Recent content by DILLIGAF

Surely not!!

Me either. Big fine and suspended sentence is my guess. I'm so disappointed with Masipa. She should have stuck to social work.

BBM So the PT can appeal the verdict? Is there no double jeopardy rule in SA?

Bit in bold. In your original post you said "No-one questioned this judge during the trial People rightly disagreed and now you're moving the goal posts. Go back and check, you said NO ONE!!

Rubbish. Plenty of posters questioned her competence and referred to her sympathy towards OP when he was on the stand. You need to go back and read the threads PLEASE...

Either that or she's out of her depth/incompetent.

Says Oscar was a terrible witness but believes his evidence!! :facepalm:

Does the double jeopardy rule apply in SA? If so, he's got away with it!!

She'll find him guilty of dolus eventualis imo. Plus the discharging of a firearm charges. He may still walk though.:sick:

Thanks so much for those links Giles, :clap: When South African legal eagles concur that OP is in big trouble, it says it all for me. Really interesting to hear the part about Roux failing to prove OP screams like a woman. Roux made a number of claims that defence experts would prove this...

I'd say (1) will be his first course of action, but he'll resort to (2) if his appeal even smells like it might be unsuccessful. It will be outrageous if the judge grants him bail if she has even the smallest inkling that he may be a flight risk imo.

:waitasec:Could someone explain why OP didn't plead guilty to the firearm charge relating to discharging the glock in the restaurant? Roux told the judge he is guilty. Why plead not guilty? Why not change your plea? Or are you unable to do that in SA? Thanks in advance.:)

If he's conceding that OP is guilty of this charge, why didn't OP change his plea to guilty?

I agree that Nel is occasionally inarticulate in the way he poses a question, but overall I think he's very impressive. Brilliant in fact. Nel only looked like he was struggling (body language wise) with his XE of Prof D because Prof D was so evasive and defensive, with an inability to...

Pretty much the way I see it too LaLaw:goodpost: