Pistorius

I still don't understand this, I'd much rather have a case tried by people with decades of legal experience.

It's the difference between a matter of law or a matter of fact.

The cases are tried by people with decades of legal experience. It is their job to convince a jury of twelve good men/women and true of the vailidity or otherwise of the charges. There is no perfect system as has been proven in this case. The judge is very experienced and has been very outpsoken about violence against women yet common sense seems to have deserted her in this instance.

Logic tells me that Pistorious knew it was her in the bathroom. If I get up in the night I know if my wife is in bed, if I think there's an intruder I get my wife to go and check lol. The time he went around the bed to get his gun he surely would have known if the bed was empty.

i also feel that the people who run athletics made the statement that he would not be barred from competing was done in unhealthy haste.

Verdict prediction? Surely some jail time?

The way things have gone so far, I expect her family will be ordered to buy him a new bathroom door.

Logic tells me that Pistorious knew it was her in the bathroom. If I get up in the night I know if my wife is in bed, if I think there's an intruder I get my wife to go and check lol. The time he went around the bed to get his gun he surely would have known if the bed was empty.

i also feel that the people who run athletics made the statement that he would not be barred from competing was done in unhealthy haste.

I've said this before, that if you think there's and intruder in your house your first thought is for the safety of the one you love. In this case it appears that meant himself.

Logic tells me that Pistorious knew it was her in the bathroom. If I get up in the night I know if my wife is in bed, if I think there's an intruder I get my wife to go and check lol. The time he went around the bed to get his gun he surely would have known if the bed was empty.

i also feel that the people who run athletics made the statement that he would not be barred from competing was done in unhealthy haste.

If he had one of those massive divan type beds, he may not have been able to see over the edge of it. They can be really high.

The way things have gone so far, I expect her family will be ordered to buy him a new bathroom door.

:lol:

If u here an intruder most people first thought is to protect those they love. Not go hunting the intruder. Whole case is messed up even for this place

If u here an intruder most people first thought is to protect those they love. Not go hunting the intruder. Whole case is messed up even for this place

What is the general view on the whole case over in South Africa?

5 years! After this sorry, soap opera of a case. Yarpie justice seems more fuc ked up than ours.

and for the firearms offence, 3 years suspended for 5. Which since he's going down for those 5 (some chance!) means he better leave the guns at home whilst he's away.

I doubt if he will do the five years. Very poor. Reeva's family must be gutted. Still it could have been worse, he could have got community service! How he didnt get charged for murder I will never know but it appears that if you fire 4 dum dum bullets at someone at close range through a toilet door you cant be expected to know that they might die.

Sentence seems fair considering the verdict and all the evidence. Think he can count himself quite lucky to be honest. The prosecution really messed up.

I doubt if he will do the five years. Very poor. Reeva's family must be gutted. Still it could have been worse, he could have got community service! How he didnt get charged for murder I will never know but it appears that if you fire 4 dum dum bullets at someone at close range through a toilet door you cant be expected to know that they might die.

The prosecution made a very poor case and failed to disprove Oscars version of events. The judge had to make a ruling based on what was put before her and imo on that score she did a good job. The prosecution is to blame here for the failure to secure a harsher sentence.

He can be reviewed for release after 1/6th of sentence ... could be out in 10 months!!

Reevas parents say they are happy with the sentence and that is the main thing.

Happy with the length of it or just that he got time? The other day they didnt seem happy that he wasnt charged with murder.

makes you wonder if the procecution didnt try too hard to get a conviction. An amateur lawyer would have done better

The prosecution made a very poor case and failed to disprove Oscars version of events. The judge had to make a ruling based on what was put before her and imo on that score she did a good job. The prosecution is to blame here for the failure to secure a harsher sentence.

I agree that the prosecutor was very poor. At times he seemed to be playing to the gallery and maybe was over confident. However I still find it hard to believe that the judge thinks it is ok to fire a gun through a door at close range in a confined space and not expect to do somene some serious damage. And three months suspended for firing a gun in a restaurant? Remind me not to eat out if I every go to S Africa.

It is a nonsense. He "thought" that Reeva was in the bedroom (where he was). He thought there was an intruder in the loo. He shouted to Reeva to call the police and she didnt respond even though she was only a few feet away, she had a packed bag in the bedroom looking if she was leaving, strong evidence of a row..........The prosecution was poor but the judge wasnt much better. I am not a great fan of juries but you have to wonder if he would have got off so light if he had been in front of 12 peers?

If he didn't mean to kill Reeva, he certainly meant to kill the intruder. That's still murder in my book.

Happy with the length of it or just that he got time? The other day they didnt seem happy that he wasnt charged with murder.

Well they aren't appealing so clearly satisfied that he is being punished for what he did.

I agree that the prosecutor was very poor. At times he seemed to be playing to the gallery and maybe was over confident. However I still find it hard to believe that the judge thinks it is ok to fire a gun through a door at close range in a confined space and not expect to do somene some serious damage. And three months suspended for firing a gun in a restaurant? Remind me not to eat out if I every go to S Africa.

 

It is a nonsense. He "thought" that Reeva was in the bedroom (where he was). He thought there was an intruder in the loo. He shouted to Reeva to call the police and she didnt respond even though she was only a few feet away, she had a packed bag in the bedroom looking if she was leaving, strong evidence of a row..........The prosecution was poor but the judge wasnt much better. I am not a great fan of juries but you have to wonder if he would have got off so light if he had been in front of 12 peers?

Personally I thought the judge was very balanced and did a good job with what was a very difficult case. I listened to almost all the court proceedings and she explained her judgements very well. You can see how she has arrived at her decision.

I heard nothing to suggest there was strong evidence of a row, if this was the case why was more not made of it? I consider oscar not knowing that reeva was in the bed to be unlikely but not impossible. It also fits with his character (and south African society in general) as someone who shoots first and asks questions later and who messes with guns.

I know people like to scream guilty based on a few details of the case, but if you actually listened to the arguments presented in court in detail then you can see why the judge delivered the verdict she did.

It would be about right if he actually served five years.

It would be about right if he actually served five years.

Not sure if that was down to the judge or not but I would agree with that.

Well at least he doesn't have to bend down to pick up the soap

Happy with the length of it or just that he got time? The other day they didnt seem happy that he wasnt charged with murder.

He was charged with murder, but found not guilty of it. You need to brush up on the basics of the difference between a charge and a verdict.

He was charged with murder, but found not guilty of it. You need to brush up on the basics of the difference between a charge and a verdict.

Strange for someone who works for the cps!

and for the firearms offence, 3 years suspended for 5. Which since he's going down for those 5 (some chance!) means he better leave the guns at home whilst he's away.

This whole case is just a further example of what a f*****d up country South Africa has become.

5 years! After this sorry, soap opera of a case. Yarpie justice seems more fuc ked up than ours.

So what is the average sentence for manslaughter in the UK?

This whole case is just a further example of what a f*****d up country South Africa has become.

In comparison to what? The way South Africa used to be?

So what is the average sentence for manslaughter in the UK?

That struck me as an interesting question hutch, so I’ve spent a few minutes searching for the answer. The nearest I’ve got so far is the link below, albeit for Northern Ireland – it would be interesting if someone could find the figures for the rest of the UK. Obviously, there are various categories of manslaughter but I’ve flagged up the one I think is most relevant to the Pistorius case.

-JUDICAL STUDIES BOARD FOR NORTHERN IRELAND (i) Cases involving substantial violence to the victim. Whilst sentences range from 6 years on a plea to 14 years on a contest, pleas in cases at the upper end of the spectrum attract sentences of 10 to 12 years, with sentences of 12 years being common. Sentences of 6 to 8 years tend to be reserved for cases where there are strong mitigating personal factors, or the defendant was not a principal offender.

http://www.jsbni.com/Publications/sentencing-guidelines/Documents/Hart%20J%20Sentencing%20Manslaughter%20Att%20Murder.pdf

Try this

[h=4]Type/Nature of Activity Sentence Ranges & Starting Point[/h]Low degree of provocation: Sentence Range: 10 years - life

A low degree of provocation occurring over a short period Starting Point - 12 years custody

Substantial degree of provocation: Sentence Range: 4 - 9 years

A substantial degree of provocation occurring over a short period - Starting Point - 8 years custody

High degree of provocation: Sentence Range: if custody is necessary, up to 4 years

A high degree of provocation occurring over a short period - Starting Point - 3 years custody

[h=3]Additional aggravating factors[/h]

• Concealment or attempts to dispose of evidence
  
• Dismemberment or mutilation of the body
  
• Offence committed in the presence of a child/children or other vulnerable family member
  

[h=3]Additional mitigating factors[/h]

• The offender was acting to protect another
  
• Spontaneity and lack of premeditation
  
• Previous experiences of abuse and/or domestic violence
  
• Evidence that the victim presented an ongoing danger to the offender or another
  
• Actual (or reasonably anticipated) violence from the victim
  

Isnt the most important thing the amount of time actually served rather than the headline sentence figure? Interesting page here.

https://fullfact.org/factchecks/murder_homicide_sentence_licence_release_parole-28691

He was charged with murder, but found not guilty of it. You need to brush up on the basics of the difference between a charge and a verdict.

My bad, should have said convicted.

Well they aren't appealing so clearly satisfied that he is being punished for what he did.

The mother didnt say that, she said it doesnt matter, he is going t pay something. I'm just glad it is all over. I think that the Dad may have said he was ok with it Have they said they arent appealing? At the last news item I heard that wasnt clear.

Personally I thought the judge was very balanced and did a good job with what was a very difficult case. I listened to almost all the court proceedings and she explained her judgements very well. You can see how she has arrived at her decision.

 

I heard nothing to suggest there was strong evidence of a row, if this was the case why was more not made of it? I consider oscar not knowing that reeva was in the bed to be unlikely but not impossible. It also fits with his character (and south African society in general) as someone who shoots first and asks questions later and who messes with guns.

 

I know people like to scream guilty based on a few details of the case, but if you actually listened to the arguments presented in court in detail then you can see why the judge delivered the verdict she did.

I watched the summing up and agree that she worded it carefully. I dont agree that when you fire a gun several times through a door in an enclosed space that you cant be expected to know that you might actually do them a great deal of damage, There are a lot of people in the legal system here who think she has got it wrong. I think most people would have a good idea that if they were sharing a bedroom with another person, that they were there. If you thought you heard a noise you would check with your partner before you went charging off and starting firing a gun.Still it is done now and I would say that Oscar is a very lucky young man.

Isnt the most important thing the amount of time actually served rather than the headline sentence figure? Interesting page here though for the life of me I cant see why average time served would vary from 18 years in 2003 to 7 years in 2009

https://fullfact.org/factchecks/murder_homicide_sentence_licence_release_parole-28691

To be fair those stats are for murder. I'm just guessing here but I suspect it's a lot less for manslaughter

To be fair those stats are for murder. I'm just guessing here but I suspect it's a lot less for manslaughter

Thats true, I couldnt find any stats for manslaughter in the UK. In Australia the average time served for manslaughter is just over 4 years.

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/four-years-typical-manslaughter-term-20110624-1giwx.html

I watched the summing up and agree that she worded it carefully. I dont agree that when you fire a gun several times through a door in an enclosed space that you cant be expected to know that you might actually do them a great deal of damage, There are a lot of people in the legal system here who think she has got it wrong. I think most people would have a good idea that if they were sharing a bedroom with another person, that they were there. If you thought you heard a noise you would check with your partner before you went charging off and starting firing a gun.Still it is done now and I would say that Oscar is a very lucky young man.

is 'here' i south africa?

is 'here' i south africa?

No, lawyers I work with here in England.

No, lawyers I work with here in England.

bit daft to pass judgement as an English lawyer on a SA issue.

guns and shooting people in your home in SA is tolerated for more than it is here, clearly

bit daft to pass judgement as an English lawyer on a SA issue.

guns and shooting people in your home in SA is tolerated for more than it is here, clearly

Sadly it would appear so, yes. As you can imagine, high profile international cases like this attract a lot of interest (as did the OJ Simpson case). Most of our lawyers do not prosecute in the Crown Court but we do have a few Crown Advocates who do this work and it is interesting getting their take on these cases. Still, no matter what we think about the evidence, it has to convince the jury (or in this case the judge) and some of the most solid cases we get often fail in court.

This whole case is just a further example of what a f*****d up country South Africa has become.

Must be all those immigrants.

https://scontent-b-cdg.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfp1/v/t1.0-

Damn .... didn't work, and just realised I can't edit until I renew my membership!!

What I find slightly disturbing is we currently have to high profile sports people in the news, following criminal convictions. Both received a 5 year sentence for their crimes( one served 2 1/2 years the, other is likely to serve 10 months) But it seems Ched Evans would seem to be regarded as more of a pariah in the media than Oscar Pistorious!

At least when he woke up this morning, it really was a burglar using his toilet.

At least when he woke up this morning, it really was a burglar using his toilet.

...

There is an interview with Reeva Steenkamp's mother on the BBc website which includes two pieces of information I didnt know previously - that Reeva had two phones in the toilet with her when she was shot and that her bags were packed. It definitely lends support to the idea that he shot her in temper.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-29777703