LOL. I don't need to look it up!
IMO this was however DD ie. with intent ( remember "pre-med" does not exist in SA law and even over here is an abused term) - but no way that DD could be proved. So never expected that verdict.
On Masipa. :thinking: You keep repeating this same point.
As i recall well, lots of posters had faith, oops lots of top SA barristers had faith, quite a few posters were entirely cynical due to her approach, others had concerns due to her lack of experience to be given a position at that level. Concerns were soothed with reasoning re. different approaches in SA law. Research was done- little info. was available because it was true - she had little experience. The back story was good, the oft quoted harsh sentence in a DV case was clung to. That's it. I personally was totally naive in my faith that she would reach the correct verdict. I said so then, said it 30 pages ago - it's not a big deal to me, on any level. I think you're clutching at the wrong straws.
Verdict was delivered . More legal EXPERTS ( remember, not me and you as I said 30 or so pages ago) were confounded , described themselves as "stunned", "embarassed", "disquieted". They are trying to describe extreme surprise and shock at a miscarriage. They're not like little kiddies in the playground pretending that they never thought differently, secure as they are, in their own expertise, Ms. Turner.
TriciaManager Websleuths.com