Oscar Pistorius Trial Part 7

[Roussette]

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

Yes but what's a month in hospital as compared to 15 years in prison?

I'm pleased that this has happened, do they not have private MH units in SA?, I'm surprised if not. If OP is found to suffer from a MH disorder than that must be taken into consideration.

Thank you looking for heading off my explosive head lol!

I think it is too early to be thinking about possible outcomes for deminished responsibility, if any finding in that respect was found it would more likely be reduced culpability, a half way house and I do not have the knowledge to speculate on how these things may or may not effect a verdict that is not even close to being made yet.
I think the defence are either worried that his condition will make his classed as an unreliable witness and have his evidence struck from record or will find that his mental health plays not part in the case, either outcome is bad bad news for the defence. It is possible that an assessment would find that while his mental health may have played a part in how he reacted that night (assuming he is telling the truth) but not to the level as to make him am unreliable witness. Basically the assessment could come to the conclusion that the defence where trying to go for by calling the psychiatrist as a witness. However that us not all that likely, they took a risk and it has crashed down around them. I am hesitant to blame the defence council as the choice to try and use mental state and disability could easily have come from OP himself. I think OP making demands on what his defence do could explain some if the seemingly odd choices the defence have made, Roux is the best in the defence business yet some of the defence choices have seemed strange. I think that I understand that council have to follow the clients orders if the client wants to say something or put a price of evidence forward, council can advise them why that would be a bad idea, tell them of possible concequences but they can refuse, they can stand down as council but not go against the direct wishes of their client.

Well that was a surprise to me, I voted in the straw poll for no referral. I thought Judge Masipa's deliverance of the reasons for allowing the referral was excellent, very comprehensive.

I think the Defence must be kicking themselves for introducing this testimony so late into the case, surely they could have seen this would have been a possibility due to the content of Dr Vorster's report. If so why did they proceed with it they could have not called her at that stage and used the report for mitigation at the end of the trial if necessary and relied on the other psychologist for evidence of physical vulnerability relevant to the defence of putative self defence.

It did seem to me that Judge Masipa was quite critical of the Defence in her summing up.

Also think Nel was quite brave to push for this referral as any findings by the psychiatrists and psychologists during the assessment could damage his own case.

I thought at the end of the programme (was watching on 517) OP did not look happy at all, he looked very shocked and distressed at the outcome. Also, interesting analysis by the reporter on 517.

And now I have no excuse not to get on with the myriad of stuff I have to do, damn and blast!

OP's pathologist might not have testified as his testimony might not serve his case because when a pathology assessment is carried out, it cannot be closed until all present agree. In addition it is common(if you can afford) in SA to provide private pathologist if you doubt the expertise of state

Had the defence seen her report before yesterday morning?

Anya I would have thought they had seen it, they requested it and would surely have read it prior to her giving her testimony. The Prosecution hadn't seen it and seemed to be ambushed by the contents.

She seemed to hand the report out at the start of her testimony to both sides. However, she probably did give a verbal or interim report to the defence beforehand.

voice my auto correct is out to get me, mitigating factors of disability that among other things means I can't feel much my hands and reduces my vision, biggest mitigating factor, I own an iPhone M'Lady.

sigh the judge didn't mention any time frames. I am not going to explain again why Nel was using the minimum time of 3 days and Roux and the press the maximum of 30 days. It is explained, several times earlier in the thread.

I have a couple of thoughts - why are 'the defence' being blamed for everything? I highly doubt that OP has given them free reign to do whatever they think is best. I'd go so far as to suggest that he's not letting them do their job & is insisting on things against their advice.

If the result of the case is for him to be sent to a mental hospital, would there be any scope for his family to insist he could get better care elsewhere & have him moved to the sort of fancy place that celebrities go to with their addictions only reappear a few weeks later having been 'cured'? I can see his family finding him somewhere in Florida which is more like a hotel than a prison given half a chance!

It's not going to 'hurt the state's case' to have this assessment. As I understand it at least, their job is to get to the truth. This will help them do it.

Phycologist was bothering me too but I'm not known for my tact when correcting people so I tend to avoid it!

Road presumably when the order is officially handed down on Tuesday all the details, including the length of the assessment (!), will be given and your head can stay intact

OP and legal team silly to part ways at this juncture imo. Trial should proceed after psychiatric evaluation, OP sentenced & launches appeal immediately. Grounds for appeal - improper defence (though I have little doubt that team Pistorius have been architects of that misfortune).

Uncle Arnold reportedly to make statement.

AGnu I think people are blaming the Defence because they should have seen that Dr Vorster's report opened the door for the State to request a referral for evaluation of OP's mental state.

Also I don't think OP or his family will be able to have OP go to a "celebrity-type rehab" as this referral is ordered by the Court and they will decide where he goes and who he sees hence the official order not being given until Tuesday.

Just heard that OP's uncle Arnold is going to give a press conference in a moment, could be interesting.

Wonder what he will say

Not a press conference OP's uncle just said they were happy with the referral in the interests of fairness and justice.

Positive spin about Judge being thorough (while he thinks that there's chance of outpatient evaluation)?

Ah!

Not sure why OP's uncle called the press together to say that, bit odd really.

The family would be silly to make sun other kind of statement.
They can hardly say otherwise. Who knows how they feel. Maybe the family do think that it would be good for OP. Maybe all the contesting has been from OP against the advice if his family and legal team.
We will never really know and at the end if the day it isn't important.
The aim is to ensure a fair trial where all factors are considered including the mental health if the acused at the time of the crime.

Hmm, not sure what else he could say tbh

Indeed Roadkill, but they didn't actually need to say anything and I wonder why they did that's all!

I guess they wanted to head off all the gossip emotion and all the speculation. Him talking to the press won't stop that ofcause but it does ensure the press have a quote and a sound bite to put in their stories.
As of tomorrow I will probably leave the thread until we are back for the order next Tuesday. I don't tend to like the direction things can go it while court is not in session.
Next Tuesday will likely be another shirt day of just the order but we will then know how long it will actually take and we can finally get away from this damed minimum and maximum time frames!

They may have been asked by the press how they feel about OP having to be observed and have decided to do it this way so they don't continually get asked?

I am hesitant to blame the defence council as the choice to try and use mental state and disability could easily have come from OP himself.

Me too.