Oscar Pistorius - Discussion Thread #64 ~ the appeal~

[soozieqtips]

Yes I did notice that. It`s a pretty crummy paper IMO but the ratio of comments would seem to be 20:1 (or more) against OP. Granted many of those people may not have followed the trial closely but even so it does show that there is a general perception that he got away with murder. Some will no doubt argue that this is the product of ignorance and media bias but IMO it indicates that the majority of people know a dodgy story when they hear one!

It's not just the DM though. Plus I don't think 99% of DM commenters can be categorised as holding a 'flog em and hang em' viewpoint just because they oppose supporters views. Quite possibly the vast majority of them view OP's version/versions with the same scepticism we do here.

 

[Trotterly]

I know plenty about the Daily Mail, thank you very much. The Guardian also has a huge majority of commenters who also believe OP is guilty. Is anyone who doesn't believe OP's pack of tripe automatically from the 'hang em, flog em' brigade? Or is it reasonably possibly true that just like the majority of us on here...they think he's guilty?

But the opposite cannot possibly be true?

 

[lithgow1]

Its not so much that what is published has been made up although I'm sure that happens, rather that it is from misinformation, speculation, "facts" not from the best sources, a certain slant on what happened etc. As we have seen a rigorous analysis of what happened takes months. The media version hits the streets in seconds, and most of it is just plain wrong.

Can't agree with you there. Definitely in the immediate days after the arrest I would agree, but not these days on the whole. Everything I have read essentially gives the facts - his story, the verdict, where it is likely to go next etc. There might be the occasional opinion piece where the author believes him to be guilty or sentenced too leniently but these are balanced by ones that take an opposite POV, such as the one that aftermath posted on the previous thread where the author mentioned that Reeva Steenkamp`s parents said they don`t care if he released but neglected to mention that they also believed the sentence was grossly inadequate. So it works both ways and OP has his share of supporters. Just so happens they are outnumbered by his detractors who by and large do not believe him.

 

[aftermath]

I know plenty about the Daily Mail, thank you very much. The Guardian also has a huge majority of commenters who also believe OP is guilty. Is anyone who doesn't believe OP's pack of tripe automatically from the 'hang em, flog em' brigade? Or is it reasonably possibly true that just like the majority of us on here...they think he's guilty?

BIB - of course not** - it's just the DM seems to attract the 'hang em flog em' brigade in significant numbers. It's probably the offer of a shiny new pitch fork in return for an annual DM subscription that does it!

**Not that I think OPs version is tripe, of course!

 

[Trotterly]

BIB - of course not** - it's just the DM seems to attract the 'hang em flog em' brigade in significant numbers. It's probably the offer of a shiny new pitch fork in return for an annual DM subscription that does it!

**Not that I think OPs version is tripe, of course!

Lol...pitch fork.

 

[lithgow1]

It's not just the DM though. Plus I don't think 99% of DM commenters can be categorised as holding a 'flog em and hang em' viewpoint just because they oppose supporters views. Quite possibly the vast majority of them view OP's version/versions with the same scepticism we do here.

That type of sentiment does exist but it is vastly outnumbered by much more considered opinions. The worst comments I have seen have been on South African sites, such as those on news24 stories on OP. Any high profile crime is going to attract those types of comments and commentators - the other bad one can be Huffington Post where sometimes the wished for punishments are more sadistic than the crime! But you don`t find that here nor generally elsewhere IMO. If believing OP to be a murderer and wanting him to pay a higher price than 10 months in prison and then 4 years of mansion arrest is considered to be a hang him high attitude by some of the posters here then so be it.

 

[cottonweaver]

Seems to be correct of online comments of D Telegraph, Guardian, Independent too. All of the three published live blog/feeds so presume most of their readership had access to point by point events in court - which is after all so unusual in UK and unique access.

So unusually those readers, they had unprivileged access to the court and OP's testimony. Maybe this is also the source of overwhelming certainty on their behalf.

Not a lot of "slanting", and spinning you can do when you are supplying a live feed or maximum character tweeting. Basic facts. Journalists don't have shorthand skills these days.

 

[cottonweaver]

mmm ..........

AFAIK, there is no annual subscription to the DM - it's free access isn't it - hence it's huge readership and why that might be a concern considering the content.

 

[aftermath]

That type of sentiment does exist but it is vastly outnumbered by much more considered opinions. The worst comments I have seen have been on South African sites, such as those on news24 stories on OP. Any high profile crime is going to attract those types of comments and commentators - the other bad one can be Huffington Post where sometimes the wished for punishments are more sadistic than the crime! But you don`t find that here nor generally elsewhere IMO. If believing OP to be a murderer and wanting him to pay a higher price than 10 months in prison and then 4 years of mansion arrest is considered to be a hang him high attitude by some of the posters here then so be it.

BIB - my 'hang em flog em' comment was specific to the DM. Whilst I have seen attitudes that I would probably classify as such on various forums, but they are by no means the norm on forums like this, where at least posters tend to have followed the case in detail...

 

[mrjitty]

True, but her mother was there every day for OP`s testimony so she also heard his version of the events along with all the defence witnesses. It is hard to say, but as a parent I think you would prefer to believe his version than the police`s, as it would seem to involve less fear for your child than the argument followed by a deliberate shooting scenario.

I simply meant that police operate with one or more theories of the case - which do not have to be proved to BRD standard and to which rules of evidence do not apply.

So her parents have had the low down from the horse's mouth so to speak.

Most of us heard the accused lie in the stand - so I can only imagine what it is like for her parents who have had more extensive briefings.

 

[lithgow1]

I simply meant that police operate with one or more theories of the case - which do not have to be proved to BRD standard and to which rules of evidence do not apply.

So her parents have had the low down from the horse's mouth so to speak.

Most of us heard the accused lie in the stand - so I can only imagine what it is like for her parents who have had more extensive briefings.

Aha. I thought you meant something different. Basically that they had listened, unquestioningly, to the police version of events.

 

[Marfa Lights]

Does anyone know if June and Barry Steenkamp had an opportunity to provide input at the Parole Board hearing back in June where Oscar was determined eligible for release after 10 months?

 

[Interested Bystander]

Does anyone know if June and Barry Steenkamp had an opportunity to provide input at the Parole Board hearing back in June where Oscar was determined eligible for release after 10 months?

Yes they did but how much would be a guess. See following link.

Time doesn’t fit crime, sayReeva’s parents

http://www.heraldlive.co.za/time-doesnt-fit-crime-say-reevas-parents/

“Explaining the board’s decision, Correctional Servicesspokesman Manelisi Wolela said the Steenkamp family had participated in its deliberations and their input had been considered.”

 

[cottonweaver]

Yes Marfa, you can see their letter ( or a part thereof) online. It was published around June 10th, I think by CNN but I can't be certain- looked at it last week. ( No links for the moment.)

 

[soozieqtips]

But the opposite cannot possibly be true?

That he's innocent?

 

[cottonweaver]

OK so it`s the Daily Mail but even tabloids are sometimes right! And I believe that what her parents believe is much closer to the truth than the lies and the far fetched story he told in court. They think that `Something more sinister happened the night their vivacious daughter was killed` and I am in agreement with them on that.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...four-bullets-door-killing-Valentines-Day.html

Interesting that everything seems to be aligning now
The Appeal,
the postponement of the release,
the timely press release- stronger comments, "something sinister"- from the parents ......

..................roll on first week of Sept and the new "parole" review decision.

 

[Trotterly]

That he's innocent?

That anyone who believes any of what he says is a OP lover, Pistorian, moominballoon (or whatever it is) or any other variant thereof.

 

[lithgow1]

That anyone who believes any of what he says is a OP lover, Pistorian, moominballoon (or whatever it is) or any other variant thereof.

It`s not so much believing anything that he says as believing everything. I`ve never heard of a moominballoon BTW. What on earth is that?

 

[mrjitty]

Aha. I thought you meant something different. Basically that they had listened, unquestioningly, to the police version of events.

Remember that the police know quite a bit that wasn't at trial.

Like why the servant didn't testify, other witnesses, what the accused said to police, where the curtains were when they arrived, what they really thought of the blood evidence etc etc

Not saying it applies in this case - but back home we had a major white collar proceeding that went on for most of a decade

Everyone around town knew what happened in that case - because so many people worked on it in one way or another.

The version in the media/court was surreal compared to what you could find out at the pub from the horses mouth

But to prove that was impossible.

 

[JudgeJudi]

Today I watched a terrific documentary "The Murder Trial" which won the award for the best single documentary at the 2014 British Academy Television Awards. I don’t want to spoil it by revealing details but if you want to watch it, it runs for 1:30. After having watched the entire OP trial, I’m sure you’ll find it more than fascinating.

The prosecution’s evidence is circumstantial.

In 2003 Nat Fraser was found guilty of the murder of his wife and was sentenced to life imprisonment with a recommendation to serve a minimum of 25 years. His defence team immediately stated their intention to appeal. After applying for leave to appeal 3 times, all of which were refused and there being no further routes of appeal in the Scottish Courts, in May 2010 he announced an intention to appeal in the Supreme Court in London and was given special leave to do so. In May 2011 he won his appeal and went on trial again in 2012 in the High Court in Edinburgh, Scotland.

This was the first time the Scottish High Court has given permission for remotely-operated cameras to be placed inside a British criminal court to capture a murder trial from start to finish and it was filmed over a period of six weeks.


[video=youtube;eKprv-AWKEU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKprv-AWKEU[/video]

If you can't view it, try the following:

http://www.clipconverter.cc/ and just paste in the You Tube URL.