Recent content by G.bng

Well the defence did very strongly oppose televising the trial but the judge ruled against them and it was televised.

BIB: Absolutely. How can anyone compare seeing someone in person with watching them in a badly focussed one and a half minute video taken from afar on a mobile phone less still observing stills from the same. The two observations are just not comparable. Don't know if it's yet been posted but...

Well for sure it's not my belief but then the question for the appeal court is not whether OP knew of the existence of the ricochet effect rather whether he foresaw the possibility of one at the time of the event and acted accordingly, which, truth or lie, he claimed he didn't not least because...

Sorry CW, no link since I downloaded the 599 page pdf way back last year and for the life of me I wouldn't be able to remember from where even if I tried (I did just try googling "oscar pistorius transcript testimony download" with no result). I could try uploading it somewhere but I'm pretty...

I remember watching that section of his testimony very well because Nel was trying hard to get OP to say he didn't fire a warning shot into the shower because he thought ("foresaw") a ricochet could end up hitting him. I can't find the section just now but below is the relevant dialogue in full...

Well spotted. I was quite perplexed wondering how the SCA was so blatantly going to go against its own rules.

Thanks for that. I already downloaded the verdict from Saffli last year but it was still unsigned and it had many "inaudibles" and in-corrections. The one you link is signed and has been corrected.

I get the feeling that Masipa might well allow the appeal to cover her back as well as getting it off her back and so shunt the question as to whether the State is appealing on questions of facts or law along to the SCA and let them decide. I don't personally think it's gonna work even then but...

For a valid PPD the way Johan Engelbrecht SC explains it in an article in The Citizen, one would neither need to intend to kill nor intend to not kill, or as you note, intend to miss, since according to his explanation, and Professor Grant explains more or less the same in several of his...

I don't think he said it was not applicable since has been applied for some 30 odd years and unsuccessfully challenged several times up to date. For it to be not applicable the SCA will have to reverse the Seekoei ruling which with the new constitution is quite likely since it creates an anomaly...

It's called "Seekoei". It's an old ruling or principle, case law, that means as per Professor Grant's post "The Seekoie Hurdle" (link to his translated article from Afrikaans, "The Seekoie-barrier"), in which he notes: However, the Seekoei principle is only applicable to State appeals from...

Well, at the moment just the arguments to request leave to appeal.

This kind of window has a stop somewhere on the frame at the level of the 2nd window otherwise the first window would slide right past the second and you'd either have to risk hanging out and reaching for it to pull it back along or you'd need a ladder.

YOU'VE BEEN FRAMED... or should I say CONNED! Well, 'spose someone has to fall for it because otherwise whoever sets these accounts up wouldn't bother unless they actually drew the unsuspecting public in! Or do you really believe a reputed officer of the court would post such a badly written...

Don't know what "~rsbm~" means but with the rest I agree. And it wasn't as if his going to Mozambique was a secret. Even before OP's appeal mid March 2013 to have Bail conditions relaxed Arnold Pistorius said he would like to be able to on business trips take OP to his farm in Mozambique to...