Trial Discussion Thread #53 - 14.12.9, Day 42 ~ final verdict~

[Susza]

Really? I would have thought prison conditions should have been totally irrelevant in her consideration of his guilt because that is not written in law. What you are basically saying is that her decision was not based on the law, but rather something else, which is indeed corrupt.

BBM I totally agree with you.
I don't know wether Angela Carr in post 1088 was ironical when writing "I do understand Masipa not wanting to send him to a South African prison for murder. The prisons are a disgrace, and no normal person would want to even spend a weekend there,..."
Unfortunately prisons in SA are what they are and that's reality.
And JM has to grant justice.

 

[Lyra500]

I'm confused. Didn't Masipa say that OP said he fired the shots "without thinking", but that the grouping of shots indicated he was thinking, and that she'd get back to that point later? Did she ever get back to it? What was the point of her bringing it up?

I think she did say that - and then failed to mention it again. Goodness knows what the point was.

 

[james83]

From one of the most imminently sensible retired judges in SA, Judge Christopher Greenland

https://twitter.com/Chrisng53

Chris N Greenland@Chrisng53 • 24h
#JusticeForReevaSteenkamp ---- I join the whole world in lamenting this travesty of justice. The Court failed Reeva.

Thats powerful coming from him, a truly great man.

 

[soozieqtips]

So South African law suggests that I could kill my boyfriend if he peed me off enough but I would only have to make sure there was noone else in the house. I would then only have to say that I feared that he was going to come out of the toilet and attack me so I got my gun out of the bedroom drawer, walked to the bathroom and as I heard him flush the toilet, I shot at him. I didn't think I would kill him if I shot these four bullets into the toilet door at the very spot where I felt he was probably sitting on the toilet. Would that get me culpable homicide and the possibility of going home to my Uncle Arthur's awaiting my sentence instead of going to jail?

Even better is that you can be an extremely experienced firearm user, and still say you didn't realise your Black Talon bullets might have killed the 'intruder' in the tiny toilet. So you can be an expert in the use of your chosen weapon, but not be expected to foresee the damage it might do at close range. There is apparently no onus of responsibility on you to foresee what might happen. How bloody ridiculous is that?

 

[buntspecht]

I think she did say that - and then failed to mention it again. Goodness knows what the point was.

I think she came back to it as follows:
1. not thinking when it comes to murder .. and now come back to...
2. oh yes, thinking when its culp. homicide

 

[james83]

Even better is that you can be an extremely experienced firearm user, and still say you didn't realise your Black Talon bullets might have killed the 'intruder' in the tiny toilet. So you can be an expert in the use of your chosen weapon, but not be expected to foresee the damage it might do at close range. There is apparently no onus of responsibility on you to foresee what might happen. How bloody ridiculous is that?

The precedent she has set with this verdict is mindblowingly dangerous, it will tarnish her legacy for sure.

 

[james83]

Has anyone got the full quote about Oscar wanting to get back on the track and make amends to the world, OMG

 

[fox1lady]

No wonder Dewani went to SA to get his wife killed! Shocking

 

[TartLemon]

I agree so far with the Judge's ruling. When is the sentencing?

 

[soozieqtips]

I agree so far with the Judge's ruling. When is the sentencing?

You'll find the dates in the thread somewhere.

 

[james83]

I agree so far with the Judge's ruling. When is the sentencing?

Shes already sentenced him to clean her windows once a fortnight.

 

[PrimeSuspect]

Even better is that you can be an extremely experienced firearm user, and still say you didn't realise your Black Talon bullets might have killed the 'intruder' in the tiny toilet. So you can be an expert in the use of your chosen weapon, but not be expected to foresee the damage it might do at close range. There is apparently no onus of responsibility on you to foresee what might happen. How bloody ridiculous is that?

and he should have foreseen it was dangerous to ask to handle a weapon in a restaurant as he is a firearm expert, but suddenly, he's no longer a firearm expert when it comes to shooting 4 talon bullets into a door of a toilet cubicle to foresee it could result in a death. :bang:

 

[PrimeSuspect]

I agree so far with the Judge's ruling. When is the sentencing?

13 - 17 October

 

[Lyra500]

Has anyone got the full quote about Oscar wanting to get back on the track and make amends to the world, OMG

No. I am not sure I could bear it right now, I am already so disgusted at this appalling travesty.

I might well consider turning up if I was in the area, just to let him know what a fabulous guy I think he is. I think people should do that at every opportunity from now on. Not aggressively - possibly just a suitably worded banner or two regarding murderers, bullies and domestic violence.

I am also wondering about boycotting SA goods. If they really only care about wealth and power, then let's hit them in the pocket.

For instance, plenty of other countries in the world produce good wines - I doubt I will be purchasing SA wines from now on if the country is happy to turn a blind eye to criminality purely due to wealth and connections. I don't want to feel I am supporting such a regime in any way.

In fact, wouldn't it be great if there could be a world wide response?

I suppose one of the things would be to follow #JusticeforReeva if you are on Twitter (I am a bit of a dinosaur, so am not)

 

[PrimeSuspect]

No wonder Dewani went to SA to get his wife killed! Shocking

Agree again fox.

 

[jay-jay]

Yes, ITA that she worked backwards.First she decided, I'm not going to hold him guilty for murder. For whatever reason (pity or whatever), she decided he should get some punishment in between nothing and murder. I think it was a combination of Pity for Oscar and also not knowing what they were arguing about and what led up to her shooting. So then she went from there. IMO.

BIB .. definitely .. she did, didn't she. I believe she worked from a starting point of not wanting to give him any jail term at all (which we will get to hear about in Oct), and in order to be able to arrive at that she would have to convict him of the appropriate crime for which could warrant no jail term (i.e. CH, which is indeed what she did convict him of), then working backwards from there she was able to do a 'pick and mix' (i.e. throw out anything which didn't fit and just keep in all the things that did fit that conviction). She actually threw out tons of evidence, just totally disregarded it all, and without any real reason .. on the one hand she was quite willing to take OP's at his word for so many things, and without any proof whatsoever, and yet she was not willing to accept any of the evidence (some of it hard evidence) that in any way showed OP's guilt. It's just a complete nonsense, this whole trial has been a total farce .. and moreover, I'm am livid by JM's attitude towards the prosecution, she has shown no compassion for them whatseover and has actually been quite rude towards them in her manner these past couple of days .. typical bleeding heart liberal .. always got time for the perpetrator, and always so full of compassion for them, but never got time for the victim and couldn't really care less about them.

 

[Paul Connelly]

BIB I think this is the crux of it. Of course, the matter's been confuddled by every legal Tom, Dick and Harry wanting to have their 15 minutes but this is what those with criminal law backgrounds seem to be saying. The judge decided that Oscar did not foresee that pumping 4 bullets into a tiny toilet would kill the person inside but this wasn't actually part of his defence, ever. His first defence was that of autonomism, the second was of a "startled" self defence but he didn't ever state that he wanted to warn or wound the intruder rather than kill them.

I personally don't think a beautifully documented timeline from Nel, recorded screams from Oscar that sounded nothing like a woman or anything at all would have made a difference. Oscar's "remorse" and post murdering prayers to god convinced her of his innocence. Roux and co had done their homework, they knew that grief and remorse were important to her and they gave it to her - in (green) buckets.

For the SA NPA to publicly state on widespread media (they were broadcast on Aussie radio today) that they are unhappy and will consider an appeal after sentencing indicates that the chances of this being appealed are high.

<modsnip>. This was the defense team plan all along and why their witnesses were so poor. Everything rested on putting a reasonable doubt in the Judges mind and they played on her psychology like Menuhin on a Stradivarius.

Nel knew this danger and it's why he was at pains to paint Oscar as having "emotion on call". Roux wasn't smarter than Nel. He was just smarter than a conditioned ex-social worker.

 

[jay-jay]

Good post. I tend to agree that the conditions of SA prisons gave her no choice but to go the way she did. If the prisons were of the standard of Australian jails then she may have gone for murder. Sending a pretty white boy with no legs to a living hell hole is beyond extreme and yes Reeva is dead and she is gone however there is "punishment' and there is living hell. The question is which does OP deserve? I would like to get some opinions on this especially from the staunch anti OP members

What difference does it make as to what the conditions are inside SA prisons? If you are going to commit a crime whereby you intentionally kill someone (for that is what this case is), then you have to face the consquences of that .. otherwise, just don't commit the crime in the first place.

I don't condone the conditions in SA prisons, but if that is what they are currently like, then it's a simple case of just not allowing yourself to go into one by behaving yourself and not shooting someone dead! It's really not that difficult!

Other killers in SA have to serve their sentences in those jails, so why not OP? Why would you think that he should be treated any differently to any other killer?

 

[PrimeSuspect]

Judiciary Becomes Topic of Debate After Pistorius Verdict

(Shortly after the judgement #OscarTrial was the top trend in Pretoria, with #JusticeForReeva second).

William Booth, a criminal lawyer based in Cape Town, believes a lot of the outrage could have been dissipated by a more comprehensive ruling from Judge Masipa. “I think South Africans, the public, are dissatisfied because she didn’t explain exactly why she came to her ruling,” he said, “I don’t think she gave sufficient reasons.”

http://time.com/3342936/pistorius-verdict-and-the-judiciary/

 

[vanatos]

Masipa has totally tarnished her reputation as well as the justice system.

I can understand the anger of so many prominent legal experts like judge Greenland, she basically represented them to SA and the law, and, she represented them as faulty in the extreme in
judgement, so much so, that to a layperson, even someone off the street would come out with a more competent verdict.

Honestly, i think she deserves it, i hold alot of sympathy for people in professions solving a problem that the layperson could not solve, however
if your judgement is so faulty that a layperson can in fact do a better job in judgement, i have the highest contempt.