IS HE GUILTY?

Game Over... Insert another Coin....

so he is dead on the canvas?

Yea.. Looks pretty much like that to me.. but i could be wrong..

blueyonder001 Wrote:

---

> so he is dead on the canvas?

Pretty much...will want to know what the judge discussed with counsel during lunch break...

Even though we can see the outcome, it is no less sad that things have come to this...not bad enough that he killed her, he has shredded whatever little credibility he may have had especially the hope he offered others with disabilities...especially parents trying to encourage their children with disabilities...

A really sad unravelling of the core of a person that shows the facade he offered in public...

Gerrie, going for the kill (bad choice of words)!

this is what it looks like for anyone interested...

After today I really wonder how any reasonable person can actually still believe the version created by Pistorius - I hope those that defended him blindly are watching and have realized that he is NOT the person they thought he was. I feel so much sorrow for Reeva's parents, friends and family as they now too realize that this was no accident.

GAME OVER OSCAR

Question to those are more in the know.. Does OP Laywers get to Question him while he is on the stand ?? or its only Nel???

blueyonder001 Wrote:

---

> GAME OVER OSCAR

Not waiting for the judges' scorecards ?? !! There have been some shocking decisions when cases have gone to the judges...

I think we have a 10 count but no-one has ended the fight as yet so it is likely going to the judges' scoreboard...

Question for our esteemed legal eagles among the clanners...Why did Barry Roux take this case??...I know that OP can source whoever he wants as counsel but surely counsel can decide (based on what the client communicates to them as to what happened) whether to represent a defendant...there is no obligation to represent a client...there are great disparities between what OP says he said to his counsel and what is being revealed in court and either OP didn't tell his counsel what he says he told them or his counsel have made some serious omissions / errors (unlikely, as Nel re-iterates, from such esteemed counsel) if he did tell them...and maybe the Bar Council will act in these omissions / errors...

TNaicker Wrote:

---

> blueyonder001 Wrote:
>

---

>

---

> > GAME OVER OSCAR
>
> Not waiting for the judges' scorecards ?? !! There
> have been some shocking decisions when cases have
> gone to the judges...
>
> I think we have a 10 count but no-one has ended
> the fight as yet so it is likely going to the
> judges' scoreboard...
>
> Question for our esteemed legal eagles among the
> clanners...Why did Barry Roux take this case??...I
> know that OP can source whoever he wants as
> counsel but surely counsel can decide (based on
> what the client communicates to them as to what
> happened) whether to represent a defendant...there
> is no obligation to represent a client...there are
> great disparities between what OP says he said to
> his counsel and what is being revealed in court
> and either OP didn't tell his counsel what he says
> he told them or his counsel have made some serious
> omissions / errors (unlikely, as Nel re-iterates,
> from such esteemed counsel) if he did tell
> them...and maybe the Bar Council will act in these
> omissions / errors...

No legal eagle but I'm certain he saw a wonderful long trial that would earn him a big whack of dough as the Pistorius family are not poor - There are very few lawyers that work for free so you cannot blame him for taking a case like this that would earn him big bucks

not a legal bugger up its just too much bullshit Roux couldnt keep up