I've been trying to make sense of why the defence would bother roll the dice with this application, as on the surface it appears to be a very poorly advised decision. In fact, almost the entire application looks frivolous on the surface of things.
In terms of his travel documents for example, it is difficult to argue against this condition given it was a proposed concession by Oscar himself should he make bail.
So why the application?
The more I think about it, I can't help but seriously doubt this application is really about Oscar's bail conditions at all. It may well be a very shrewd fishing expedition from the defence for more info on the States case thus far.
By presenting this application, they baited the State into biting and stating they will firmly oppose; however in doing so, the State should be mindful of how far they are willing to stretch to successfully succeed (given the eyes of the world are firmly on them, expect ego to exceed common sense), as they will potentially be forced into exposing key aspects of their case, including forensic results.
Should the State fumble and again present shaky assertions as they did during the bail application (expect the defence to bring up the State trying to present a 'Sarie' magazine as the basis for the foreign property ownership argument), and/or decide not to oppose the application altogether, it will certainly be used against them later during the trial. Oscar on the other hand, has very little to lose if the application fails.
Sure, it's possible that a greater number of the esteemed 'Supreme Court of Public Opinion' membership will turn against him, but the value of public opinion is a boat that has long since sailed when weighed up against ones ultimate freedom.
Conversely however, there is always a possibility that support for Oscar could swell if he succeeds, even in part, and/or the case against him increasingly appears to be in the weeds by way of lack of evidence, an apparent bumbling by investigators, or lack of reasonable argument by the Prosecution.
In order for Oscar to have made bail, the defence had little option other than go full tilt and expose their hand by presenting Oscar's statement; which will now be used as the key points of argument during the trial itself. The State on the other hand did not really reveal much other than their Legs/Gun/7m/Shoot x4 theory. A theory that now hinges on the ever important toilet door, and forensics.
If the results show Oscar was indeed without his prosthesis when the shots were fired, it will almost discredit what the States theory; just as it would blow a huge hole the Defences case should it be found Oscar was at full height at the time.
Simply put, I suspect this bail revision application could just be the Defence flipping the tables and baiting the State into presenting a greater portion of their case against Oscar before this goes to trial; as this gives the Defence a deeper insight into how the State will move forward, and potentially expose further points of argument, or evidence ahead of the eventual trial.
Disclaimer: All articles and letters published on MyNews24 have been independently written by members of News24's community. The views of users published on News24 are therefore their own and do not necessarily represent the views of News24. News24 editors also reserve the right to edit or delete any and all comments received.