Sherbert
New Member
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2014
- Messages
- 528
- Reaction score
- 0
Well, I don't see how Masipa could have accepted PPD when it was abundantly clear from the evidence of Sean Rens that OP knew it was unlawful to shoot in those circumstances. As far as I can see, the requirements for PPD were not met, so I don't follow the reasoning in the Daily Maverick article that he intended to kill but not to kill unlawfully. Anyway, I don't think that that was what Masipa was saying: Masipa seems to have found that OP intended to shoot, but not to kill. But how does that finding sit well with the fact that you can be found guilty of dolus eventualis for dangerous driving?
http://www.timeslive.co.za/opinion/2014/09/12/jub-jub-and-the-pistorius-judgement
http://www.timeslive.co.za/opinion/2014/09/12/jub-jub-and-the-pistorius-judgement