Oscar Pistorius Trial Part 7

[Roussette]

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

I've lost the sky feed again

Telegraph feed us good

this is working Anya if you can ignore the inane comments on the right.

Roux is up now

Just to note, the person listening with headphones (so hearing loop or translated, think it's hearing loop) is uncle Arnold.

Oh dear Roux clutching at straws.

If OP was found not guilty of all charges, could the state use that he was not observed to appeal themselves? (if they choose not to have him observed that is)

Roux is having a hit to grasping at straws rate with his statements of about 1 to 5.

Trying so hard to not let my bias to discount what Roux is saying he just seems to be dh grappling to gain some ground back. His argument is in eloquent and disjointed. He isn't convincing me. At end of session yesterday I didn't think that referral was really appropriate but Nel's argument was very good.

I do think it's more to make sure the loop holes for appeal are closed and to make sure any allegations that due process was not followed can not succeed.

Sigh. The realities of the attempts for society to gain justice are in the end about technicalities rather then truth. It makes me sad for humanity.

I'm not liking 'she gave an indication only, not an allegation...'

She gave a diagnosis. How that diagnosis is used and considered has to be consider by the court.

I'm not understanding Roux argument to be honest

Ehh? I'm confused why Roux is bringing the material evidence into the argument when this is purely about mental state?

3 different versions is irrelevant. I think it might well be for this particular argument. The rest is pretty damned relevant though.

Dies Roux know what his case is anymore?
His argument is leaving me deeply confused.

What? They are planning to bring more of phycological evidence in and they are using this as a reason NOT to refer!! Surely that just strengthens the need to apply!!!

WHAT!!!!!

Next witness? Thought that was it?

I knew that was going to be at least one more witness as they weren't expecting the dr to take so long and where hoping to finish today so knew there must have been one more, but another phycological state witness and they think this is reason not to refer when they are planning to introduce more evidence about the effects of OPs mental state, good god, they surely have to refer!

I need an I luff you Mr Nel badge!

Ah hah! what a blinder. Nel was Roux in the case he has quoted.

Another Mr Nel fan here....

I need to set 'with the utmost respect' up as a macro.

They both seem to be using it as 'far be it for me to tell you your job...'

So that's it for today

Soooooooo.

What do people think?

Just to say, Roux did say 30 days a couple of times. I wonder if this is because he's suggesting the worst case scenario (up to 30 days) as a suggestion that it's overkill.

Think it backfired on Roux like bonfire night

I think he has to be assessed, it would be very dodgy if he didnt, wouldnt it?

Arfing at all the closet Nel lovers here, i thought I was the only one

anyone going to come forward and admit stirrings for Roux?