Oscar Pistorius Trial part 9

[JillJ72]

Starting a new thread as part 8 is nearly full, here - www.mumsnet.com/Talk/in_the_news/2080468-Oscar-Pistorius-Trial-Part-8

Well Roux is arguing from the point of view of OP having mistakenly killed Reeva. Whatever Nel believes to be true, he will have to argue according to the verdict and not a deliberate killing of a girlfriend, surely?

Yes, and I think at this stage it's all about what punishment is suitable for CH in this instance.

Roux is bringing up the media and OP being called a cold blooded murderer. Judge Masipa says that the court should not be influenced by anything not put before it.

I would think so Nerf . I think an important factor is, will OP be sentenced more harshly because of who he is and the public expectation that he must be punished? From what I've read, and what South African colleagues tell me, it's not impossible for first offenders convicted of CH to get suspended sentences. It's certainly true that he has been mightlily abused and all sorts of rubbish printed in the media because of his fame, of course. Equally Roux needs to be carefully about over-egging that side of it, which I think he is in danger of doing.

I would however expect Judge Masipa to treat him fairly. Apparently she is big on rehabilitation as well as punishment and I really can't see OP being a repeat offender.

OP certainly wouldn't be a repeat offender I can't imagine for one minute but that is not a reason to keep someone out of prison.
Nel has started his summing up and this is very relevant..
Nel turns to mercy. He understands mercy, he says. But is the court supposed to apply mercy because Pistorius could have made millions and now cannot? That cannot be an argument, Nel says: he caused it himself.

Quite a relevant point by Nel there about "playing the handicap card when it suits him" and that there were no safety railings in Pistorious own house so why bemoan the fact there were none in prison.

And the fact that the negative media on this should be excluded from the court which Judge Masipa confirms it has.

Nel sits down after saying that the minimum prison term that the prosecution is looking for is 10 years. He is not saying 15 years with the hope of getting 10.

Pistorious family member "gasped" at that. Wonder what they really expect then?

Thanks for the summary - haven't managed to see any of the sentencing arguments & the news is very brief on this now.

I Hate the way Sky News just stopped coverage? Does anyone know whats happened has he been sentenced?

No, they reconvene Tuesday morning for the sentencing.

Here are links to the sentencing arguments in full:

State: whosyourdadic.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/sentence-pistorius-friday-final.pdf

Defence: whosyourdadic.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/heads-of-argument-on-sentence-accused-pistorius.pdf

It must be very frustrating for the judge that she can't actually decide the sentence based on what the sentence 'officially' might be, eg. 10 years in prison. She has to consider what the sentence would actually mean, in terms of assault/facilities/disease and so on. That really depresses me, as it means SA does not have a prison system fit for purpose. It is awful if a judge feels that a convict should go to prison for a certain time, but has to sentence otherwise because the prison conditions are so bad. I know there are risks and poor conditions in all prisons, but it seems like they are saying 'yes, he should have a prison sentence but since we don't have any properly managed prisons we'll have to let him off'.

I really don't know what the punishment should be. I don't think a system that fails to be what it claims to be should be a factor though, and it clearly is. I don't understand why Oscar could not be in solitary confinement rather than with the general population if necessary, or why they could not provide facilities for the disabled including prosthesis. Whether he should go to prison or not surely shouldn't be about that.

Apologies if I have missed it, but what are you thoughts on what they are terming 'blood money' here, that OP has been paying Reeva's parents an amount of R6000 each month since March last year.

It seems that Reeva was supporting her parents, and once this payment stopped they were cash strapped and he offered to pay this amount over, to which they accepted.

I am quite shocked at this, her parents have done many interviews for which they were paid.

I just don't think I could accept payment from the murderer of my child...

temporary I agree that the facilities shouldn't be a factor. One of the representatives from the prison system said that OP could stay in a hospital wing which would have more appropriate facilities. Someone else (Nel possibly?) mentioned that OP's home didn't have some of the facilities that the defence were saying were absent from prisons ie so that shouldn't disadvantage him.

SA prisons were notorious. I'm not entirely sure if they are completely unfit for purpose but if they are then they need to be reformed. It's no excuse for using house arrest rather than a custodial sentence. (I also think the defence are legally obliged to make every argument possible so just because they presented that argument doesn't mean it isn't open to question iyswim).

murphys I've read that Reeva's family initially thought they would pursue a civil case against OP and the monthly payments would have been deducted from any final civil case settlement. They have since decided they will not be pursuing a civil case and hence are going to return those payments. I think accepting the payments initially was a decision made out of financial necessity and now they do have some funds from interviews, etc, they are keen to pay back OP and have no financial link to him at all. I was surprised when I first read about it but I can't judge them on it. I think they have behaved with great dignity throughout an incredibly difficult process.

I don't think the judge will be that swayed by the argument that disability should be a reason for not going to prison.

I also don't think she will be convinced by Nel's argument that the sentence should be determined by the views of society and prevent South Africans taking the law into there own hands. Particularly in the light of her facing death threats, because some in society already think their views matter more then those of the court. I think she may come down very hard indeed on that line of argument.

Karyn Maughan has done an interview with the Pistorius siblings, it is being shown on ENCA (Sky 517) from 4pm.

Does anyone know how the sentencing will happen...how long it is likely to take and so on? Hard to believe it won't somehow develop into more delays.

I couldn't watch it Ponty - do you know if it's available anywhere?
Also, does anyone think his family believe his story? How many times must they have asked him - it would be so hard wouldn't it?

www.enca.com/south-africa/big-interview-oscars-siblings-carl-and-aimee-speak-out

There is some of it here I think Nerf.

I hope that OP goes to jail but isn't solitary confinement a specific punishment within jail, it's not really an option for a full sentence.

However, it might be an option whilst initial modifications are made to a jail eg hand rails.

.

Sentencing is at 9.30 . I don't think I will be watching to be honest, it will be all over the media. Apparently the media have been camping out again last night.

Thanks Temp

Judge thinks non-custodial sentence would send wrong message to public, on the other hand, does not think long sentence appropriate.

Tasha's restaurant doesn't merit imprisonment