Oscar Pistorius - Sentencing - 6.13.2016

[Interested Bystander]

Alex Crawford ‏@AlexCrawfordSky 20m20 minutes ago
#OscarPistorious tells us as he leaves court 'you know I pray for them every day' re Steenkamps

Possibly for public consumption that (a) he is religious and (b) that "he's a nice guy at heart" (NOT!)

 

[cottonweaver]

I hope it will be Samantha Taylor's mother. She had a lot to do with him when he dated Samantha and knows many of his failings. I don't think Gina will have known much about him. It seems RS did not "report" much back to her best friend.

Yes IB, she knew a lot and had e mails to prove some of the stuff. Just worried that she made XXXX rand from her book though.
True Mrs Taylor comes across as an emotional person, but can she really speak of loss? She didn't know Reeva. ( This point Nel apparently made about being fair to the witness about not leaving them hanging over night makes me think it's someone who has experienced loss. ) IDK though, I didn't even see this exchange.

ETA tweets

Nel says last witness' evidence is "emotional". Judge agrees to break. But says court will sit "until we are finished".
Karyn Maughan ‏@karynmaughan 2h2 hours ago
Roux unhappy that state wants to adjourn. He suggests this is a tactic. Nel disagrees, says he's acting in witness interest #OscarPistorius

https://twitter.com/karynmaughan/with_replies

 

[JudgeJudi]

David Dadic ‏@DavidDadic [video=twitter;742691911857672192]https://twitter.com/DavidDadic/status/742691911857672192[/video]
Can't stop thinking about poor Barry. Shame, man.

Neither can I. It's terrible to see a person grieving like this.

 

[cottonweaver]

To be honest in a normal case I am not sure how much of this stuff would be called.

He should be staring at 15-12 and the State does not really have to prove lots of stuff beyond the conviction.

Rather it is the defence who must prove compelling circumstances and all they have really put out there that is new is this medical business - and that witness got shredded

I am less worried about the evidence than the Masipa clown car.

If the murder of Reeva Steenkamp is not enough to get you 12+ years, then I doubt the evidence of some dude in a bar will cut any ice.

BIB Phrased that way, yes, the club fracas is "small beer" but I thought Nel wante dto establish that he was a future risk to the public as an angry violent man.

 

[mrjitty]

BIB Phrased that way, yes, the club fracas is "small beer" but I thought Nel wante dto establish that he was a future risk to the public as an angry violent man.

Such evidence could be good but we don't know about the quality of the witness.

 

[Estelle]

Such evidence could be good but we don't know about the quality of the witness.

MrJitty Who would you choose (besides Frank - your joke answer)?

 

[lithgow1]

MrJitty2 - if you are still here and in a question answering mood ....

How long do you think closing arguments are likely to take?

Also, do you think Nel will address OP's likelihood of reoffending or just stick to `this is the crime he committed, this is the minimum sentence and so this is what he should serve?'. I would of thought the potential for reoffending would be somewhat of a nothing issue at this point and should come into play when he comes up for parole at some future point.

TIA

 

[mrjitty]

MrJitty Who would you choose (besides Frank - your joke answer)?

Maybe someone who could talk about the medical report

Anyone who knew him who could document what he is really like (i.e. abusive/dangerous)

 

[mrjitty]

MrJitty2 - if you are still here and in a question answering mood ....

How long do you think closing arguments are likely to take?

Also, do you think Nel will address OP's likelihood of reoffending or just stick to `this is the crime he committed, this is the minimum sentence and so this is what he should serve?'. I would of thought the potential for reoffending would be somewhat of a nothing issue at this point and should come into play when he comes up for parole at some future point.

TIA

My guess is the State will talk for 1-2 hrs

They probably will focus a lot on sentences handed down in previous cases with similar facts. For example in De Oliveira this was a case of actual mistaken identity and the sentence was 12 years. So realistically that should be precedent for this case.

I am sure there will be other cases of murder with Dolus Eventualis which will be broadly relevant.

The idea will be to box Masipa in with those precedents.

Danger to public is relevant so no doubt his history of abusive behaviour will be raised.

I suspect time will also be devoted by Nel to the summary of Justice Leach.

So even though Roux will harp on about the "intruder" Nel will counter about the lack of a rational and genuine belief in danger

etc

 

[lithgow1]

My guess is the State will talk for 1-2 hrs

They probably will focus a lot on sentences handed down in previous cases with similar facts. For example in De Oliveira this was a case of actual mistaken identity and the sentence was 12 years. So realistically that should be precedent for this case.

I am sure there will be other cases of murder with Dolus Eventualis which will be broadly relevant.

The idea will be to box Masipa in with those precedents.

Danger to public is relevant so no doubt his history of abusive behaviour will be raised.

I suspect time will also be devoted by Nel to the summary of Justice Leach.

So even though Roux will harp on about the "intruder" Nel will counter about the lack of a rational and genuine belief in danger

etc

Thanks so much for that. If Masipa were to turn around and sentence him to be hospitalised, as I assume the defence will argue going by the psych guy's testimony, would that be way out of line in your opinion? I know that it would cause uproar and anger in the public domain but legally, would it be seen as grossly inappropriate? If he were genuinely mentally ill i would have no problem with it but I don't think he is - I think he just desperately wants to stay out of prison. I also assume the State would appeal such a sentence and if so, would it then go to the SCA where he may get a harsher sentence than 12-15. Thanks again. It is great to have someone who has knowledge of these aspects of the justice system. And I won't ask any more.

 

[soozieqtips]

Missed it from midday onwards, so will have to do some catching up.

I want to see the part where Masipa told Roux off for tricking the witness!!

 

[Viper]

Thanks so much for that. If Masipa were to turn around and sentence him to be hospitalised, as I assume the defence will argue going by the psych guy's testimony, would that be way out of line in your opinion? I know that it would cause uproar and anger in the public domain but legally, would it be seen as grossly inappropriate? If he were genuinely mentally ill i would have no problem with it but I don't think he is - I think he just desperately wants to stay out of prison. I also assume the State would appeal such a sentence and if so, would it then go to the SCA where he may get a harsher sentence than 12-15. Thanks again. It is great to have someone who has knowledge of these aspects of the justice system. And I won't ask any more.

That is why there are prison hospitals, so that convicts serving time can receive necessary medical care. No way he gets shipped off to a palatial private hospital, would be nice but unrealistic. In hindsight it seems he was doing better in the prison infirmary than he is at Uncle Arnold's place! :cry:

 

[mrjitty]

Thanks so much for that. If Masipa were to turn around and sentence him to be hospitalised, as I assume the defence will argue going by the psych guy's testimony, would that be way out of line in your opinion? I know that it would cause uproar and anger in the public domain but legally, would it be seen as grossly inappropriate? If he were genuinely mentally ill i would have no problem with it but I don't think he is - I think he just desperately wants to stay out of prison. I also assume the State would appeal such a sentence and if so, would it then go to the SCA where he may get a harsher sentence than 12-15. Thanks again. It is great to have someone who has knowledge of these aspects of the justice system. And I won't ask any more.

Yes I think that would be an outrageous sentence that would be immediately appealed.

I doubt Masipa will do that

She will be looking to deliver a water tight sentence that the State can live with.

IMO it should be in range 15-12

However I believe it will be in the range 12-8

 

[Viper]

Yes I think that would be an outrageous sentence that would be immediately appealed.

I doubt Masipa will do that

She will be looking to deliver a water tight sentence that the State can live with.

IMO it should be in range 15-12

However I believe it will be in the range 12-8

IIRC the mandatory minimum sentence for Murder is 15 years. Judges like Masipa are the reason that we have mandatory minimum sentencing laws in the USA; its that and other reasons that they have them in SA.

In this high profile case she will probably just do her job and hand down the 15 years. Time will tell but she does follow the law and that happens to be a law. Don't know why everyone thinks she will give OP preferential treatment this go round, she didnt like the backlash she received in the first go round and frankly she didn't expect such. By simply following the law she does her job and is respected, its easy and I think she likes easy! :smile:

 

[soozieqtips]

How does OP have nieces and nephews if his siblings don't have children? I just saw the tweet Carl posted of a poor exhausted OP falling asleep with his niece, nephew, and godson. I am still playing catch up. I won't be around till tomorrow afternoon, so will have to watch Nel's (female?) witness when I get back. Thanks and kisses to all who have posted updates and video links x

 

[mrjitty]

IIRC the mandatory minimum sentence for Murder is 15 years. Judges like Masipa are the reason that we have mandatory minimum sentencing laws in the USA; its that and other reasons that they have them in SA.

In this high profile case she will probably just do her job and hand down the 15 years. Time will tell but she does follow the law and that happens to be a law. Don't know why everyone thinks she will give OP preferential treatment this go round, she didnt like the backlash she received in the first go round and frankly she didn't expect such. By simply following the law she does her job and is respected, its easy and I think she likes easy! :smile:

She has discretion to depart from the minimum

Having listened to the relatively balanced discussion from Ulrich Roux (also a defence lawyer) I think there is a very high chance she comes in under 15

It will certainly be more than the 5 she gave first time around.

 

[Viper]

She has discretion to depart from the minimum

Having listened to the relatively balanced discussion from Ulrich Roux (also a defence lawyer) I think there is a very high chance she comes in under 15

It will certainly be more than the 5 she gave first time around.

Just checked Ulrich's twitter feed, he retweeted this:

POWER987 News
@POWER987News

#OscarPistorius @ulrichroux: When a person is convicted of murder they face a minimum sentence of 15 years...
12:02 PM - 12 Jun 2016

Masipa really screwed up the trial and could not see the big picture, but sentencing laws are crystal clear. She handed a life sentence to a cop that killed his wife, a cop! Ulrich also tweeted about this conviction being for Murder, OP can no longer deny that he committed Murder.

What examples have you seen this year of Murder convicts getting less than 15 years, and were the sentences appealed by the state? Just curious as I have not been following this thread for a long time now. Thx

 

[mrjitty]

The sentencing guidelines were posted by JJ already

I suggest you check back in the thread, or watch this video from Ulrich Roux

The minimum sentencing regime only creates a presumption of 15.

The Judge may depart where compelling reasons are shown.

Onus is on the defence.

 

[mister happy]

Sorry to say, Masipa just makes me sick. From her tired face, to her tea times, to her Oscar coddling. And now she's again in charge of the sentencing! Ridiculous. I only hope Oscar spends a least a few years in prison after all this baloney. I thought the US justice system was the funkiest -- not anymore!

 

[soozieqtips]

The sentencing guidelines were posted by JJ already

I suggest you check back in the thread, or watch this video from Ulrich Roux

The minimum sentencing regime only creates a presumption of 15.

The Judge may depart where compelling reasons are shown.

Onus is on the defence.

BIB - I don't think any compelling reasons have been given at all so far. Most of the argument has been on OP's mental health, and how an extra spell in prison would finish him off. But he committed murder - and being 'broken' or 'depressed' are just not good (or compelling) reasons to avoid a lengthier custodial sentence.

Maybe Masipa could ask Roux, why, if OP is leaving his fate to God... is he doing everything in his power to avoid serving time for the life he took that he admits should only have been taken by God? For someone in such ill health, he sure is pulling everything out of the bag to avoid serving an extra minute of time.

He's still aggressive, he's still arrogant, he's still remorseless - and he's still a murderer. I can't think of a single compelling reason for him to get a reduced sentence. The 'rape' and 'suicide' was a lie (he should get extra time just for that). Plus he coped in prison, forming friendships with those like himself and even enjoying a game of football now and again.

He just can't stand the thought of not being in control and not being able to treat the prison staff as his own personal servants. He has a HUGE attitude problem and maybe he could deal with that once and for all during a long incarceration!!