Oscar Pistorius Trial Part 8

[Roussette]

here is Number 7.

I think the biggest issue I have with that is that before the GAD was introduced OP and the defence have said that OP's reaction was a normal one for a SA person who wanted to protect the people they lived and their property. At no point before had OP, the defence or any defence witnesses suggested that they believed OPs response to be over the top. Even quite a number of people who live in SA or who have family still in SA have come onto these threads (and the ones from when Reeva was killed) and stated that OPs reaction to an intruder was a fairly normal one. The only thing OP has been criticised for from those people is not ensuring he got an answer from Reeva before going to confront the intruder with his gun.
It just feels to me like GAD is being used by the defence to patch the holes in OPs story, where ever there are questions about his version they are now responding by pointing the blame on GAD.
Now that could be true I am absolutely not qualified to make that judgement which is exactly why the referral had to be made as the court isn't qualified either.

I would think that a psychiatrist could diagnose a mental disorder in every single person if they wanted to and looked hard enough. Nobody has the perfect life and everybody has problems so it needs to be ensured by way of a panel of mental health experts that the diagnosis of GAD isn't a case of 'looking to hard'. Not for a second do I believe that the Dr in this case has deliberately done this, she was very profetional and she is extremely expirenced however suncontious bias should not be ruled out and also far more time is needed to try and find out if OPs anxieties before he shot Reeva where outside what would be expected. I don't really have a huge amount of confidence that this is possible so long after the event with OP having been under such high levels of stress over the last few months but I am not an expert and given that working backwards to uncover peoples mental state before a crime is this type of Drs speciality I have faith that a panel can work together to at least get an indication.
There is also the fact as was mentioned a few posts ago that so far the psychological evidence has been from the point of view of OPs version of events. I am sure the assessment team will look at all angles.

"just feels to me like GAD is being used by the defence to patch the holes in OPs story, where ever there are questions about his version they are now responding by pointing the blame on GAD."

Yes it does to me. It seems like another level of OP not taking responsibiilty for his actions and blaming something else. Poor old GAD gets the blame this time.

Roadkill "before the GAD was introduced OP and the defence have said that OP's reaction was a normal one for a SA person who wanted to protect the people they lived and their property."

Have they actually said that? Contextualised it in terms of how other people would react? I can't remember if that's the case.

"Even quite a number of people who live in SA or who have family still in SA have come onto these threads (and the ones from when Reeva was killed) and stated that OPs reaction to an intruder was a fairly normal one."

Hmm, I'm not sure they have, have they? From memory most people (I think?) have said that whilst it's normal to fear intruders, they cannot understand moving towards the danger and not towards an exit, or eg. pressing the panic button.

"It just feels to me like GAD is being used by the defence to patch the holes in OPs story, where ever there are questions about his version they are now responding by pointing the blame on GAD."

I think you are hypothesising here a little bit. Firstly, all they have done is to get a forensic psychiatrist to do a report on OP and she has given her evidence to the court. I think we would have to wait for Roux's summary of the case for the defence to see how exactly he would use her evidence to support their case. In fact, wasn't he playing down the 'severity' of GAD in order to try to suppress a psychiatric referral?

I'd be interested to hear what the defence team have to say about firstly the fact that they didn't appear to commission her report until after OP had given testimony, and secondly her placement towards the end of the line of defence witnesses called. I am sure they give great thought to the order in which witnesses testify and personally think they were hoping to end on an emotive, tug-of-the-heartstrings note. The fact that her report was done so late and that she was called almost last leaves her entire testimony open to question and to me it seems like an obvious mistake to have made. And I can't believe that they are that stupid, so wonder what the thinking was behind it...

(not sure if any of that makes sense!)

I don't think OP's defence has said his response was common. In fact, even Stander said you can't shoot that often at an intruder. I think they were using the GAD diagnosis to explain why OP went towards the threat, why he didn't use the panic button and all the other differences between his response and the response you would expect (even in SA). I think Roux was trying to both explain OP's actions and set the groundwork for mitigating circumstances when it came to sentencing.

I did find it interesting that they were mentioning GAD in relation to some of his actions but they didn't link it to his failure to check Reeva's whereabouts. I think they didn't make that link because they couldn't. If his anxiety was heightened not just because of the percieved threat but because he wanted to protect Reeva (as OP's testimony did say he wanted to protect her) then why didn't he make sure she was safe? Perhaps the further analysis will shed more light.

criminallawza.net/2014/05/17/pistoriuss-third-defence-pathological-incapacity-insanity/

Not wildly insightful as Masipa's explanation of why the court had to act understood by most but maybe a bit more detail

Bookaboo - am I right in thinking that Nel asked Dr Vorster about this specifically? I seem to remember him 'double checking' re. what you'd expect a person with GAD to do regarding checking on Reeva.

Yes Nel did ask and iirc Dr Vorster said that OP's response would be to fight (the threat) rather than flee but she didn't specifically say why that meant he would be lax in establishing where Reeva was.
I might need to check it again to see if I do remember correctly.

I vaguely remember Nel asking whether it would be expected that a person suffering from GAD would check the whereabouts of other people who might be in danger, and that she replied that it would be expected - ie. that OP reacted in a way not associated with someone with GAD.

Ah, I must have missed that Voice . The bit I've just listened to again, Nel asks about OP checking on Reeva and then mentions the fight response and that a person with GAD, fight response and a gun would be a danger, and Vorster agrees.
Nel must have jumped back to the failure to check questioning at a different time.

Bookaboo spot on with your post of 12.17.

I think there is a vague understanding from me about the 'fight not flight' thing spoken of by the psychiatrist because OP probably cannot flee with great speed. But the wanting to protect Reeva OP made a point of saying just seems so odd when his first thought was not checking she was OK before 'fighting'.

Right from the first time I posted on these threads that has always been my 'sticking point' i.e. that's what stops me believing OP. He never waited for an answer from her when he spoke to her which is a natural and normal thing to do.

Bookaboo no it may be my mistake... Might be what I was thinking he should ask!

I did miss lots of parts this week and it would be like Nel to ask the question more than once and in different ways! [Smile]

Oops smiley fail

Special programs on sky new tonight, 8pm

To be fair though Twinkle, the GAD is being used by the defence to try to explain in part OP's hyper-extreme response to thinking there was an intruder.

Absolutely, so why not use it from the start?

That was the reason I have struggled to believe OP Rousette. I can't help think that if I thought there was an intruder and there was no response, I would probably first think the intruder had 'captured' whoever was with me. I don't think I could think otherwise until I had spoken to my loved one.

One thing, unrelated to this that sticks out to me is when OP said Reeva went to sleep a loved woman or knowing she was loved. Can't remember the exact words used. Did she die knowing she was loved? That makes me sad.

Excellent recent blog post from David Dadic

bobblewobble OP's comment about Reeva knowing she was loved when she went to bed that night always struck me as so sad because it did leave room to imply that she didn't feel that way when she was killed.

Two things came to mind today
One was I am sure I read that OP used to go running in the night if he couldn't sleep. Is this the action of a man worried about crime at night.

The other was he said he fell asleep with his head on her tummy and his arms wrapped around her legs. What post ion was he in when he woke up? Did he wake when she extricated herself? Was he still lying on her when he woke. I assume not. Actually don't believe this bit of the story

That blog post was excellent Godot.

And yes I did read somewhere that he went running or something and that he had awful sleep patterns and hardly slept. I'm a light sleeper (i hear an insect crawling along the floor) so I do understand that. But it does illustrate to me that he would hear everything and if she shifted position in the night, he would possibly wake up.

Karyn Maughan tweeted today:

There is no legal minimum time that #OscarPistorius panel needs to spend with him. They will decide how much time they need

Dr Jonathan Scholtz will be psychologist on #OscarPistorius panel.

Prof Herman Pretorius and Carla Kotze are the Weskoppies psychiatrists on #OscarPistorius panel. Defense psych is Leon Fine

Oscar Pistorius will be referred to the Weskoppies psychiatric hospital tomorrow - as an outpatient.

Delayed start - Roux and Nel in chambers with Masipa

Court in session - watching www.enca.com/oscartrial/

1.1 26th May to present himself as an outpatient to Medical Superintendent as an outpatient at Weskoppes @9am and attend daily at whatever time hospital deems neccessary.

1.2 to remain there till at least 16:00 daaily unless excused by psychiatrists

Court adjourned till 30th June @9.30