Oscar Pistorius Trial Part 7

[Roussette]

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

Anya I am sure I read somewhere that the Steenkamps are bringing a civil claim against OP and that they were torn to shreds in the SA media for doing so. I see it as no different from the civil claim brought against OJ Simpson, and in some cultures payment of money to the family of the victim is standard practice.

I think it is incredibly sad that Reeva's parents can't afford to attend the trial without charitable donations.

Following on from what was said earlier about narcissism, I am interested to know what people think about diagnosable mental disorders and whether there are mitigating circumstances for committing a crime.
It seems that people are able to empathise somewhat with GAD, but not with NPD.
Sure, narcissism comes with it some pretty unpleasant personal qualities, but surely both are a function of your environment, upbringing, the quality of care your parents gave you etc. So why does NPD attract contempt and GAD attract sympathy?

The civil claim has been ongoing since last year

I hope try do emotionsecho, op is throwing rands at his defence and the steenkamps have lost everything. Their whole family will never be the same.

Majestic personally I think only very severe mental illnesses should be used as mitigating factors in the commission of crimes and that would necessitate a defence of diminished responsibility and subsequent detention in a psychiatric institution.

I think that using GAD as a factor in OP carrying out the crime, as stated that the psychiatrist report was to be used for conviction, could set a dangerous precedent. I don't think either NPD or GAD should be used as a mitigating factor in the commission of a crime, but could be used in mitigation for sentencing. From what I understand Nel wants OP referred and assessed to discount or confirm the possibility of diminished responsibility due to his mental disorder.

Regarding the sufferers of either condition you are possibly correct in that the unpleasant characteristics associated with NPD are what renders people unable to feel empathy for them, whereas sufferers of GAD are generally more "likeable".

Majestic I agree wholeheartedly with you.
Narcissistic personality disorder is a debilitating condition and if a person accused of a crime is a sufferer and that condition played a part in that crime then it must be taken into account when considering culpability just like they are asking GAD to be taken into account here.
These types of mental illness should never be seen as an excuse for terrible crimes and things have to be looked at on a case by case basis to uncover the implications of mental health conditions where the sufferer has commited a crime.

It is a reminder how much still needs to be done when it comes to understanding and attitudes toward mental Heath in society as a whole. I think people may display less sympathetic responses towards conditions like narcissistic personality disorder, borderline personality disorder and many other personality disorders because they make the sufferers very difficult people to get along with, they make them hard to like and therefore reduce feelings of empathy and understanding.
Disorders like depression, GAD and other largely anxiaty driven disorders are more easy for people to relate to, most people have expirenced times of high anxiaty and can understand to a greater level what the sufferer is dealing with, people are better able to see them self in the sufferers place and as a result find it easier to feel empathy and relate to how the disorder can effect life.
The sad fact is that if you have a mental disorder that makes you an arsehole and difficult to live with and relate to then if you commit a crime in which your disorder has played a part then you are less likely to have any kind of public understanding and support for the position you find yourself in.
Still so much work to be done for mental health to be seen as illness that the sufferer can't control any more then a person with epilepsy can control having seizures. Both can control the symptoms to a point with medication but the still have the disorder yet still the person with a mental health condition is viewed as having somehow chosen to have the illness and chosen for it to continue effecting their lives.

Now all that said I will repeat what I said yesterday, in the case of OP and the killing of Reeva, I don't believe that OP can use his mental health to fully defend his actions, he can't have it both ways, he can't be in enough control of his condition to lead a successful life, have good friend and social life, maintain family bonds and Riley simply on his gun for the mainstay of his security and yet blaim is mental Heath condition for the act of shooting somebody (regardless if who he thought it was) though a closed wooden door into a very small confined space with no reasonable escape route.

emotions, I agree with you. I think neither should be used for mitigation and it would set a dangerous precedent. I can understand why psychotic disorders are treated differently, as there is a loss of touch with reality.

I didnt know the broken window was downstairs!

Yup Anya downstairs... Although to be fair I believe it is a fairly small window that would be quite difficult to gain access through. Although of cause not impossible as burglers have been well known for sending children into property through very small access points who can then open a door or larger window to gain access.
It's one of the things that gives me real chills even if I where to believe chapter and verse if OPs version. It could have even a child in that toilet, a child sent first to gain access or even a young fan desperate to get close to their idol without fully understanding the risks of breaking in, children often times see themselves as invincible, even in SA where people use lethal forse more willingly on intruders. Why would a child think or expect their sporting hero to shoot through a closed toilet door?

Yep roadkill. I agree with that too. What troubles me is that even in the mental health profession (I work in this field) some people seem to express a dislike for people with "personality disorder". It's true that such people labelled as such can be pretty difficult to relate to, but it seems important to remember that it is essentially a product of upbringing. So still deserving of some sympathy and compassion.

But could the same be said for people with addictions? Its an illness but also damaging to be around?

Correct me if I'm wrong Majestic, but I remember hearing a mental health professional saying that borderline personality disorder was caused by a baby/child's needs not being met. Is that right? I'm not applying this to OP by the way, just interested in the subject.

Yes I believe it can Anya, it's not an excuse and not a reason for a person to avoid the implications of commuting a crime but I do believe that understanding the factors that contribute to a crime being commited is nexus art when it comes to rehabilitation and preventing repeat offences.

Nexus art? Maybe I meant necessary!

Yy roadkillbunny, that's why I think op should go for the assessment, if there is the chance of an mental illness then he will need treatment.

The causes of Borderline personality disorder are fairly complex, but childhood abuse, neglect, and especially sexual abuse are often found to be factors.

I do think the fact that this psychiatrist was brought to the Court way after OP had testified is very relevant. For that reason, I think perhaps Judge Masipa may say no.

Surely it's his mental state before the shooting that matters, not what he is feeling and how he is after a mauling by Nel in the witness box. To me, it seems as if it is the third defence as Nel mentioned on Monday.

I think Nel is right to question it and push for assessment so that whatever verdict is brought, there can be no comeback for mental health reasons. He has no choice.

I think some of the problems society as a whole has with understanding people with mental illnesses is fear, and also a number of people with difficult personality disorders themselves show no empathy to others, sometimes presenting themselves as cold and to an extent cruel.

It is not right that we have so little understanding or care towards sufferers, it is difficult and generally we don't like difficult, we don't want to try and put ourselves in their shoes, maybe we are frightened we may see some of ourselves in sufferers, or think well if I had been treated like that, I could be like that and that is too hard to contemplate.

Probably the best that can be said about the treatment of mental illness today is that we don't queue up at asylums on a Sunday afternoon to laugh at the inmates.

Just watched the Sky update and it appears the legal concensus is that the Judge will not allow the referral, although the legal expert added the caveat that the Judge will want to be seen to be beyond reproach and could grant it on those grounds. He did also say that he thought Nel asked for as a tactical move to drive a wedge between OP and his legal team, and that he thought Nel didn't really expect it to be granted.

Thanks Majestic

I think everyone will be suprised if the judge does grant it

Just watching the Sky News update from yesterday, so apologies if this has been mentioned already, but Vorster is saying that OP wasn't faking the vomiting. She said if someone fakes vomiting they tend to go red ad get hoarse, whereas he was going pale and sweating.

As an aside, Vorster has the same accent and way of speaking as my MIL and the translator for Michelle Burger I think it was sounded exactly like my SIL!

Why does anyone think that Roux is so vehemently against any sort of assessment?

Is it because of the length of time this will extend the case? Is it because of what they might find WRT OP's condition? He just seemed to get quite agitated about it all. Nel said yesterday referring Pistorius would determine A) if he had a psychiatric condition at the time of the shooting and B) if so, how much that effected him. Is this what the defence are scared of?
I can't quite work it all out but we will know later this morning if it's going to happen.

Is it because of what it could do to OP?

What would it gain for Reeva?

Is it because Roux and team with OP and family want to see things done right, and a query on his mental state may change his defence? Almost as if he should be punished as the judge sees fit, without further mitigating circs,that his disability and the fear under which he says he shot should be mitigation enough, no "special treatment"?

All surmising.

It seems that people are able to empathise somewhat with GAD, but not with NPD.

My immediate response to this is that it's hard to empathise with NPD simply because people with NPD don't often know or believe they have it.

GAD is something that most people can imagine. Everybody has felt anxiety (or most people have perhaps) at some level, and most people are able to project up and imagine how debilitating that would be if it was a constant sensation.

It's really hard to imagine thinking 'I am amazing, and the world is here to revolve around me.' Not in confident sense, but in a desperate, needing constant reassurance that you're amazing.

It's only been in the past few years that I've been looking into NPD more. I do actually feel sympathy for people who have it. To have that overwhelming, constant need for love/approval/positive reinforcement to the extent that you'll lie and manipulate and attack everyone around you just so that you can feel elevated yourself.

However, that sympathy soon turns to banging a head against a brick wall, because one of the major factors is that they can't recognise it in themselves, so any help or guidance you try to give is rejected. It makes it hard.

Interesting post Looking. As far as NPD, I did have a boss who ticked every single box with the condition (she was aboslutely hell to work for). I just can't imagine NPD providing mitigating circumstances for a crime, whereas with an anxiety disorder, it just seems a bit more 'worthy'.

(I apologise if this sounds awful, I don't know much about it all, it's just my 'take' on it)