JudgeJudi
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2014
- Messages
- 10,621
- Reaction score
- 31,364
I am not sure why Nel said this case bordered on Dolus Eventualis. That suggested to me that he may not be going for an appeal?? Surely he would/should have said that in his opinion this was Dolus Eventualis or can he not do that because a judgement already has been made. Somebody tell me I am wrong with respect to Nel giving up - pleeeeease!
I think everything will hinge on the sentence imposed. I think Nel used the findings in the judgment, as opposed to what believed the judgment should have been, and based all his argument on those findings. It would be pointless to do otherwise. Ever since Masipa's verdict, I thought the question of whether or not the State would appeal would rest on how light a sentence she handed down. I haven't seen any judgments for CH where there was a 15 year sentence. They're usually more in the order of 8 years or less. It was pretty obvious the DT wanted a non-custodial sentence, but Masipa has already stated that he used excessive force and used a firearm so some prison time is possible.
My view since the judgment has been that if he got 10 years or more the state probably wouldn't appeal.
If he did get a 10 year sentence, the defence could possibly appeal in the hope of reducing it but they would then run the risk that another court could impose a harsher sentence or change the verdict to murder.
If the sentence is very light, I believe Nel will use Masipa's misinterpretation of the law as the basis of an appeal and go for dolus eventualis.
Of course like everything else in this case, anything and everything is possible.