Neither Masipa nor her assessors understood even basic elements of the evidence, hence their need to discard almost all of it in favor of the most simplistic decision they could come up with. If it were not such a serious miscarriage of justice it would be laughable. Sorry, but there cannot be any high marks for the intellectual prowess of any of the three, they just failed plain and simple.
If it is a miscarriage of justice, it will be challenged.
And those who think it is a ruse do so without reference to the phones evidence. The phone times were not disputed by the state at any point so there's nowhere to go with arguing they are wrong as it's just speculation.
But you speculated about when Dr Stipp first picked up his phone and started dialling numbers.
If she was going to hand out a stiff sentence, I doubt she would have kept him on Bail and asked Uncle to keep an eye on the Naughty Boy whilst pending sentence.
The writer is likely to want to believe that to balance his arguments. We will see.
It wasn't so much a stiff sentence I was thinking of but the idea that Masipa has closed down all wiggle room now, having been as compassionate as possible. If she decides on a custodial sentence, and I hope she does, OP will have much less grounds for appeal than if she'd handled the verdict differently.
This article puts it quite well, I thought - Masipa has been visibly at pains to ensure a fair and compassionate reckoning for OP, and via a route that would seem to close down opportunities for appeal.
In sentencing, we may find Masipa giving a decent jail sentence, which OP will not be able to wriggle out of. If not, I'll be back to eat a few more hats!
No offense, but that "article" is in an Internet rag that publishes all kinds of rubbish, they even scoured the Internet to find DonMack's excellent post here at DS and published that. The "expert" that wrote the "article" is:
Matthew Lester: Rhodes Business School professor, tax and financial planning specialist
That's not correct, that the judge (or juror) needs to be educated in the field of psychology. That's why experts are called in. Granted she needs to know precedents in cases in which defendants used mental illness or cognitive impairment as a defense. She has researchers for that.
You may as well say that a person, or even the judge, has to be an expert in handguns, or arsenic, or arson, or whatever case comes her way.
Easy startle in and of itself does not excuse a person from legal responsibility for murder.
OP was found fit to stand trial after a forensics evaluation.
The basic question is not, did OP have easy startle, but was he lying about not knowing it was his lover in the toilet?
In which case, there was no "easy startle" to consider.
The State were arguing that Oscar must have known if you fire four bullets into a room that there is a possibility you would kill someone and he reconciled himself with that which is DE. However Prof. Dermains evidence of fight or flight would contradict that. Judge Masipa used this evidence in her summary during the Verdict. One of the Assessors has an honours degree in Psychology, so I'm sure her input would have been invaluable
Where did you get that idea from? It definitely doesn't.
I got the idea from witnesses who didn't hear the shots saying that they heard a man crying for help.
It's just illogical to suggest that testimony related to a man crying cancels out blood curdling screams, especially when Stipp heard a man and a woman.
It's illogical to think that in all that time the woman never once said it's me, stop, argued back, pleaded.
I got the idea from witnesses who didn't hear the shots saying that they heard a man crying for help.
It's just illogical to suggest that testimony related to a man crying cancels out blood curdling screams, especially when Stipp heard a man and a woman.
It's illogical to think that in all that time the woman never once said it's me, stop, argued back, pleaded.
Never uttered a single, solitary syllable if Pistorius - and Masipa - are to be believed.
The State were arguing that Oscar must have known if you fire four bullets into a room that there is a possibility you would kill someone and he reconciled himself with that which is DE. However Prof. Dermains evidence of fight or flight would contradict that. Judge Masipa used this evidence in her summary during the Verdict. One of the Assessors has an honours degree in Psychology, so I'm sure her input would have been invaluable
No it only contradicts that if you buy into the defense party line that there really was an intruder.
OP didn't even have GAD. Lots and lots of people have anxiety but aren't allowed to shoot people.
Abusers and narcissists also suffer from a flight of fight reaction, in which the attempt of a victim to abandon them, will be met with violence.
The State were arguing that Oscar must have known if you fire four bullets into a room that there is a possibility you would kill someone and he reconciled himself with that which is DE. However Prof. Dermains evidence of fight or flight would contradict that. Judge Masipa used this evidence in her summary during the Verdict. One of the Assessors has an honours degree in Psychology, so I'm sure her input would have been invaluable
A social worker that had a political appointment to the bench after only six years of experience practicing law, a gal with a psychology degree and a criminology degree who likes to represent rapists and murderers, and a completely inexperienced male assessor walk up to the bar, what could possibly go wrong? Everything!
But you speculated about when Dr Stipp first picked up his phone and started dialling numbers.
How is it speculating to say that the first known call from Dr Stipp was at 3:15? If one has to be a bit cautious about the Stipps' evidence and timing it's because it doesn't agree with the phone times that we know about.
I got the idea from witnesses who didn't hear the shots saying that they heard a man crying for help.
It's just illogical to suggest that testimony related to a man crying cancels out blood curdling screams, especially when Stipp heard a man and a woman.
It's illogical to think that in all that time the woman never once said it's me, stop, argued back, pleaded.
But when did Mrs N hear the man crying for help? Before the 3:16 phone call. So probably around 3:15. When did Burger/Johnson hear a man crying for help? In the minutes before 3:17. This doesn't conflict.
It's illogical to say that male crying before 3:16 was some different sound from the female screaming heard before 3:17 i.e. heard at the same time. That's what is really illogical.
But when did Mrs N hear the man crying for help? Before the 3:16 phone call. So probably around 3:15. When did Burger/Johnson heard a man crying for help? In the minutes before 3:17. This doesn't conflict.
It's illogical to say that male crying before 3:16 was some different sound from the female screaming heard before 3:17 i.e. heard at the same time. That's what is really illogical.
The defense was never able to refute that Stipp heard a man and a woman's voices.
And it's really illogical to think that OP was speaking in falsetto.
Stipp called security at 3.15 to report the first set of bangs and the screams.
Neither Masipa nor her assessors understood even basic elements of the evidence, hence their need to discard almost all of it in favor of the most simplistic decision they could come up with. If it were not such a serious miscarriage of justice it would be laughable. Sorry, but there cannot be any high marks for the intellectual prowess of any of the three, they just failed plain and simple.
Stipp called security at 3.15 to report the first set of bangs and the screams.
This was all discussed already if you look back.
I know it was already discussed - I was often one of the posters discussing it
I think you are getting confused between the different versions. What you say above is the defense version and since he was hearing the noises at the same time as the near neighbours and Burger/Johnson, they must be the same noises.
No offense, but that "article" is in an Internet rag that publishes all kinds of rubbish, they even scoured the Internet to find DonMack's excellent post here at DS and published that. The "expert" that wrote the "article" is:
Matthew Lester: Rhodes Business School professor, tax and financial planning specialist
A financial planning specialist? Really?
None taken, I wasn't looking for an impressive expert, just for different takes on the verdict.
A social worker that had a political appointment to the bench after only six years of experience practicing law, a gal with a psychology degree and a criminology degree who likes to represent rapists and murderers, and a completely inexperienced male assessor walk up to the bar, what could possibly go wrong? Everything!
Well it all boils down to interpretation. I find their credentials impressive.:)
Must have been keeping quiet because of the "intruder"
Indeed
As the first bullet shattered her hip and she fell backwards I’m sure she was thinking ‘Oh God the pain, the pain, but I must remain silent because of the ‘intruder’
Of course in the real world she would have screamed her head off but of course still remembering to scream like Pistorius.
Poor girl she really didn’t deserve to die at the hands of that pathetic egotistical gun nut
As the first bullet shattered her hip and she fell backwards I’m sure she was thinking ‘Oh God the pain, the pain, but I must remain silent because of the ‘intruder’
Of course in the real world she would have screamed her head off but of course still remembering to scream like Pistorius.
Poor girl she really didn’t deserve to die at the hands of that pathetic egotistical gun nut
Are you one of those who thinks the phone times must be wrong?
Comments
If it is a miscarriage of justice, it will be challenged.
But you speculated about when Dr Stipp first picked up his phone and started dialling numbers.
It wasn't so much a stiff sentence I was thinking of but the idea that Masipa has closed down all wiggle room now, having been as compassionate as possible. If she decides on a custodial sentence, and I hope she does, OP will have much less grounds for appeal than if she'd handled the verdict differently.
No offense, but that "article" is in an Internet rag that publishes all kinds of rubbish, they even scoured the Internet to find DonMack's excellent post here at DS and published that. The "expert" that wrote the "article" is:
Matthew Lester: Rhodes Business School professor, tax and financial planning specialist
A financial planning specialist? Really?
I got the idea from witnesses who didn't hear the shots saying that they heard a man crying for help.
It's just illogical to suggest that testimony related to a man crying cancels out blood curdling screams, especially when Stipp heard a man and a woman.
It's illogical to think that in all that time the woman never once said it's me, stop, argued back, pleaded.
Never uttered a single, solitary syllable if Pistorius - and Masipa - are to be believed.
Well and truly silenced, eh?
No it only contradicts that if you buy into the defense party line that there really was an intruder.
OP didn't even have GAD. Lots and lots of people have anxiety but aren't allowed to shoot people.
Abusers and narcissists also suffer from a flight of fight reaction, in which the attempt of a victim to abandon them, will be met with violence.
Did Prof. Dermains talk about that.
A social worker that had a political appointment to the bench after only six years of experience practicing law, a gal with a psychology degree and a criminology degree who likes to represent rapists and murderers, and a completely inexperienced male assessor walk up to the bar, what could possibly go wrong? Everything!
How is it speculating to say that the first known call from Dr Stipp was at 3:15? If one has to be a bit cautious about the Stipps' evidence and timing it's because it doesn't agree with the phone times that we know about.
Must have been keeping quiet because of the "intruder"
But when did Mrs N hear the man crying for help? Before the 3:16 phone call. So probably around 3:15. When did Burger/Johnson hear a man crying for help? In the minutes before 3:17. This doesn't conflict.
It's illogical to say that male crying before 3:16 was some different sound from the female screaming heard before 3:17 i.e. heard at the same time. That's what is really illogical.
The defense was never able to refute that Stipp heard a man and a woman's voices.
And it's really illogical to think that OP was speaking in falsetto.
Stipp called security at 3.15 to report the first set of bangs and the screams.
They didn't need to refute it. The rest of the evidence is enough. See my post above.
They did need to refute it.
Stipp called security at 3.15 to report the first set of bangs and the screams.
This was all discussed already if you look back.
In you opinion, but I disagree with you,
I know it was already discussed - I was often one of the posters discussing it
I think you are getting confused between the different versions. What you say above is the defense version and since he was hearing the noises at the same time as the near neighbours and Burger/Johnson, they must be the same noises.
None taken, I wasn't looking for an impressive expert, just for different takes on the verdict.
Well it all boils down to interpretation. I find their credentials impressive.:)
Indeed
As the first bullet shattered her hip and she fell backwards I’m sure she was thinking ‘Oh God the pain, the pain, but I must remain silent because of the ‘intruder’
Of course in the real world she would have screamed her head off but of course still remembering to scream like Pistorius.
Poor girl she really didn’t deserve to die at the hands of that pathetic egotistical gun nut
Please sign the petition for justice for Reeva on Change . Org, they have 1500 but need more :cool:
Are you one of those who thinks the phone times must be wrong?
She must have been wearing a silencer.
I've already signed it. ;-)