Oscar Pistorius

[Cowden til i die]

What's all this talk of bad Thunderbirds episodes? Thunderbirds was class.

The one with Alan on the bridge was brutal.

[welshbairn]

My only experience in a courtroom was as a witness to an assault. The defence lawyer immediately set about trying to unsettle and discredit me as what I saw was pretty damning evidence. His first question was had I been drinking, how much, was I drunk, had I had too much to drive, if I couldn't drive then how could I consider myself sober etc.

I wasn't even the defendant (honest), I can only imagine what it must be like to be defending a serious charge like murder. With TV cameras and everything it's no wonder he's a sniffling wreck, guilty or not.

Similar to my experience. The adversarial system doesn't promote finding out what happened, just what side has the best lawyer and who can confuse a witness the best. I was a prosecution witness as well, there ended up being a retrial because of my shaky performance, the second time the cops took me out for a half-pint before I appeared to chill me out. The defence lawyer asked me exactly the same questions as the the first trial so I tore him apart. Guilty.

[Dee Man]

Similar to my experience. The adversarial system doesn't promote finding out what happened, just what side has the best lawyer and who can confuse a witness the best. I was a prosecution witness as well, there ended up being a retrial because of my shaky performance, the second time the cops took me out for a half-pint before I appeared to chill me out. The defence lawyer asked me exactly the same questions as the the first trial so I tore him apart. Guilty.

I'll take that alcohol advice on board. I'm the main witness in a serious assault case later this year.

Hopefully Ad Lib will be the defence lawyer so that I know I'm in for an easy ride.

[Ad Lib]

Good to see you haven't shifted from the 'strongly advise' approach to burglars.

Now onto more serious stuff. What should they do about the defendants constant boo-hooing?

Also, what kind of Micky Mouse legal system uses M'lady/Me lady every few words? HB is right, it's like a bad episode of Thunderbirds. What are your thoughts on this serious problem?

Defendants should be allowed to be in any state of emotion they choose.

Don't see why. In some societies a threat to honour is considered more serious than to life and limb.

I don't care. I live by a liberal paradigm. Honour isn't a justification for killing.

Firstly, may I ask you to kindly refrain from the bullying and barracking personal insults as they are both hurtful and inappropriate.

Secondly; yes, your torture example was totally and utterly irrelevant. Comparing waterboarding, finger nail extraction, genital electrocution and sensory deprivation to a bit of shouty and uncomfortable questioning is ridiculous in the extreme.

Please reply without the personal abuse or I may have to resort to showing exhibit A which is that picture of you with those stupid glasses and that stupid jumper.

1. You're not under cross examination, champ. Get over it.

2. No it isn't. It is merely the most extreme example of a situation in which freely given testimony is compromised. What the prosecutor engaged in was not just "a bit of shouts and uncomfortable evidence". It was strategic, persistent and manipulative bullying, irrelevant, and calculated to break the will of the defendant and insodoing undermine his right against self-incrimination. In my view, and in the view of the judge who reprimanded him several times, it went beyond what is acceptable as a form of cross examination in a court of law.

3. What on earth are you talking about?

[welshbairn]

Do I personally think that shooting someone if you suspect they are an intruder in your house is normally proportionate? No.

Do I think it is legitimate for a legal system to adopt that position? Yes.

Why? What positions would be illegitimate for a legal system to adopt?

A self-defence law that does not require a perceived threat to life or limb, for example.

Don't see why. In some societies a threat to honour is considered more serious than to life and limb.

I don't care. I live by a liberal paradigm. Honour isn't a justification for killing.

So your reasoning is just as subjective as the rest of us, despite your cloaking it in legalese.

[Ad Lib]

So your reasoning is just as subjective as the rest of us, despite your cloaking it in legalese.

I didn't say it wasn't subjective. I believe liberalism is the only legitimate paradigm for criminal justice.

[Scary Bear]

Defendants should be allowed to be in any state of emotion they choose.

I don't care. I live by a liberal paradigm. Honour isn't a justification for killing.

1. You're not under cross examination, champ. Get over it.

2. No it isn't. It is merely the most extreme example of a situation in which freely given testimony is compromised. What the prosecutor engaged in was not just "a bit of shouts and uncomfortable evidence". It was strategic, persistent and manipulative bullying, irrelevant, and calculated to break the will of the defendant and insodoing undermine his right against self-incrimination. In my view, and in the view of the judge who reprimanded him several times, it went beyond what is acceptable as a form of cross examination in a court of law.

3. What on earth are you talking about?

If I'm ever up in court, no matter how trivial the charge, i'm going to follow Oscar's snivelling example and boo-hoo my way through the trial. I'll be too upset to give any useful evidence. I'll really ham it up. I'll also mumble "me lady", at every opportunity, to anyone who talks to me, just to really piss everyone off.

[Dee Man]

1. You're not under cross examination, champ.

I'd bring back the death penalty for anyone who uses the phrase 'champ' on p&b.

[ayrmad]

I've watched several high profile homicide cases. They hardly ever involve such a gratuitously blunt and abrasive approach, irrelevant questioning and open attempts to leave the accused like a quivering wreck. Bullying doesn't get you to the facts. It gets you into procedural impropriety and improperly obtained testimony.

The duty of a Prosecutor is not to persuade the court that the accused is guilty at all costs. The duty of the Prosecutor is to assist the state, through a fair hearing, to establish whether or not the accused is guilty.

You'll not be earning £5000 for a brief appearance with that nicey nicey attitude, of course you'll never cut a deal for an agreed sentence with your principles anyway.

[eindhovendee]

He's guiltier than OJ so he'll probably get off.

[Half Rice Half Chips]

He should be found guilty for his whiny little voice alone. I don't know if that's his natural speaking voice or an affectation to garner the sympathy of the judge and/or the public, but it's annoying as f**k.

[bigjerseybuddie]

I'm not surprised at the barbaric structure to the court and the prosecution. I've worked with numerous south Africans over the years and every one of them, without exeption, has been obnoxious, bullying, condescending and aggressive. Male or Female, it doesn't make any difference. To make it worse they often do it with a smile. They still have a streak of White supremacist in them where they think everyone is a slave and here to meet their needs. Mind you, they don't like it when you challenge them 'cause their not used to it. I've had a hard time due to my accent until it eventually softened in time, but by Christ theirs would go right through you. Now we have to listen to room full of them.

[a1974h]

He should be found guilty for his whiny little voice alone. I don't know if that's his natural speaking voice or an affectation to garner the sympathy of the judge and/or the public, but it's annoying as f**k.

It might be to discount a witness that said he heard a women scream.

[Dee Man]

It might be to discount a witness that said he heard a women scream.

Questioning was quality on Friday. It went along the lines of:

Nel: A witness heard Reeva screaming but you said she didn't.

Pistorious: She didn't scream, m'lady.

N: What happened when you fired the gun?

P: My ears were ringing and I couldn't hear anything, m'lady.

N: How do you know she wasn't screaming then?

P: Errrrrrmmmmmmmmmmmmm.......

[Ned Nederlander]

I'm not surprised at the barbaric structure to the court and the prosecution. I've worked with numerous south Africans over the years and every one of them, without exeption, has been obnoxious, bullying, condescending and aggressive. Male or Female, it doesn't make any difference. To make it worse they often do it with a smile. They still have a streak of White supremacist in them where they think everyone is a slave and here to meet their needs. Mind you, they don't like it when you challenge them 'cause their not used to it. I've had a hard time due to my accent until it eventually softened in time, but by Christ theirs would go right through you. Now we have to listen to room full of them.

I almost think that's a stereotypical view of South Africans, my personal experience is very different ... from discussions I've had with some of them the general view of the black population at large is 'complicated' to say the least, and there is certainly a touch of what you describe, but not as 'black & white' (pun not intended) as your experience.

My FB feed features updates from 8 South Africans (4 of them family) and their posts are fairly good natured, self depreciating and inclusive - they also nip between English and Afrikaans, sometimes in the same post, which can be slightly weird.

[bairney]

I saw some of this last night on TV and I was astonished at how abrasively, snarkily and generally inappropriately he was behaving. Had it been a jury trial, frankly they'd have had to have discharged them because the way he went about questioning Pistorious was irrelevant, abusive and misleading. He was trying to break him emotionally in a way that goes beyond free testimony and into bullying. I am amazed he got away with it, notwithstanding being reprimanded a couple of times by the judge.

His whole demeanour certainly didn't show any regard for the gravity of the situation and made a circus of the event in a way which disrespects the family of the deceased.

ETA: to be clear, I'm talking about the prosecutor.

Bollocks - Nel knows the case and he's pressing buttons that need pressed. It's a murder trial and Pistorious is trying to worm out of it on a lie - he's guilty as hell. The fact it's in South Africa probably leaves the 'accused' open to more duress than he'd be under in a UK court, but Nel knows Pistorious is bullshitting. I thought he'd cracked him on Friday. Give it time, I'm sure he will crack.

[a1974h]

Bollocks - Nel knows the case and he's pressing buttons that need pressed. It's a murder trial and Pistorious is trying to worm out of it on a lie - he's guilty as hell. The fact it's in South Africa probably leaves the 'accused' open to more duress than he'd be under in a UK court, but Nel knows Pistorious is bullshitting. I thought he'd cracked him on Friday. Give it time, I'm sure he will crack.

Friday was excellent viewing.

The bit when pistorious denied something about the door being kicked in, which he said the opposite earlier. Mel was saying if he can lie about that he can lie about the rest.

Although the fact he denied the incident in the restaurant showed he was denying everything no matter what. Nel was excellent on friday

[Zetterlund]

I'm not surprised at the barbaric structure to the court and the prosecution. I've worked with numerous south Africans over the years and every one of them, without exeption, has been obnoxious, bullying, condescending and aggressive. Male or Female, it doesn't make any difference. To make it worse they often do it with a smile. They still have a streak of White supremacist in them where they think everyone is a slave and here to meet their needs. Mind you, they don't like it when you challenge them 'cause their not used to it. I've had a hard time due to my accent until it eventually softened in time, but by Christ theirs would go right through you. Now we have to listen to room full of them.

[bairney]

Friday was excellent viewing.

The bit when pistorious denied something about the door being kicked in, which he said the opposite earlier. Mel was saying if he can lie about that he can lie about the rest.

Although the fact he denied the incident in the restaurant showed he was denying everything no matter what. Nel was excellent on friday

I agree Nel did a good job on Friday. He has also left the questioning on a cusp at what Nel portrays as an arguement at the door. Pistorious could mull over this point over the weekend and perhaps return with a slightly modified recollection on Monday, which would be pounced on by the prosecution. After reading the article linked below today, it has definitely changed my outlook on the case, and although I never saw it in a 'soap opera' light, the human interest side of the trial can lead to that perception. Hope the b*****d gets what he deserves.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2603268/Pistorius-lying-head-shot-sister-fit-rage-Reevas-family-reveal-horror-smirking-Bladerunner-face-court.html

[harry94]

I'm fucked if I ever have to explain the inconsistencies of my LED shielding in a murder trial.