Pistorius - is this man sane

[jeremyp]

I think he must be, since he is denying murder but accepting culpable homicide. I've never seen him say he fired intending to kill whoever was behind the door.

"Culpable homicide"? That sounds like murder but with some mitigating factors to me.

He knew somebody was on the other side of the door, he shot through it, there's no possibility it was self defence. It's murder.

At least it would be in the UK. The law may be different in South Africa.

[jeremyp]

"Culpable homicide"? That sounds like murder but with some mitigating factors to me.

Just looked it up. Culpable homicide is only manslaughter. However, Pistorius's conviction was overturned and changed to murder, which I think, on the facts of the case, is the correct conviction.

[floo]

I see that nasty creep has only been given a 6 year sentence for killing Reeva. That is total insult to her and her grieving family. Pistorius should have been given at least 15 years. I hope there is another appeal.

[Maeght]

I see that nasty creep has only been given a 6 year sentence for killing Reeva. That is total insult to her and her grieving family. Pistorius should have been given at least 15 years. I hope there is another appeal.

You clearly have your opinion of Pistorious and that won't change so no point in discussing that - but have you read the judge's statement?

[floo]

You clearly have your opinion of Pistorious and that won't change so no point in discussing that - but have you read the judge's statement?

Yes I have, and I totally disagree with it. Pistorius is a murderer and no clemency should be given to him.

[Brownie]

You obviously know things that the judge doesn't know floo.

He has been convicted of murder, sentenced, so now it is all over unless there is an appeal.  I sincerely hope he doesn't appeal against the murder conviction, I know he said he would gladly do a long sentence but not for murder.  In view of all the adverse press, it might be worse for him if he appealed against the murder conviction now.  Certainly it wouldn't change any the public views and there's no new evidence.  Best to let it be now (I doubt anyone concerned is going to listen to me  ).

I'm glad it is, or appears to be, all done.  I really believe that showing trials on television is not right.  It's done in America where entire families sit glued to the box, arguing the rights and wrongs, which cannot be healthy.  Far better to just read or hear a news report.  Public opinion can influence the fairness of the outcome of a trial and that is not right, imo, we might just as well have lynchings.  Seething with indignation afterwards isn't going to help the victim and certainly doesn't do anything for the person seething!

[floo]

There should be an appeal to try to get the sentence extended to at least 15 years, it is a travesty of justice to think that creep with be out in 3 years. He is danger to the public, imo.

[Maeght]

There should be an appeal to try to get the sentence extended to at least 15 years, it is a travesty of justice to think that creep with be out in 3 years. He is danger to the public, imo.

And why do you think your opinion is right whereas that of the judge who has looked at all the evidence isn't?

[Owlswing]

And why do you think your opinion is right whereas that of the judge who has looked at all the evidence isn't?

I think that there is another angle from which this case can be looked at and I am not exactly sure how to make a judgement call on it.

To all intents and purposes Pistorius athletic career was/is over. Other, younger, athletes had destroyed his one-time absolute supremacy in the field.

I think, at it is only my opinion, that the only person who is of any importance is Pistorius' world IS Pistorius and that he would do anything to retain his position in the public eye, including killing his girl-friend. I think that he banked on his celebrity status, not on hi personal celebrity status but his celebrity as a representative of South Africa, to ensure that he receive clement treatment at the hands of the judiciary, it went wrong and he got a far longer sentence than he bargained for and he used his celebrity to generate the publicity to get a far shorter sentence.

I can see no other reason why the sight of Reeva's father’s devastation at his daughter's death should be ignored in the way it has been.

In my personal view, the justice system and the judiciary of South Africa have not come out of this with any honour whatsoever. 

[floo]

And why do you think your opinion is right whereas that of the judge who has looked at all the evidence isn't?

Pistorius is a murderer, a six year sentence, of which he will only serve three years, is a travesty of justice, the judge is wrong, imo!

[Maeght]

I think that there is another angle from which this case can be looked at and I am not exactly sure how to make a judgement call on it.

To all intents and purposes Pistorius athletic career was/is over. Other, younger, athletes had destroyed his one-time absolute supremacy in the field.

I think, at it is only my opinion, that the only person who is of any importance is Pistorius' world IS Pistorius and that he would do anything to retain his position in the public eye, including killing his girl-friend. I think that he banked on his celebrity status, not on hi personal celebrity status but his celebrity as a representative of South Africa, to ensure that he receive clement treatment at the hands of the judiciary, it went wrong and he got a far longer sentence than he bargained for and he used his celebrity to generate the publicity to get a far shorter sentence.

I can see no other reason why the sight of Reeva's father’s devastation at his daughter's death should be ignored in the way it has been.

In my personal view, the justice system and the judiciary of South Africa have not come out of this with any honour whatsoever.

Really? Wow.

[Owlswing]

Really? Wow.

Yes REALLY.

There is also the fact that, as his popularity diminished, more and more attention was lavished on Reeva.

The way he worked the Court, pathetically wandering around on his stumps, floods of tears, the press conference, all the attention on HIM, and his plea that he would not be able, because of his disability and the nasty men in prison, be able to survive a long sentence.

Reeva didn't survive going for a piss!

[Maeght]

Yes REALLY.

There is also the fact that, as his popularity diminished, more and more attention was lavished on Reeva.

The way he worked the Court, pathetically wandering around on his stumps, floods of tears, the press conference, all the attention on HIM, and his plea that he would not be able, because of his disability and the nasty men in prison, be able to survive a long sentence.

Reeva didn't survive going for a piss!

Sounds total nonsense to me but if that's what you want to believe ....

[Brownie]

It does sound like nonsense, so hateful.  If the trial had not been televised I doubt any of us would have had an opinion.
Thank goodness the law is, or is supposed to be, unbiased.  Public opinion and gut reactions have to be ignored.
Anyway he's in prison now so people can be satisfied and get on with real life.

[Owlswing]

It does sound like nonsense, so hateful.  If the trial had not been televised I doubt any of us would have had an opinion.
Thank goodness the law is, or is supposed to be, unbiased.  Public opinion and gut reactions have to be ignored.
Anyway he's in prison now so people can be satisfied and get on with real life.

Would you be satisfied if it had been your daughter behind the toilet door?

I know that I  wouldn't and I somehow doubt if Maeght would either!

[Maeght]

Would you be satisfied if it had been your daughter behind the toilet door?

I know that I  wouldn't and I somehow doubt if Maeght would either!

Probably not, no.

[jeremyp]

There should be an appeal to try to get the sentence extended to at least 15 years, it is a travesty of justice to think that creep with be out in 3 years. He is danger to the public, imo.

How do you know? Have you studied all the facts of the case like the judge has? Have you seen the psychological reports so that you have a factual basis for your assertion that he is a danger to the public.

[Maeght]

You said you'd read the judges statement Floo so just wondered if you still stood by this, since the judge said there was not a shred of evidence that he had killed her after they had had a row

It was much more likely they had a row and he shot her in a fit of temper.

[Brownie]

Of course I wouldn't be happy if my daughter was shot behind a door, I'd feel all sorts of things that I can only begin to imagine.  I would be biased.  That's why we have laws of the land, to prevent people from taking the law into their own hands and looking for revenge.

There was no evidence that the couple had had a row and even if they had, rows don't usually lead to murder.  There was no motive for murder.  Floo says:  "It was much more likely they had a row and he shot her in a fit of temper."   Where's your proof floo?  You've just decided that's how it was.  Thank goodness you are not a judge, there would certainly be no justice, never mind mercy.

However Oscar Pistorius has been convicted of murder and is now in prison so why are we still arguing about it.

[Owlswing]

You said you'd read the judges statement Floo so just wondered if you still stood by this, since the judge said there was not a shred of evidence that he had killed her after they had had a row

Yet at the first trial several neighbours stated that they had heard a loud screaming match between Reeva and Pistorious some time that night before the shots!

[Brownie]

This is from the Guardian, March 2014:
A witness told the trial that she heard “bloodcurdling screams” on the night the Paralympian shot his girlfriend dead. The witness, Michelle Burger, told the court she heard two people – a man and a woman – shouting, adding: “The fear in that woman’s voice; you only fear like that if your life is threatened.”
Burger said she heard four gunshots on the night in question.

[Maeght]

Yet at the first trial several neighbours stated that they had heard a loud screaming match between Reeva and Pistorious some time that night before the shots!

So do you think the judge wasn't aware of that? The reliability of that evidence was questioned at the original trial (the witnesses were some distance away and closer witnesses did not agree with what they said for example) and clearly the judge does not consider it reliable to have said what she did.

[Brownie]

Well done, I was looking for something about that to add to my previous post and the computer went 'off', so I left it.  I remembered the woman's evidence was refuted but not the details.

When she said: "The fear in that woman’s voice; you only fear like that if your life is threatened.”, that did not ring true. I don't believe anyone would say that in a court of law, it's far too dramatic and it was her opinion.  Difficult to believe too as she was not a near neighbour.   I'm not saying she lied, she must have heard something but she obviously exaggerated it in her mind.  However, that's just my opinion which is even less relevant than hers.

The fact is that he's serving time for murder which is what some people wanted, so why can't they draw a line under it.  Reeva Steenkamp's family may not be able to do so, which is understandable, but even they must have some closure now.  Nothing will bring her back and life must go on.

[Owlswing]

Well done, I was looking for something about that to add to my previous post and the computer went 'off', so I left it.  I remembered the woman's evidence was refuted but not the details.

When she said: "The fear in that woman’s voice; you only fear like that if your life is threatened.”, that did not ring true. I don't believe anyone would say that in a court of law, it's far too dramatic and it was her opinion.  Difficult to believe too as she was not a near neighbour.   I'm not saying she lied, she must have heard something but she obviously exaggerated it in her mind.  However, that's just my opinion which is even less relevant than hers.

The fact is that he's serving time for murder which is what some people wanted, so why can't they draw a line under it.  Reeva Steenkamp's family may not be able to do so, which is understandable, but even they must have some closure now.  Nothing will bring her back and life must go on.

OK OK Brownie and Meaght

Pistorious is a Saint and Reeva committed suicide by hiding in the toilet and acting like a burglar

[Maeght]

OK OK Brownie and Meaght

Pistorious is a Saint and Reeva committed suicide by hiding in the toilet and acting like a burglar

Nobody has said that. If you can't address the points being made best to drop out of the discussion rather than take that approach.