• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

"Blade runner" shoots girlfriend

Bonsaiboy said:
You seem to be ignoring that he was tried in a South African court under a South African legal system and within a South African Cultural context.

Most of the legal experts were predicting he would be convicted of Culpable Homicide and receive the kind of sentence he has.

The same crime here would have produced a murder conviction and a much longer sentence, but the crime didn't take place here.

A lengthy custodial sentence is not always the right sanction. The idea is to punish the crime, have some kind of deterrent and rehabilitate the criminal.

He basically destroyed his own life as well doing what he did and he's a strong candidate for suicide at some point. By the time he's able to race again he'll be too old and won't be accepted by the public anywhere anyway, and he'll struggle to find another equivalent means of earning such an amount of money. No worthwhile brand will touch him with a barge pole.
Click to expand...

Hey Bonsai, firstly I think you missed my sarcasm/humorous intent ( probably more a reflection on me than you !) but following on from your reply, "the idea is to punish the crime, have some sort of deterrent and rehabilitate the criminal" ... What punishment would you suggest is suitable for killing your girlfriend? What deterrent has now been published? And why should a killer be rehabilitated ?

I would suggest the punishment did not reflect the severity of the crime, the opposite effect for deterrent has now been achieved, and I would personally not want murderers ( as you rightly pointed out would be the title over in the uk or most 1st world countries) rehabilitated when they have been proven to be guilty of such a crime, have had evidence provided of similar actions (re guns) and have done nothing in life to warrant any sympathy over whether they can rebuild their career or not.

My opinion, he paid a lot of money to get off lightly for a crime that in any just system would have him sewing mailbags for at least 20 years.
 
Jimmy Carr made a controversial joke at the Q Awards – and it went down like a lead balloon.

Carr made the comment about Reeva Steenkamp while presenting the Best Act In The World Today award to Kasabian..

Steenkamp was shot dead by athlete Oscar Pistorius, who was sentenced to five years on Tuesday.

In his speech Carr began talking about long queues when needing the toilet, adding: ‘So frustrating. All I’m saying is I can see it from Oscar Pistorius’ point of view.’

The audience are said to have gasped as Jimmy went on: ‘That’s not the controversial bit. Here it comes…I blame her.

‘If she hadn’t been in that disabled toilet none of this would have happened.’

He shouted at the now-silent crowd: ‘It’s the f*****g Q Awards, come on.’

The comedian told The Mirror’s 3am after the show: ‘I think it went all right. I’m going to go home and write some new jokes.’
 
Thebarbarian said:
Hey Bonsai, firstly I think you missed my sarcasm/humorous intent ( probably more a reflection on me than you !) but following on from your reply, "the idea is to punish the crime, have some sort of deterrent and rehabilitate the criminal" ... What punishment would you suggest is suitable for killing your girlfriend? What deterrent has now been published? And why should a killer be rehabilitated ?

I would suggest the punishment did not reflect the severity of the crime, the opposite effect for deterrent has now been achieved, and I would personally not want murderers ( as you rightly pointed out would be the title over in the uk or most 1st world countries) rehabilitated when they have been proven to be guilty of such a crime, have had evidence provided of similar actions (re guns) and have done nothing in life to warrant any sympathy over whether they can rebuild their career or not.

My opinion, he paid a lot of money to get off lightly for a crime that in any just system would have him sewing mailbags for at least 20 years.
Click to expand...

But he wasn't found guilty of murder, he was found guilty of the equivalent of manslaughter.

I watched a fair bit of case, particularly early on, and the prosecution made a mistake in perusing a case of premeditated murder when there simply wasn't any evidence for it. No evidence of any arguments or discord and no evidence of any motivation for wanting to kill her. It really does seem like he heard a noise, walked past the bed not noticing Reeva wasn't in it, then put four slugs through the toilet door without giving any kind of accurate warning.

Here, that would absolutely get a murder conviction, and it could also have got one in South Africa because he arguably intended to kill the person behind the door, but the mitigating factors of Pistorius perceived vulnerability whilst on his stumps and the general paranoia of crime in South Africa swung it his way with the judge to get a lesser charge of Culpable Homicide and she applied the sentence based on previous case law. Judges can't make up sentences on a whim.

The case wasn't swung on the ability of his lawyer. He was very good but so was the prosecution lawyer. It wasn't decided on a technicality. The judge heard the facts and made a decision based on them.
 
I don't really see why it was a mistake, they had witness reports of hearing an argument. Besides which it wasn't as if it closed off the other two possible charges, common-law murder and culpable homicide. I personally can't see how he got away with the former of those. As far as I know, there are plenty of legal minds in SA who don't think the judge applied the law correctly, as well as those that agree with her.

Common-Law Murder said:
Unlawfully intended to kill in the heat of the moment but without "malice aforethought". Either: Shot door intending to kill, or knew someone might be killed and still fired gun
Click to expand...
 
Seedy Ron said:
I don't really see why it was a mistake, they had witness reports of hearing an argument. Besides which it wasn't as if it closed off the other two possible charges, common-law murder and culpable homicide. I personally can't see how he got away with the former of those. As far as I know, there are plenty of legal minds in SA who don't think the judge applied the law correctly, as well as those that agree with her.
Click to expand...

The witness reports were disregarded by the judge for a few reasons, they were able to show that from the distance the witnesses were reported to be it would be very difficult to distinguish anything, let alone the difference between the scream of a woman and the scream of a man who's voice in a state of anguish you have never heard. The judge mentioned this in her closing statement. Basically, as Bonsaiboy has summarized very well, there just wasn't any concrete evidence of pre-meditated murder.

I do find it difficult to get my head round him not being convicted of common-law murder as there was concrete evidence (i.e a testimony from OP himself) to say that he thought someone was behind the door. I struggle to understand how anyone can fire 4 bullets into a door knowing someone is on the other side without thinking 'someone might get killed here'. So I suppose in some aspect the judge must believe his testimony that he was so stressed he did not realise what he was doing, then again, this goes against what she said about basing her judgement on facts and facts only.

Any legal heads on here that could explain to me (in relatively simple terms) a plausible justification for not convicting of common law murder?
 
markysimmo said:
Jimmy Carr made a controversial joke at the Q Awards – and it went down like a lead balloon.

Carr made the comment about Reeva Steenkamp while presenting the Best Act In The World Today award to Kasabian..

Steenkamp was shot dead by athlete Oscar Pistorius, who was sentenced to five years on Tuesday.

In his speech Carr began talking about long queues when needing the toilet, adding: ‘So frustrating. All I’m saying is I can see it from Oscar Pistorius’ point of view.’

The audience are said to have gasped as Jimmy went on: ‘That’s not the controversial bit. Here it comes…I blame her.

‘If she hadn’t been in that disabled toilet none of this would have happened.’

He shouted at the now-silent crowd: ‘It’s the f*****g Q Awards, come on.’

The comedian told The Mirror’s 3am after the show: ‘I think it went all right. I’m going to go home and write some new jokes.’
Click to expand...

I don't find that joke funny, not because of the subject but because of the fact it's ****. But why the fuss about this joke? Jimmy Carr has made many other jokes much more controversial than this one. A famous pretty girl dies and they jump on it.
 
:eek:

Oscar_zpsf0827291.jpg
 
Olympic athlete Oscar Pistorius has been found guilty of murder after a South African appeals court overturned an earlier manslaughter verdict.

He killed his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp in February 2013 after shooting her four times through a locked toilet door.

He is currently under house arrest after spending one year of his original five-year sentence in jail.

Pistorius will now have to return to court to be re-sentenced, for murder.

It was earlier incorrectly reported that the court had ruled the manslaughter verdict would remain.

South Africa's Supreme Court of Appeal ruled that the lower court did not correctly apply the rule of dolus eventualis - whether Pistorius knew that a death would be a likely result of his actions.

Reading the ruling reached by a panel of judges, Justice Lorimer Leach said that having armed himself with a high-calibre weapon, Pistorius must have foreseen that whoever was behind the door might die.

Pistorius' lawyer argued that he believed that there was an intruder in the house but the judge said that the identity of the person behind the door was irrelevant.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-34993002
 
The fact this happened just under three years ago is testament to what her parents are going through. I'm glad they're getting a little more justice.
 
Pistorious has been granted bail. Legs or no legs, known all over the country or not known at all, no convicted murderer should ever be granted bail.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back