Discussion between the verdict and sentencing

[Figuring]

I was reading the article RosieC posted about chances for appeal. Thanks for that. It says, essentially, where there was "a competent verdict," the state cannot appeal. According to the ruling, the state can only appeal if there was a "complete acquittal."

To me, the key words here are "competent verdict". If the judge did NOT make a competent verdict, there could be grounds for appeal.

I for one have questions about the judge's state of mind... Her logic was so convoluted as to be frightening. She also appeared not to be fluent with a document she ostensibly created over a period of weeks. Editing it on live tv and whatnot. I believe there may be some genuine cognitive issues at play with the judge (bias aside). It seems the state could appeal on these grounds.

Has anyone found statues pertaining to SA's definitions of and exclusions to "competent conviction"? I'm looking...

Forgive me for replying to myself!--But my buttons to edit and delete are missing at the moment, and I was quite wrong about this statement I made above, as other posters mentioned. So I just wanted to highlight my errors in this post, so as not to perpetuate my wishful thinking....

I still believe there are concerns re. the judge's state of mind and/or potential bias, but am not sure what if anything could be done about it.

 

[Interested Bystander]

I was wondering if the many of you who know a heck of a lot more than me about SA law can help me with two questions:

1. How is it determined that a case is heard at Lower Court vs. High Court? Is it based on the severity of the charge? I ask because the State's rights are restricted even further when cases that take place at the High Court (as OP's was), versus lower court.

2. Can the State appeal the acquittal of the gun charges? It says they are permitted to try and appeal in cases of "complete acquittal." Does that mean OP would have to have been convicted of none of the 4 charges? Or does it mean the State can appeal any charges he was acquitted of?

After reading a bunch of docs today, my hopes are dashed...I'm whittling for a sliver of hope!

Here is a little about the courts in SA. I am not sure it is enough information for you but it may start you off in the right direction. It covers the types of prosecutions that can be held at each type of court.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Courts_of_South_Africa

 

[mister happy]

After a brief period of hopefulness, I am getting cynical again. As of now, I don't think there will be an appeal (for whatever reasons), or if there is an appeal it will be squashed by the higher courts. The dreadful Masipa will give her boy Oscar a wimpy sentence (no prison time, of course) and that will be that. The person who is really rustling my jimmies now is uncle Arnie. I can't help but think that his wealth, power and influence had an effect in this farce.

 

[Fuskier]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-29193657
BBC News Africa

Pistorius trial: South Africans still looking for finality
by Andrew Harding, Africa correspondent.
14 September 2014

"...The gap between a murder verdict and culpable homicide is obviously a narrow and at least partially subjective one" ... "meantime, the legal pundits here - are now either accusing the judge of not understanding the law, or polishing their knives in preparation for an appeal" ... "There is still the crucial matter of sentencing - and the very real possibility that Judge Thokosile Masipa will seek to make an example of a man whom, until now, she has favoured with a generous portion of reasonable doubt" ... "We'll be in a better position to put it all in context after Judge Masipa has passed sentence on Oscar Pistorius. For now, the prospect of forgiveness and redemption seems a long way off.

 

[Lux et Veritas]

I also seriously fear for any future GF of OP. This guy will not change and he will harm another GF in future. It may not be murder next time but I am betting he will hurt another GF in a fight. - Hatfield

While I totally agree that any future girlfriend is by default in danger, Oscar is the one who really needs to keep looking over his shoulder. The REAL OP - a convicted killer - is now not only on SA’s radar, but the world’s.

Chances are excellent that he will severely harm the wrong girlfriend and either she, herself or a family member/friend will swiftly take care of justice. They won’t be helplessly waiting around for another Masipa.

Realistically, how many girlfriends does OP think are lined up, waiting to jump into his arms?! LOL My guess is only the ones with issues as bad or worse than OP.

The Predator may easily become the Prey.

Look at the social strata he now frequents - known toughs, killers and shady power-players with less than dubious reputations. What normal, sane woman would ever have him now? His ‘dating pool’ has been severely reduced, both in quantity and quality. Running in those circles, he no doubt eventually will say and do the wrong thing to the wrong girl (or guy) and he will pay the price.

Mistress Justice often wears clever disguises.

 

[mister happy]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-29193657
BBC News Africa

Pistorius trial: South Africans still looking for finality
by Andrew Harding, Africa correspondent.
14 September 2014

"...The gap between a murder verdict and culpable homicide is obviously a narrow and at least partially subjective one" ... "meantime, the legal pundits here - are now either accusing the judge of not understanding the law, or polishing their knives in preparation for an appeal" ... "There is still the crucial matter of sentencing - and the very real possibility that Judge Thokosile Masipa will seek to make an example of a man whom, until now, she has favoured with a generous portion of reasonable doubt" ... "We'll be in a better position to put it all in context after Judge Masipa has passed sentence on Oscar Pistorius. For now, the prospect of forgiveness and redemption seems a long way off.

Thanks Fuskier, I need that! Is there a sliver of hope? Will Masipa surprise us all? Stay tuned.

 

[soozieqtips]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-29193657
BBC News Africa

Pistorius trial: South Africans still looking for finality
by Andrew Harding, Africa correspondent.
14 September 2014

"...The gap between a murder verdict and culpable homicide is obviously a narrow and at least partially subjective one" ... "meantime, the legal pundits here - are now either accusing the judge of not understanding the law, or polishing their knives in preparation for an appeal" ... "There is still the crucial matter of sentencing - and the very real possibility that Judge Thokosile Masipa will seek to make an example of a man whom, until now, she has favoured with a generous portion of reasonable doubt" ... "We'll be in a better position to put it all in context after Judge Masipa has passed sentence on Oscar Pistorius. For now, the prospect of forgiveness and redemption seems a long way off.

BIB - I don't think there's a very real possibility at all that she'll make an example of him. And for Harding to say she favoured him with a "generous portion of reasonable doubt" is the understatement of the year. The sentencing is at her discretion, and will depend on how negligent she thought he was. Seeing how she's bent over backwards to accommodate all his lies and fake remorse, I honestly can't see her dishing out anything more than a fine, which will no doubt be paid for by Uncle Arnold. OP won't get punished at all, judging by what we've seen so far.

 

[vanatos]

I personally don't like reading the BBC, it tries way too hard to be objective (read simply stating things we already know) and still using thinly veiled language to promote an agenda that shows the bias of the author.

You can see when their out of touch when they use language that flies in the face of peoples actual response, if i say 'people feel dissapointed' thats a far cry from the real sentiment which is 'enormous godam outrage' similarly saying that Masipa was 'masterful' and she struck 'a middle ground' is just an attempt to say Masipa is the reasonable one, and everyone who disagrees is unreasonable, but again, this betrays an agenda since virtually all the legal profession is also up in arms against Masipa's judgement.

For example, if you read Judge Greenlands twitter (who is probably the most experienced and has the most weight in terms of commentary) says he is outraged and believes the court failed Reeva.

As a journalist imho, you are either objective (state facts) or subjective (state an opinion), pretending to be one and also being the other strikes me as dishonest.

 

[Figuring]

Here is a little about the courts in SA. I am not sure it is enough information for you but it may start you off in the right direction. It covers the types of prosecutions that can be held at each type of court.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Courts_of_South_Africa

Thank you for this!! Yes, I was on here earlier today. Interested Bystander, I read that regional magistrate courts could deal with charges with murder (I read this in another document). So I am wondering why it went to High Court for OP's crime, especially in light of how it restricts the state re: appeal. Will re-read again, in case I missed the rationale. Thanks!

 

[katydid23]

I didn't even bother listening to why he got off on that one. It seemed open and shut, what was her reasoning for it again?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk and I have large thumbs.

The state had the burden and didnt prove its case. Even though they were in his safe in his home...:facepalm:

 

[katydid23]

Thanks Fuskier, I need that! Is there a sliver of hope? Will Masipa surprise us all? Stay tuned.

I highly doubt it. She has already said he was remorseful and it was all a big accident. So why would she punish him? She didnt even want him to have to stay the night at Wekoppies. Nor have to stay in jail awaiting sentencing. No way is she going to lock him up.

 

[vanatos]

In all honesty i think this has the real potential to be even worse for Pistorius.

If Pistorius was charged with dolus eventualis, i think the public attention would have waned and switched to another public topic, the defense team would appeal
and behind closed doors they would have gotten a full acquittal (consider how ridiculous his bail went behind closed doors).

What this has done is forced the public to scrutinize Pistorius forever, he is going to be front-line news all throughout september, October and then through the appeal, so basically
for a LONG time.

It all depends on how insular the judges and justice system is imho, if they do not care about public opinion, their totally shut off from the public and their world is themselves (read rich white men culture),then i believe that Nel's appeal will be shot down because quite frankly they've been shown to be incompetent, however, if they do care about public opinion, then i believe Nel will win the appeal.

It's a shame Masipa has convinced me that judges are incompetent, oh how we wish judge greenland was the one doing the trial.

 

[wb180]

I don't want the judge to care about public opinion. I want the judge to apply the law with the evidence correctly. Not some contradictory statements that make no sense at all.

 

[thewagesofsin]

The state had the burden and didnt prove its case. Even though they were in his safe in his home...:facepalm:

What's to prove though? It was there wasn't it? I seem to remember Nel saying that oscars defense team would have jumped up and objected if he was wrong. Oscar claimed ignorance. Am I missing something?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk and I have large thumbs.

 

[eimajjjj]

Hi, This isn’t really right, but you certainly are not slow, it has all been very confusing. Let me try and explain the law simply (forget Masipa for now).

If you hit your target

• Then it is not directly relevant if the identity of the actual victim turns out to be someone other than who was intended
• The legal jargon for such a scenario is “error in persona” or “error in objecta”
• Whether you had direct intention (dolus directus - wanted to do it) or legal intention (dolus eventualis - foresaw and took risk you may do it) or even direct intention with pre-meditation all forms can still apply despite the victim turning out to be someone else
• The key question relates to what you intended to do to the human body in space and time concerned. If you intended to unlawfully kill this human body, then it is murder.
• This has always been the law in SA
• There is no transfer of intent legally speaking, because the intent in this crime relates to the human body in space and time that was struck, not the identity of said human being
• This is not some legal technicality - it accords with common sense and moral reasoning and is vital to define murder properly

Not to sound childish, but isn't that what I said? Determimed to completely understand this so tell me where I went wrong!

 

[wb180]

What's to prove though? It was there wasn't it? I seem to remember Nel saying that oscars defense team would have jumped up and objected if he was wrong. Oscar claimed ignorance. Am I missing something?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk and I have large thumbs.

The argument put forward by Masipa for the ammunition possession is so far off into fantasyland I have no words to describe!!

 

[eimajjjj]

The argument put forward by Masipa for the ammunition possession is so far off into fantasyland I have no words to describe!!

I think blowing away your partner if they 'hover near you in the dark' being excusable takes the top prize for me.

 

[katydid23]

What's to prove though? It was there wasn't it? I seem to remember Nel saying that oscars defense team would have jumped up and objected if he was wrong. Oscar claimed ignorance. Am I missing something?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk and I have large thumbs.

Exactly. whats there to prove. But My Lady claimed the state did not meet the burden of proof. I dont get it either.

 

[JudgeJudi]

.. yet the judge believed all that nonsense .. she actually believes that OP believed an intruder had:

1) made the ridiculous decision to enter his house on the first floor with a noisy ladder, risking the window being locked when he got to the top of the ladder, instead of making his entry somewhere else on the ground floor or even via the open balcony doors which would've been their obvious point of entry if they really existed and if they really were going to use the ladders (and not only that but this intruder would've had to have scaled the outer wall of the housing complex without first being detected by security/cameras).

2) managed to use prop up the ladder against the wall without making any noise whatsoever

3) and then having climbed in through the window, gone straight into the toilet cubicle and locked themselves in .. in what weird world would anyone think that an intruder is going to do that? If it was an intruder, they would've gained entry and come straight in (and OP knows that) .. they would not have locked themselves in the bathroom, and the sound of a person doing that would NOT have indicated to someone that it was an intruder .. what it WOULD'VE indicated is that it was the person you were, just seconds before, sharing your bed with.

.. it never happened ..

I agree with all of the above, but don't forget the intruder/s noisily opened the window so that it hit the frame, and more importantly, slammed the toilet door shut. These 5 things in themselves would prove to any idiot that no burglars/intruders would ever do this.

I saw a video of black intruders entering a house in SA who were caught on surveillance video. About 4 of them entered the house and you should have seen the way they crept around. They definitely didn't want to make a sound as no intruders would ever go out of their way, especially in the middle of the night, to be banging windows, all entering a toilet and then slam the door. OP's story is the most preposterous thing I've ever heard. But Masipa in her wisdom bought that story.

 

[Z&BsMommy]

Concerns for Masipa:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-29223241

It is the personal nature of these attacks that are of concern to the three legal groups, Legal Resources Centre, Section27 and the Centre for Child Law.

"Whilst it is understandable that people may disagree with the verdict, there is a significant difference between criticising the judgment and criticising the judge," their statement said.

"These comments allege that Judge Masipa is corrupt, and/or that her gender and/or race rendered her incompetent in appropriately applying the law to the evidence presented."

The statement said that her decision in the high-profile case last week required a considered application of the law in relation to the evidence presented.

"Attacking and threatening Judge Masipa because she is black or because she is female is simply unacceptable and should not be tolerated in our current constitutional framework, where equality and non-discrimination are of paramount importance," the groups said.

Poor Masipa, Poor OP.. seems the only person not getting any sympathy is Reeva... My god, it's like a pity party!!!