To think that being broke and 'a broken man' doesn't mean Oscar Pistorius shouldn't serve a jail sentence

[meltedmonterayjack]

I absolutely HATE the "He's a broken man" line that is trotted out in the majority of court cases. I'm sure having to go through a long court case is a horrible experience but why on earth should that be a mitigating factor when it comes to a judge considering sentencing?

And if he hadn't done what he'd done he'd probably not be broke either. I feel really angry when I see reports on this.

When my ex-H was sentenced, his defence did the whole 'broken man' thing. He perhaps wouldn't have been a broken man if he hadn't a) committed a criminal offence in the first place and b) been caught and then tried for it. Luckily, although the sentence was way too lenient, the judge wasn't having any of it and he did get a jail sentence. I think I'm probably projecting here, but I felt really angry when Pistorius's defence came out with that cliched line.

Standard last ditch attempt to reduce sentence.

Most Bar Associations have the rule that defence counsel make "every effort possible", to avoid any accusation of professional incompetence. That's all this is.

When you consider what Levi Bellfield's team did to Millie Dowler's father...

I agree completely, he's a broken man and she's dead, both are his fault. He is not the victim in this hideous, tragic event.

Agreed, he's broken himself through his own actions

Of course he's a broken man. He destroyed two lives. If he wasn't broken he'd be a psychopath. You still go to jail though, for killing your girlfriend (or you do in a normal world but maybe not in a 'lets all feel sorry for white men who kill' world).

He'll eventually recover from being a "broken man". Reeva Steencamp won't ever recover, though. He should be in jail, for a long time.

It is the role of his defence team to attempt to portray him in a positive light and try to secure as lenient a sentence as possible.

It's their JOB and therefore what they are paid for. Is in then the responsibility of a jury and Judge to weigh up the evidence and make a judgement.

A civilised society should always offer a defence for people accused of/convicted of serious crimes. Doesn't mean it will result in leniency but it is important that it happens.

I hope to god the judge does the right thing and sends him down. He might be vulnerable in jail, but Reeva Steencamp was vulnerable holed up in the bathroom with a man with a gun on the other side.

coffeeslave that's my thought entirely - he'll recover (I read something about him having a new girlfriend????!), but his girlfriend and her family will never recover.

I agree with the OP. He should go to jail.

I'm made very uncomfortable by "he shouldn't go to jail because jail's a nasty place." Why would that be a special mitigating factor for him - surely it's true for everyone?

But I agree it's his defence team's job to do everything they can.

It will be an absolute farce if he avoids jail. A piss take of their judicial system.

I don't believe he is broken, either. Hasn't he got a new girlfriend?

I don't doubt he is a broken man. There are no winners here. However I would suggest without a shadow of a doubt that Reeva Steinkamp's family are far far more broken

I read that he has a new girlfriend Rooners. I wonder what would possess anyone to be his girlfriend? You'd not dare go to the loo in the night if you shared a bed.

I have an awful feeling that he won't be jailed. I hope I'm wrong. I do agree his defence team have to do what they can but to trot out that 'broken man' thing is such a ridiculous cliche. I hope no judge would take that seriously. I was seething when ex's defence piped up with that one. Oh and he'd lost everything too according to his defence. Ummm yes. Because HE made sure of that.

I can't believe that there is even debate about him going to jail. At the very least, he has been unbelievably negligent, well and truly criminally so. I think he probably did murder her. Broken man? I expect her family are broken too. I can't see that he is too disabled to go to jail. His disability doesn't seem to hold him back much.

FFS. If he got off and killed someone else would people try to claim it was during a flashback from last time?!

Probably Irina. He'd be suffering from PTSD no doubt. Which reminds me my ex's defence claimed ex had PTSD as well as being broken! Which proves defence teams really will sink to ridiculous depths to come up with mitigating factors.

Hadley Freeman has written a great piece for the guardian about this (sorry can't link from phone).

my thoughts are with her family. this must be torture for them

don't think this will go far, south african jails are full of broken repentant men

great post from a mn blogger

redred and truffle - both pieces really interesting. Hadley Freeman has summed it up really well imo. Pistorious is NOT the victim here. His defence might state he is and Pistorious's snivelling and vomitting seem to be trying to convince everyone he is. Insulting and traumatic for Steencamp's family to have to see and hear.

You are alive to post.

Reeva cant tell her story.

YABU to draw any such comparison between your situation and that of Reeva

YABU to project your emotions onto a trial in another country

YABU to suggest your able bodied ex can be compared with Pistorious situation in gaol.

Do I think he should serve time? Yes. But his crime is not comparable to your ex.

Oscar's vomiting and crying could be quite genuine. All terribly sad, but he killed a young woman for absolutely no reason. The only acceptable reason might be self defense- totally and obviously not arguable here. The Steenkamps have no doubt done a lot of crying too, and will continue to do so. He needs a long jail sentence. Also, no self justifying books or interviews when he does get out. He may well feel remorse, but there is obviously something very wrong in this man's head, psychiatric or psychological, and I can't see any way it could be guaranteed that he could not do something like this again.

I'm not for one minute suggesting that my situation is ANYTHING like this case foxglove. The only thing they have in common (as so many cases will have in common) is how defence lawyers trot out insulting mitigating factors such as client is 'broken' or has 'lost everything'. These seem to be a stock phrases and imo absolutely no reason why someone should not receive a prison sentence if their crime warrants one.

TheMagicChicken YABU with that nasty post.

Melted I agree with you. Frankly, I'd break him myself, willingly. How in god's name they decided he wasn't guilty of her murder I'll never know. It's a disgrace. If he doesn't go to jail I wouldn't want to be him out on the streets.

I think (and hope) that him already having another girlfriend will go against him - yeah, he's so fucking broken over killing Riva he's just had to fall into some other girls pants. ffs.

Sorry Melted- was not really thinking of your op when I posted. More of a general comment. Indeed you haven't attempted to equate the two situations.