Transcript of update from NPA spokesperson, Nathi Mncube posted on 27 Oct. Mr Fossil kindly provided the Youtube link on p.39. I think this sort of interview is best transcribed to avoid going back and forth with the video.
Q. What’s the process or the steps that will need to be followed from this point forward?
A. Well, the first step is that we have to prepare our papers, which we are busy with at this point in time. We’ll then have to file those papers with the Registrar of the High Court. The application for leave to appeal will then have to be heard. If it’s granted we’ll then, of course, wait for the matter to be heard at the Supreme Court of Appeal. So that will all depend on whether the application that we’ll be lodging with the court will be successful or not.
Q. What sort of timeframes are we looking at?
A. Well, we don’t really have the timeframe but we have undertaken that we will try to speed up the process and lodge the papers as soon as possible. We think we should be able to do that within the next 6 or 7 days from now on and hopefully the latest should be Monday, the 3rd of November 2014.
Q. Is Judge Masipa’s interpretation of murder on dolus eventualis the bone of contention here?
A. Well, we are not going to disclose our arguments at this point in time. As I’ve said earlier, we have not lodged our papers. It will become evident in our papers what is the bone of contention and which aspect of the law we’re going to argue and why we’re arguing that way, save to say that of course as we all know, that as NPA, you can only appeal on the question of law, and of course that is what we are doing at this point in time. But also, we are not just appealing the conviction. We are also appealing the sentence. So we are going to make sure that when we go before Judge Masipa to argue for the leave to appeal, that we are prepared to – we are well-prepared, and of course, we are able to present a very sound argument in law before her.
Q. What sort of judgment would be suitable for this case in particular? What is the NPA looking forward to?
A. Well, we have to look back to at what we charged him with initially. We had charged Mr Pistorius with premeditated murder, and of course when we were arguing you will recall that our argument on whether he should be convicted or not was that he should be convicted of murder. Of course we did say after he was acquitted on the charge of murder and only convicted on culpable homicide, we did indicate that we respected that decision but that we felt that we held a different view and we thought that the outcome would have been different. We have then had the matter finalised on the 20th of October. We indicated again that we wanted a sentence at least a minimum of 10 years for the culpable homicide and the reason for that was that we felt that Mr Pistorius was grossly negligent in the manner that he committed the offence. So our view was that the only suitable sentence was 10 years, at least a minimum of 10 years’ imprisonment. So we got half of that and we did not get a conviction on premeditated murder. We think that, as I said, we do have grounds in law to appeal the conviction and the sentence.
Q. If the Appeals Court rules in the NPA’s favour, will Oscar Pistorius’s jail term automatically be lengthened? What is the process thereafter?
A. Well, we do not want to jump the gun. I think that what we think what we want to do right now is to make sure that we succeed with the leave to appeal, and when that is granted, we’ll then wait for the matter to be heard at the Supreme Court of Appeal. But of course,
in the event that we are successful with this move, it means that the sentence will automatically have to change. But as I said, if that doesn’t happen, we’re still gonna go and argue that the sentence that was imposed, in our view is not an appropriate one when one takes into account that he was convicted of culpable homicide but he was grossly negligent, and according to the judge, he actually – his act bordered on dolus eventualis.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jo_mjQpcii4&feature=youtu.be
Before anyone states that he's wrong saying he was charged with premeditated murder, let me explain ...
The charge document says:
p.1 "The applicant is charged with MURDER.
p.2 The State argues that the applicant is charged with an offence referred to in schedule 6
Murder, when
(a) It was pre-planned or premeditated;"
The charge was murder and p.2 is only describing the type of murder.
The application will be made on or about 3 November. This is not the date of the appeal. Judge Masipa will only be deciding whether to grant leave or not. If she refuses this, the NPA can still make an application for review (I think with the SCA itself) for leave to appeal. Judge Masipa will not be one of the judges hearing the appeal.
http://juror13lw.wordpress.com/2014/03/02/oscar-pistorius-charging-documents/
Criminal Appeals
The Supreme Court of Appeal is the court of appeal in respect of appeals and questions of law reserved in connection with criminal cases heard by a high court, except in cases where a court granting leave to appeal is satisfied that the appeal does not require the attention of the Supreme Court of Appeal. In such cases it directs that the appeal be heard by a full court.
http://www.justice.gov.za/sca/aboutsca.htm
In terms of section 12 of the Supreme Court Act, the quorum of judges for both civil and criminal appeals in the Supreme Court of Appeal is generally five judges, and the judgment of the majority is the judgment of the court.
http://www.northernlaw.co.za/import...tutional_court_judgment/Jurisdiction.LSSA.pdf
