Trial Discussion Thread #59 - 14.21.10, Day 48 ~ sentencing~

[LemonMousse]

The guardian has history of carrying water for murderers

See Amanda Knox

Very true.

 

[mrjitty]

I so hope Nel gets to appeal this absurdity.


I also hope he writes his memoirs and reveals some of the mysteries of the trial.

It's clear that critical evidence was compromised.

E.g. the state of the bedroom and the bathroom. The jeans out the window. The deleted phone data.

 

[LemonMousse]

The worst part about it is he disagrees with the verdict and believes Pistorius is guilty of murder but still thinks he shouldn't go to prison! Were he one of the 'terrible accident' brigade I'd understand his point of view more but as it stands, not at all. I think he's just looking for the reaction as I just said in a prior post - and he's getting it. BTW, I'm probably your typical Guardian reader in terms of politics but I think the article is a load of bollocks.

Yes...I am also a "typical Guardian reader" - very liberal in my outlook all round. But it's senseless bollocks to me too.

They do this sometimes though (The Guardian). Generally they are very free thinking and science supporting, but every now and then they drag someone out to pronounce that "faith" is a perfectly marvellous thing - as an example.

I suppose it's all about being balanced. But this writer is a pillock

 

[kaos]

Sky news guy just saying that viewers should be aware that correctional supervision is very strict. Hmm. He said three strikes and you're back to court for not complying with the conditions and then sent back to jail for the remaining sentence. He also said that even 10 months imprisonment will not be a piece of cake for OP, and that when he comes out, he'll be closely monitored to ensure he's complying with his house arrest. Well, if that's the case, I think OP will break his conditions within the first month, but he needs to break them three times. Why? Why three? He can screw up three times

I thought that was strange too. She stipulated the second conviction was suspended unless he committed another gun related crime within the 5 years and yet there were no specifics relating to any crimes he committed during the actual prison sentence for culpable homicide.

 

[lithgow1]

Sky news guy just saying that viewers should be aware that correctional supervision is very strict. Hmm. He said three strikes and you're back to court for not complying with the conditions and then sent back to jail for the remaining sentence. He also said that even 10 months imprisonment will not be a piece of cake for OP, and that when he comes out, he'll be closely monitored to ensure he's complying with his house arrest. Well, if that's the case, I think OP will break his conditions within the first month, but he needs to break them three times. Why? Why three? He can screw up three times

I don't see the three times thing either - I think it should be none, except for maybe one or two very minor breaches at the max. The peerson I heard on the radio said the conditions would likely be strict too - no alcohol, no going out at night, allowed out really just for work and church and maybe a couple of hours on a Saturday to shop. And that this would be strictly monitored. So though it's no way near enough for what he did it's not the cushy life of ease and leisure either. Plus he has to get through the next year or so with a clean slate too and that alone might be hard for him.

 

[lithgow1]

Just guessing - I suspect when it's closed, a general discussion thread will be reopened. Or......there may be cause to open an appeal thread, or......a 'latest trouble for Pistorius' thread. !

I hope so. Even though I don't want to follow any new trials I've invested enough time in this one to want to continue following developments. 'Oscar in strife again with warden' or 'Oscar's prison romances exposed' - that kind of thing. And besides, like LemonMousse, I've become strangely attached to Carl Pistorius' tweets!

 

[kaos]

I so hope Nel gets to appeal this absurdity.


I also hope he writes his memoirs and reveals some of the mysteries of the trial.

It's clear that critical evidence was compromised.

E.g. the state of the bedroom and the bathroom. The jeans out the window. The deleted phone data.

I don't think there can be much doubt that evidence was left out due to Botha's credibility. Maybe we should also be looking for his memoirs too!
He was the one who noticed that it looked a bit like a domestic violence incident and warranted more investigation.

 

[believe09]

If there is any cash left any where in OP's family, it will be applied to making sure that OP's days in prison are as easy as possible I am sure. I also expect the same of house arrest should he be sprung 10 months from now. Like Z I think Roux's statement regarding OP not wanting to own a gun is laughable...it will be the first thing someone hands him when he steps outside perhaps.

Reflecting on this case, I cant help but feel that there is such an astonishing mixed message here-OP was so clearly vulnerable physically, emotionally and mentally that he gets a pass on a flat out murder charge because he was so vulnerable to intruders, but the naughty boy shouldn't have fired black talon bullets into a toilet cubicle when he knew whoever was in there couldn't get out.

huh?

It is bizarre to me that her honor would so quickly completely discount the testimony of the probation department but invest so heavily in the testimony of the psychiatrist who evaluated OP. Emotionally, and I am discussing my emotions, they feel like very similar characterizations of this man.

I have a lingering hope that Nel will pursue the appeal on her original dismissal of the premeditated murder charges because of her misinterpretation (imo) of the law. That hope is dwindling, but I guess we will see.

I appreciate the perspectives of all who posted here-it was invaluable to me as someone who did not study the case closely but simply had a heartache for the family of Reeva.

 

[Val1]

I so hope Nel gets to appeal this absurdity.


I also hope he writes his memoirs and reveals some of the mysteries of the trial.

It's clear that critical evidence was compromised.

E.g. the state of the bedroom and the bathroom. The jeans out the window. The deleted phone data.

The stolen handbag... what if anything was in the garbage to show what could have been cooked for dinner. Where OP's bloody shirt disappeared to, did they find the missing watch(if so where and if not did they check the siblings, once a thief....).

 

[rachael123]

Darn I missed everything and over slept.

The stairs Oscar went down. I was just listening to a replay, where Roux said 'My client does not wish to be allowed to own a firearm'.

I don't believe a word of that.

 

[mrjitty]

I don't think there can be much doubt that evidence was left out due to Botha's credibility. Maybe we should also be looking for his memoirs too!
He was the one who noticed that it looked a bit like a domestic violence incident and warranted more investigation.

Yes - but exactly why was it left out?

 

[Paul_1900]

We were warned by Zwiebel . . just watched Uncle A :gaah:

"tragic event" > again downplaying and ignoring Reeva was brutally killed
"public trial" > yes, they are the true victims :shame:
"give us some dignity" Reeva was left dead on the floor in a pool of blood, after being dragged around by OP . . do they consider this a way of showing dignity ??

"case dragged out for 20 month" > Could have easy be cut short if his nephew had manned up to tell the truth

Seems "accountability" doesn"t form part of their vocabulary, let alone their thinking or behaviour

 

[pandax81]

I was just checking the Firearms Act and I believe proper procedure has not yet been followed in order for OP to be properly declared unfit to possess, it is not wholly automatic:

Declaration by court of person to be unfit to possess firearm

103 (3) A court which has convicted a person of a crime or an offence contemplated in subsection (1), has made a determination contemplated in that subsection or has made a declaration in terms of subsection (2) must notify the Registrar in writing of that conviction, determination or declaration.

103 (4) Unless a determination that a person is not unfit to possess a firearm has been made in terms of subsection (1), a notice contemplated in subsection (3) must be accompanied by a court order for the immediate search for and seizure of—
(a) all competency certificates, licences, authorisations and permits issued to the relevant person in terms of this Act;
(b) all firearms in his or her possession; and
(c) all ammunition in his or her possession.

Proof of declaration

105. A certificate purporting to have been signed by the Registrar or by the registrar of a High Court, the clerk of a magistrates’ court or the clerk of a military court, stating that the person mentioned in the certificate has become or been declared unfit to possess a firearm, or has been convicted of a specific offence or crime, is upon production thereof by any person, prima facie evidence of the facts stated in that certificate.

http://www.westerncape.gov.za/text/2003/firearms_control_act_60_of_2000.pdf

 

[Val1]

Yes - but exactly why was it left out?

So they wouldn't have to call him to enter it into evidence, leaving the door open for the DT to carry on bashing him and the police dept. like they did during the bail hearing, imo.

 

[Susza]

Not neccesarily. National Prosecuting Authority may consider an appeal if they feel the law has not been upheld.

ETA: Oops, in response to posts saying it's over because Nel and Arnold have said no to appeal.

Wouldn't the prosecution make a total fool of themselves if they don't appeal? I mean Nel was clear: When JM asked him what a harsh sentence would be he explained clearly that he asks for 10 years min. He clarified that he was not playing that kind of game asking for 15 because hoping for 10. He wanted minimum 10!
To resume, I think the prosecution has more than enough reasons to appeal for error in law and the sentence.

 

[kaos]

Yes - but exactly why was it left out?

IMO it was done by Nel to completely avoid putting Botha on the stand. The focus of OP's trial was completely shifted once those revelations came out and it gave those who wanted a 'get out clause' for OP to then say the police were too corrupt. Nel tried to keep the focus on OP so deliberately left stuff out that he thought would be hotly contested and to avoid Roux changing it to Botha being a 'patsy'.

 

[kittychi]

Does anyone think that perhaps the judge was pressured to hand down something? Either by public opinion or her peers?

The reason I ask is that after her conviction statements and total swallowing of OP's story, I expected her to also give him a pass re: sentencing. The sentence seems inconsistent with those initial statements from her, no?

Thank God he is getting something. Great to see him hauled away right out of court; no chance to skidaddle to Mozambique. I wonder if he was packed? :laugh:

I do think he was highly medicated or sedated; looked to me that his eyes were very sleepy-looking.

 

[kaos]

OP still got a thing for those watches!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...y-learn-sentence-killing-reeva-steenkamp.html

2nd picture down.

 

[Paul_1900]

I don't see the three times thing either - I think it should be none, except for maybe one or two very minor breaches at the max. The peerson I heard on the radio said the conditions would likely be strict too - no alcohol, no going out at night, allowed out really just for work and church and maybe a couple of hours on a Saturday to shop. And that this would be strictly monitored. So though it's no way near enough for what he did it's not the cushy life of ease and leisure either. Plus he has to get through the next year or so with a clean slate too and that alone might be hard for him.

Hope you will be right and it will be monitored strictly

Agree it will not be a walk in the park for him, and as such a huge challenge - and a chance to learn some true humility, at least I hope so.

Like others I still see what huge impact it had and has on him. Yet, if he had just given a millisecond of thought to Reeva when standing in front of that door (taking the scenario of his intruder version) . . . nothing would have happened. Reeva would be alive and he could go on with his life.

I was surprised this was not pointed out more clearly by Nel

 

[east2west]

I think AV the social worker must have helped him write that.

Yes...that article has the claws of a "holistic" social worker written all over it. imo