Oscar Pistorius - Discussion Thread #66~ the appeal~

[lithgow1]

Lithgow, you are just so UNRELIABLE! How can you leave us alone in the fog in such a crucial moment???

Well, to be honnest, I'm envious. A couple of months in Australia - a dream! ENJOY!!!

Thank you Susza. And full disclosure - unlike OP, I have been called unreliable! I figured out that I will be somewhere between London and Kuala Lumpur when the decision is announced so will have to hope that it is on the news feed on the in flight entertainment. But either way I will enjoy reading the comments here and also the judgement itself. Fingers crossed! And remember, the fog will lift!

 

[mrjitty]

After the highs and lows of the Knox fiasco and the Masipa ruling I just can't get too hopeful.

Will it be a tour de force like when the Italian Supreme Court shredded the corrupt Hellmann ruling?

or another embarrassing spectacle where the Court ducks for cover in an over publicised case?

Leach at least showed some bravery from the bench to ask the tough questions that should have been asked of Roux in closing in the main trial.

cross everything!

 

[mrjitty]

for me, the saddest thing about this case is that reeva's screams have not been heard. did masipa really find as fact that all the screams were op's. i still cannot work out how he proved that fact to her?

sad in terms of outcome for reeva. and sad travesty in terms of sa justice.

the fact that the lenient, now retired [i.e. not accountable] judge will be dealing with any change to sentencing [if there is any] just brings in another level of absurdity.

masipa didn't really deal with it.

She just claimed timeline meant Reeva never screamed and also she must not of screamed when she was shot... just because.

 

[Susza]

Queensland time 5.45pm.

Hopefully on ABC News 24.

Switzerland time 8.45am.
Hmm, will have to catch up during my lunchbreak. I hope I'll find a video of the announcement and watch it without knowing the final decision...

 

[sleuth-d-]

how do you figure a reduction of more than 50%, of 7years ? Based on which circumstances?

50% off, that does seem excessive.
guidelines state that 15 year minimum is for a first offender, so no reduction there.

guidelines also state... “substantial and compelling circumstances” for reducing mandatory sentences,,, so i guess there will be mucho debate on here over those two words, if the verdict is changed.

the reasoning behind “substantial and compelling circumstances” has to be written up by the judge too. that will be interesting.

http://www.loc.gov/law/help/sentencing-guidelines/southafrica.php#Introduction

 

[Susza]

If only Reeva had been exercising 2nd amendment style thinking - she could have defended herself in the toilet

That's the real lesson here.

BBM
Language & knowledge problem - please help me: what does this mean?
TIA

 

[sleuth-d-]

masipa didn't really deal with it.

She just claimed timeline meant Reeva never screamed and also she must not of screamed when she was shot... just because.

the timeline she relied on was flawed.

 

[saraomar]

You're dead wrong, spend 23 hours a day in solitary and see how it breaks you. Tough gang members break after long periods of time in solitary and while Pistorius brought this upon himself, I'm sure his family still loves him and hates to see him in this predicament.

That's human love and kindness.

Dead wrong? About what exactly? I have no idea what you are saying and what you are responding to! Did I touch a nerve?

Boo hoo! He CHOSE supposed solitary confinement because he was far to precious to be in the regular prison and its inmates, so he got what he wanted. He had a full time room mate, so to speak in the next cell and they shared a bathroom and many basketball games.
This has nothing to do with his family and their love for him, I never said that.

Maybe you should take your own advice about human love and kindness and out of respect stop comparing his grief to that of Reeva's parents, who you have so kindly stated will be spared the 'pain' because they are old and will die sooner than OP who will have to continue enduring the pain for another 50 years.

There is no comparison between the grief a parent feels who's child has been murdered in a hideous way to that of the perpetrator, who is a coward and brought it all on himself!

Why don't you show the Steenkamps some human love and kindness!

 

[cottonweaver]

I suppose to get a handle on it, you'd have to think what would he have got for a crime of passion murder?

Minimum 15? Maybe 20?

I think with the "intruder" finding - that is going to take it down to ten. I'd guess 7 or 8

Sucks but I feel 15 is unlikely.

He'll be sentenced as if there really was a dangerous "intruder" in the toilet.

So starting point is 15 for blazing away in a totally unjustified and outrageous way - but discounted compared to if he meant to murder Reeva

I can't imagine he will get 15 either, 10 maybe but I am wondering what the next judge would accept as mitigation to go against the guideline minimum. Best I can find is the cases listed in Montsho case

http://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZASCA/2015/187.html
Above (Montsho v S) , an SCA judg from last week , appeal against sentence, sentence upheld by SCA. Lists some of the substantial and compelling circs pleaded by Appellant which were not compelling enough for SCA.

Montsho decision also cites a no. of relevant, important cases, most important being (it seems) is S vs Malgas, whereby life sentence reduced to 25 years with full discourse on what substantial and compelling circs should be.
http://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZASCA/2001/30.html

Would quote them - but I think these things are very hard to second-guess, whatever the HC judge decides in Jan 2016 , it's got to be appropriate and be "un-reviewable" so the case can finally be put to bed.

 

[cottonweaver]

50% off, that does seem excessive.
guidelines state that 15 year minimum is for a first offender, so no reduction there.

guidelines also state... “substantial and compelling circumstances” for reducing mandatory sentences,,, so i guess there will be mucho debate on here over those two words, if the verdict is changed.

the reasoning behind “substantial and compelling circumstances” has to be written up by the judge too. that will be interesting.

http://www.loc.gov/law/help/sentencing-guidelines/southafrica.php#Introduction

BIB. It sounds like a supermarket offer in the UK! Buy one, get one free! ( Aka BOGOF for non UK posters)

Thanks for the link

The Combrink case is interesting, I linked to it a month in August, DE, trained shooter, shoots a farmhand thinking he is a "suspicious " person. Went through 2 courts before SCA got to it and effectively increased the sentence to 15 years, for a whole host of reasons specific to that case but one big one-
"The court held that, given the public incense with sentences which appeared to favour a particular group in society, courts had to be conscious and sensitive to cases which appeared to have*racial*or*discriminatory*connotations, especially when dealing with the question of sentence.*Public interest*was one of the essential considerations in determining an appropriate sentence" ( wikipedia but it's a bad entry ) better read in the original at :

http://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZASCA/2011/116.html

I know I am jumping the gun here on sentencing, pun intended, but fingers crossed for Thursday!

 

[Trotterly]

Thank you Susza. And full disclosure - unlike OP, I have been called unreliable! I figured out that I will be somewhere between London and Kuala Lumpur when the decision is announced so will have to hope that it is on the news feed on the in flight entertainment. But either way I will enjoy reading the comments here and also the judgement itself. Fingers crossed! And remember, the fog will lift!

No in-flight wifi?

 

[lithgow1]

No in-flight wifi?

Hadn't thought of that so thanks. Didn't know they even have it. I tend to turn off the phone and get over obsessed with the little route planner, seeing where we are flying over and counting down the hours. But I shall look into it. And to be honest, I hope that if so, it pleases me more than you!

 

[jilly]

I suppose to get a handle on it, you'd have to think what would he have got for a crime of passion murder?

Minimum 15? Maybe 20?

I think with the "intruder" finding - that is going to take it down to ten. I'd guess 7 or 8

Sucks but I feel 15 is unlikely.

He'll be sentenced as if there really was a dangerous "intruder" in the toilet.

So starting point is 15 for blazing away in a totally unjustified and outrageous way - but discounted compared to if he meant to murder Reeva

Well.......at least you've prepared me for the worst which I probably need.

I just don't get it. How many men have killed their spouses because of an uncontrollable rage and, as a result, are sitting in prison for life.

I've never seen anything like this case. It's comparable to role reversals with Oscar being the victim. Unreal.

 

[Marfa Lights]

BBM - Is he allowed to leave the country???

Sorry Susza, I was being somewhat facetious, but I think if he gets handed a 15-year sentence then the family may decide to take justice into their own hands and "sentence" him themselves. Something more appropriate for someone of his stature-- such as life in Mozambique working on Uncle's resort, helping the little children. A regular Napoleon in exile.

All it would take is a one-way ride on a private plane, no extradition treaty either if I recall correctly.

 

[atthelake]

I would like to do a shout out to the moderator(s) for this thread.

This is such a breath of fresh air throughout this trial that you have allowed us to agree to disagree and talk about our differences much more than any threads I have been on lately.

Hopefully our breakfast person will return for the verdict

 

[Val1]

For anyone else that needs a time converter, this one is pretty good.

http://www.worldtimebuddy.com/

 

[foxbluff]

Switzerland time 8.45am. Hmm, will have to catch up during my lunchbreak. I hope I'll find a video of the announcement and watch it without knowing the final decision...

--------------------------------------EST: 2:45 am--------------------Yes, it's much more exciting to follow as Judgments take place... that exciting uncertainty that keeps you perched on the edge of your chair!!--------------------BBM = Bolded By Me

 

[Interested Bystander]

For those who don't want to use the world clock calculator the Appeal timing for the various parts of the world is as follows.

South Africa 09.45

Europe -1 hour = 08.45
UK -2 hours = 07.45

New York -7 hours = 02.45
Austin -8 hours = 01.45
Los Angeles -10 hours = 23.45 (day before)

Perth +6 hours = 15.45
Brisbane +8 hours = 17.45
Sydney +9 hours = 18.45

Wellington NZ +11 hours = 20.45

 

[foxbluff]

On second thought, I don't believe we're going to get much sitting-on-the-edge-of-our-seats time.--------------------KM reported that the Judgment rulings are very brief--------------------I read on SCA website that they handed down (12) judgments on Nov. 30th alone.--------------------That certainly sounds as though they simply read their written Judgment out loud and then it's on the the next case.

 

[soozieqtips]

On second thought, I don't believe we're going to get much sitting-on-the-edge-of-our-seats time.--------------------KM reported that the Judgment rulings are very brief--------------------I read on SCA website that they handed down (12) judgments on Nov. 30th alone.--------------------That certainly sounds as though they simply read their written Judgment out loud and then it's on the the next case.

BIB - that's a shame. I was looking forward to hearing a detailed explanation of how they arrived at the judgment in the first place. Mind you, if 12 judgments were handed down in a single day and they sit for 8 hours (if they do) it allows about 45mins for each judgment. That's more than enough time for some detail, especially as they won't be adjourning every 5 minutes or stopping for frequent tea breaks!