Oscar Pistorius - Sentencing - 6.13.2016 #2

[cottonweaver]

he can't have been unaware of the implications of wearing it as it was such a £ blow when they dropped him.

 

[Tortoise]

Looked for JGreenland clip on DSTV web/carte Blanche as I enjoy his take - no luck

only this from March 2016
.....

(snipped) On all the evidence it seems most probable that he killed Reeva in a situation of "uncontrollable rage", i.e, sane automatism with culpa (negligence) being present for having a gun knowing his pathological condition.
So the verdict of culpable homicide was actually correct on the "real facts".

http://www.news24.com/MyNews24/silence-is-not-golden-the-right-to-silence-in-law-oscar-p-20160308

That's the first time I've ever heard of a rage being a defence to murder. And what pathological condition?

This is weird for Judge Greenland. I've only ever heard him say it was Dolus Directus.

 

[Tortoise]

he can't have been unaware of the implications of wearing it as it was such a £ blow when they dropped him.

He's wearing it on the ITV interview too. It's a stunt. He's crazy.

 

[Estelle]

Beyond crazy. How does living in a mansion with servants, pool and as much money as you can spend amount to any sort of punishment at all? It's a joke. If he gets to keep his freedom after murdering Reeva, then there's no bloody justice, and the Steenkamps will have held everything together for nothing.

I just received this on My Facebook page as Chris Greenland is a "friend" of mine.
3 hrs ·
Carte Blanche --- Oscar Pistorius
I recommended "15 years house arrest PLUS 15 years community service that was Reeva Steenkamp specific so that her life would confer a benefit even though she is not here".
That way he would be in prison without being brutalised and have a chance at rehabilitation, society would benefit, the offence is not trivialised and good is done in Reeva's name.

 

[cottonweaver]

That's the first time I've ever heard of a rage being a defence to murder. And what pathological condition?

This is weird for Judge Greenland. I've only ever heard him say it was Dolus Directus.

At a guess - I think he is meaning "crime of passion" but I can't remember the rules on that these days.

? had he been honest and confessed to a row and then a total loss of control, he would have gained a smaller sentence?

 

[Tortoise]

I just received this on My Facebook page as Chris Greenland is a "friend" of mine.
3 hrs ·
Carte Blanche --- Oscar Pistorius
I recommended "15 years house arrest PLUS 15 years community service that was Reeva Steenkamp specific so that her life would confer a benefit even though she is not here".
That way he would be in prison without being brutalised and have a chance at rehabilitation, society would benefit, the offence is not trivialised and good is done in Reeva's name.

I can understand his sentiments about the community service in Reeva's name, but on the whole I think someone needs to see if he has a fever. Brutalised? He has his own secure wing, gym and TV for goodness sake.

 

[cottonweaver]

I must say I did notice in a recent article , before trail, that JG had actually got some of the judgment quotes on intention wrong. ( Nel repeated them in Day 3 this week, "he formed the intention in the bedroom, went to get his gun: wtte etc etc . )

I think the length of the combined sentence is interesting - 30 years.
36 yrs + 15 = middle aged by end of the house arrest period.

But "personally" , Comm Service is ridiculous over there, as is House Arrest, even if you're not in Waterkloof but in a more modest environment/little house etc.

My personal minimum is still 10, but I'm optimistic about signs of a few years on top.

 

[Tortoise]

At a guess - I think he is meaning "crime of passion" but I can't remember the rules on that these days.

? had he been honest and confessed to a row and then a total loss of control, he would have gained a smaller sentence?

Perhaps, but unless he has been deemed by Weskoppies to have a psychological condition that means he is not responsible for his actions, it is murder. And as you say, then let him be sentenced accordingly - held indefinitely in a secure hospital IMO. Not house arrest.

 

[Tortoise]

I must say I did notice in a recent article , before trail, that JG had actually got some of the judgment quotes on intention wrong. ( Nel repeated them in Day 3 this week, "he formed the intention in the bedroom, went to get his gun: wtte etc etc . )

I think the length of the combined sentence is interesting - 30 years.
36 yrs + 15 = middle aged by end of the house arrest period.

But "personally" , Comm Service is ridiculous over there, as is House Arrest, even if you're not in Waterkloof but in a more modest environment/little house etc.

My personal minimum is still 10, but I'm optimistic about signs of a few tears on top.

Sorry couldn't resist it. Me too :laugh:

 

[cottonweaver]

Sorry couldn't resist it. Me too :laugh:

Freudian slip. Let's hope it's not me crying into my beer ey?

What's your "gut" telling you Tortoise, re sentence.

I can't read Masipa, I didn't even catch a single close-up reaction shot so I can't say what she is thinking.

eta - not waht you personally think is morally just , nor what we would give over here or elsewhere , US etc.

 

[jilly]

I just received this on My Facebook page as Chris Greenland is a "friend" of mine.
3 hrs ·
Carte Blanche --- Oscar Pistorius
I recommended "15 years house arrest PLUS 15 years community service that was Reeva Steenkamp specific so that her life would confer a benefit even though she is not here".
That way he would be in prison without being brutalised and have a chance at rehabilitation, society would benefit, the offence is not trivialised and good is done in Reeva's name.

lol A mansion is not a prison..........so one system for the disabled and another for everyone else and onward, it goes.
This disabled hot-headed, cruel man ended Reeva's life which prevented her from doing more good and now Oscar's supposed to do good in her name? I don't think so.

I can't even talk about the rehabilitation aspect, at this point. Unreal.

 

[cottonweaver]

Masipa said last time around, that she was not totally convinced about his vulnerability , as he had "excellent coping skills" didn't she so the walk by OP was there for that purpose.

But as Lithgow said upthread, if she remembers/reviews her findings of fact in Trial 1, she can see all the actions he had to niftily & speedily perform on his stumps.

I don't have her judgment in front of me, I know she did say he was vuln to some extent.

If it's an issue of disability. Is his disability to potentially mitigate against the shooting or the against his future tolerance of prison. ( Can't be the latter as Kgosi period proved that it was suitable for him as a disabled offender.) So we are back to where we were, a disabled man with a super powerful loaded gun is not actually vulnerable etc etc, he was nifty, confrontational, disregarded other means of SOS - and that's just on his BS version. )

 

[cottonweaver]

lol A mansion is not a prison..........so one system for the disabled and another for everyone else and onward, it goes.
This disabled hot-headed, cruel man ended Reeva's life which prevented her from doing more good and now Oscar's supposed to do good in her name? I don't think so.

I can't even talk about the rehabilitation aspect, at this point. Unreal.

BIB You nailed it there jilly. That in itself is outrageous.

 

[cottonweaver]

He's wearing it on the ITV interview too. It's a stunt. He's crazy.

Well spotted, I hadn't noticed.

I wouldn't be very happy if I was Nike PR dept, with it's zillion dollar investments in sponsors.

I would have thought that his inability to subsequently wear it might even be in the severance details of his old contract with them.

 

[Tortoise]

Freudian slip. Let's hope it's not me crying into my beer ey?

What's your "gut" telling you Tortoise, re sentence.

I can't read Masipa, I didn't even catch a single close-up reaction shot so I can't say what she is thinking.

She is unfathomable. A compete law unto herself.

We know all this already but I'm just doing this for my own benefit really, to remind myself of how she approached him last time. She let him off the ammunition and sunroof shooting charges, with no good reason. She acquitted him of murder by giving him the benefit of (totally unreasonable) doubt, because she had to ignore the evidence, ignore his lies, ignore human experience, and make legal errors to get there.

This time, he has produced no mitigating circumstances. He has shown no remorse, has denied being a criminal in prison, has appealed his conviction, has refused to testify at sentencing to accept his conviction, has refused to apologise for his crime to Reeva's family and has gone on TV to no doubt repeat his 'accident' version. His vulnerability was not accepted last time. He has sentenced Reeva's family to a life sentence, but thinks he is broken. He thinks he should not be punished further.

Based on all this, I see no reason for Masipa not to give him the full minimum sentence. Based on her past performance I think she will continue to insult Reeva's family and hand down a heavily discounted sentence, just because she can't see through the BS, so I think she will give him 6-8 years. I can see no reason for this but I just think she would have to throw out all her previously held convictions about him being a good Christian boy, to give him the max, and did not appreciate having to come back.

 

[cottonweaver]

I'll call it a night, but for any night owls out there this might be worth a listen? ( Can't vouch for contents, only listened to intro, but the 3 speakers sound legit. )

Episode 21: The Murder of Reeva Steenkamp by Oscar Pistorius

Published on Jun 9, 2016
Jim Clemente, Laura Richards and Lisa Zambetti provide an insight into the relationship between Reeva Steenkamp and Oscar Pistorius before Reeva was murdered on February 14, 2013

30 min radio show

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uTjKX0aqank&feature=youtu.be




fair enough T re 6-8. It wouldn't be that much of a surprise. I'll look at my old posts tomorrow because I know his age, 1st time offence, his 3 courses in prison and ALL the rest of the B.S. WILL earn time off. ( That's how I got down to 10 though. )

 

[jilly]

BIB You nailed it there jilly. That in itself is outrageous.

It has to be a hoax....don't you think? If it was a couple of months ago, I'd think it was an April Fools joke.

 

[DexterMorgan]

When Oscar was on his stumps in court. Why didn't Nel ask for him to show us how he maneuvered on the stumps in the dark while grabbing his gun and proceeding to the bathroom to bang on the door.

Nel may be a good lawyer. But he sometimes makes me wonder. Jmo

 

[jilly]

Freudian slip. Let's hope it's not me crying into my beer ey?

What's your "gut" telling you Tortoise, re sentence.

I can't read Masipa, I didn't even catch a single close-up reaction shot so I can't say what she is thinking.

eta - not waht you personally think is morally just , nor what we would give over here or elsewhere , US etc.

I don't think she IS thinking. imo, she's tunnelled with Oscar's disability. Remember her Assessor? Same thing.

 

[jilly]

When Oscar was on his stumps in court. Why didn't Nel ask for him to show us how he maneuvered on the stumps in the dark while grabbing his gun and proceeding to the bathroom to bang on the door.

Nel may be a good lawyer. But he sometimes makes me wonder. Jmo

I think many of us would agree. Sometimes, during the trial, he appeared confused, imo. For this sentencing, however, I think he had all of his ducks in a row (as in rehearsed). I don't know, however, if he was aware that Oscar was going to give this demo.....therefore, he was completely caught off guard and perhaps, blindsided. I know I was. lol