbh but who knows. It is a better SA nowadays and these things are taken seriously

I think if the circs were the same - that he shot someone to death in a closed toilet and gave them no opportunity to exit , hand themselves in, etc. didn't fire a warning shot. Had other options. Lived in a town, with security

I believe it would still have gone to court and he would have been in trouble IMO

That was to Rousette not Roadkill
20 yrs ago it wouldn't have gone to court now SA is a different place in terms of govt expectations policing courts etc

RoadKill that sounds like the scenario that would have happened, yes. I have no idea personally, I just read what it said on a SA website so it isn't gospel.

I think Nerf must be busy compiling this excel spreadsheet we're all anticipating...

No, I understand that, Stack - I didn't mean that the witnesses must use English what I mean is, the court uses the mother-tongue of the accused - here Pistorius. The witness testimony then must be entered into the court in English. The witness saying it and it being entered into the court are two different things. They can happen simultaneously, but they don't have to.

The witnesses can either choose to speak English, or speak their mother tongue with an interpreter putting it into English. Neither is a perfect situation, because there are nuances in languages that don't carry across. There is no English word for Schadenfreude for example. The nearest would be to say 'he was upset, and I was happy about that' which isn't the same exactly. I seem to remember that the man speaking Zulu explained that in Zulu there is the word for a 'scream' and the word for 'a sort of shouted scream' and a word for 'shout'. We don't have that middle one.

The reason it's 'fair' is that the accused ought to be able to understand what's being said, but it does mean that there will be issues with interpretation.

(I've just got to the part where Roux is reading Stipp's testimony to Burger. He translated it and shortened it at Nel objected. The Judge told him he must read it in Afrikaans, and then the court translate would translate. It struck me as an odd situation where an Afrikaans speaking person would read an Afrikaans written statement to an Afrikaans Mother tongue person in English, then question her in English, and she would answer in English/Afrikaans for the benefit of the court.

The judge is clearly more experienced in dealing with this and cut to; read it in Afrikaans, and we'll translate officially. The lawyer, the witness will hear it in Afrikaans which is better, but for the court's benefit, there will follow a translation.)

(Oops, sorry, I read Stack's question, then went to sort the laundery out, then got sidetracked by having a bath, and by the time I answered, loads of posts had gone by.)

I must go and do some chores too but I'm a bit hungover poorly today

I agree with what Roadkill and Ronald suggest - I don't think the person in the article was stating legal fact, but giving his opinion on what might have happened. I think it would have been treated very differently, likely as Roadkill suggests.

While we're on the subject, I don't think the UK police are exactly squeaky-clean when it comes to dealing with non-white victims. Or of non-white potential criminals, come to that.

The US has some recent examples of odd verdicts where black victims were concerned.

It's possible that South Africa is still more extreme in this area, but we're not perfect out here either.

So just watching the sky programs from yesterday. If those bruises are from a bullet that means reeva was cowering (sp? Doesn't look right to me)

The bruises on her back, Anya? The state's case is that the bullet that didn't hit her front ways ricocheted from the back wall to behind her, after she had collapsed to the floor.

I have to say, I have no clue which I think is more likely - the ricocheting bullet or the magazine rack. The magazine rack sounds more likely, but not if that positions her right away from where she needed to be for the last bullet. I don't even know whether they are certain that the bruise happened at the time of the shooting accident (and how they'd know).

Hmm, think so, I'll have another watch

I find it so hard to get my head around the whole idea that there exists a massive, silent unacknowledged substrata of humanity who are both denied protection and whose experience and observations are dismissed/discouraged.
Life must truly be scary for these people.

Nel is saying if reeva collapsed then reeva wouldn't have had the head wound.

Can someone clarify for me how Reeva was found? I thought her body was between the wall facing the door and the toilet bowl but in court it looked as though the magazine rack was on the same wall as the door. If the latter, then was she found with her back to the door wall?

Book. I has thought the far wall but she has landed on the rack.

That is confusing me as the blood in the toilet seat would indicate she was facing the direction of the door. Yet the magazine rack was still upright.

There doesn't look to be enough room there

Nel is saying if reeva collapsed then reeva wouldn't have had the head wound.

I think he's saying if she fell forward in the way that the state suggest, that she wouldn't have the head wound. The state say she fell down and back. She needed to have been down when she got the head wound, but couldn't have fallen towards the door as they suggest.

how Reeva was found?

From OP's testimony, she was sitting on the floor, with her back to the far wall, facing the door, but with her arm down between the toilet and the wall, and her head on the toilet seat. Blood spatter seems to suggest this is true.

They contention here is that he said that the magazine rack was further over to the right (when facing into the toilet) when he found her, but this can't have been true according to the blood spatter, and I don't think anyone, including the Defence, has any clue why he said it. It doesn't aid his case in any way whatsoever.

Yy looking, sorry! If reeva have fallen straight down in (like the expert is saying) she wouldn't he had the head would

Sorry looking, I misunderstood.

I have to take (another) break from transcription because I'm technically responsible for the children right now. They're at an age where I can be in another room, writing, in the bath, cooking without them needing my immediate and direct supervision. But for some reason as soon as I put a set of headphones on, they both need to have a million questions answered with immediate effect.

Now I've taken the headphones off, he's happy playing computer games and she's in the garden. As soon as I put them on, they'll be back at my feet, nagging.