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

I did read that. Tbh I can't devote enough brain space to it all. I think there was enough doubt within the evidence to avoid whatever charge would imply he deliberately killed Reeva, but more than enough to show he should have known better than to shoot through the door four times.

It's all going way over my head. Some legal people are saying Judge Masipa made a mistake, others saying she didn't.

If you can't understand , Ronald, with 2 law degrees then no hope for me.

There is a programme on BBC news just now.

'There is a programme on the BBC now'. Sadly it's about Oscar. It would be nice if there were one about Reeva too...

Is it just me or did the announcement that OP could compete again seem much too soon by any standards?

I am not denying him a right to earn but why would they make this announcement even before sentencing?
Also his book?

Christ on a bike

It would be nice if there were one about Reeva too...

I made a similar comment elsewhere on MN. There seems to be very, very few article celebrating Reeva's life alone. If you do a quick google, half of the articles on the first page are about Oscar P and Reeva in regards to the trial. It appears that she will end up another footnote in the recounting of the life of a man .

I think the law the UK has about not profiting from criminal acts, meaning you don't get to write tell-alls about things you've been convicted for, is very wise.

I don't see what could be in the book that people don't know already and I can only imagine it causing further distress to Reeva's family. I'm sure the manager is super keen for him to write it, the manager has lost out on millions, but I think taste and decency should prevail.

The IPC announcement, I agree is far too soon and could have been conveyed privately to OP anyway. They've said throughout the case that the paralympic movement is bigger then one man, by rushing to make a big statement it seems to undermine that.

I think the announcement was motivated purely by money. If OP competes again it will be a huge deal and get lots of media attention. I didn't think paralympic events needed that kind of publicity, but I guess some think otherwise.

It would be different if, rightly or wrongly, the judge had not found him guilty of any charge, but I agree the IPC should have stayed quiet. And from the IPC's statement it seemed to me they believe he won't have much of a prison sentence. Unless that is a soundbite of a lengthier statement; I haven't looked.

The IPC comment was on radio. There is a formal statement from IPC on their website that says they do not comment on the private lives of paralympians.

If OP writes a book, well.... I don't know. The Steenkamps are the forefront of my mind with this. And with running for SA - I really can't see how he would be welcomed on a world athletics stage in general.....

For me it would be a bit different if, rightly or wrongly, he'd be found not guilty. But he hasn't.

Agree, Ronald, announcement far too soon re competing.

I wonder if they kept getting asked to comment and ended up preparing a statement, rather than choosing to.
The Steenkamps also have a book deal but I got lots of grief for mentioning it on the other thread - I'm adding it here as it's a politer thread! And it's just information, I don't have any opinions on them writing one.

I did see that too Nerf. I also read the DM (sorry) interview with Reeva's stepbrother. As you'd expect , the headline is a stirrer, but the actual interview is very composed, much like the Steenkamps have so gracefully demonstrated throughout, and so not like the headline.

The toll this has taken on the Steenkamps is very evident, and OP is lucky to have a family that stands behind him. It must be very difficult for the Pistorius clan, but I don't doubt even more so for the Steenkamps.

I think it would be impossible not to see it as us against them if you were in either family
I have been amazed by the Steenkamps. I would have been much less charitable.
The Pistorius family have been v supportive, it must have been difficult at times and they also had no part to play in this.
Awful.

Also whilst it isn't perhaps relevant to all. The Steenkamps are below breadline poor. Ms Steenkamp paid a lot of their bills for day to day living. Their book may be driven by absolute financial necessity but perhaps also to try to have their daughter remembered in this sorry tale.

OP's family are hugely wealthy. He will want to write a book to place himself in the spotlight, reaffirm his commitment to God and rewrite his killing another human and performance at the Trial. It will be part of his media rehab. If he doesn't get a sizeable CH sentence or lose an Appeal ( even if he does get a sentence he'll Appeal) I guess it is what we all might do. I dunno.

I also see Sam Taylor (or her mum) is writing a book. I don't have a DD but if my DS was 22 and well-known and said his gf was 16 my eyebrows would raise - 16 is so young!

Barry Bateman is also publishing his book; be interesting to see if he covers the SA justice system and prison conditions as well, so not just Reeva and OP.

I looked up this article about Chiziweni the housekeeper who was at Pistorius' house on the night of the murder after someone mentioned P Being the only witness. If only he could have been persuaded to speak up. www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/oscar-pistorius/10809123/Oscar-Pistorius-trial-Malawian-housekeeper-was-at-Pistorius-home-on-night-of-shooting.html

If I've understood the article correctly there was also a domestic worker at the Stipp's house who heard screaming, but s/he was never called as a witness. I wonder why that was.

I remember the judge saying that the food digestion is not an exact science theyre weight the food has lots ov affects on the outcome ... my opinion is that he never went out to kill her but out of pure negligence an arrogance he did ....he wil live with the guilt for the rest of his life ........

I listened to this again yesterday. I thought I understood. Judge Masipa's reasoning when I was listening but going over it in my head I am still confused.

I also think that if the state had perhaps charged him with CH - or rather hadn't gone for a schedule 6 offence from the start then he may have been less evasive, more honest and the Steenkamps might have got some answers. *disclaimer. I'm not a lawyer so not sure if that was a possibility.

I too read the DM piece and thought her brother's words were touching. And again agree that the headline bore no relation to the story. But that has been the pattern throughout the trial.

Someone asked up thread about a programme about Reeva. There was one just before the trial. Channel 5 I think. It was very good and very sad. should be available on YouTube

I think that they had to charge him with murder as his actions looked like murder under their definition.
I think we all get it wrong when we imagine premeditation to mean ...sitting planning it the night before...rather than going getting your gun, taking it out of the holster, cocking it, walking stealthily, aiming, not firing a warning shot, pulling the trigger 4 times into a locked, enclosed space. Not allowing the intruder to surrender to escape.

His defence was PPD that he intentionally fired his gun in the mistaken belief that he was allowed to do so in order to protect his own life from attack.

They needed to show that he was aware of when and how he could use his gun
That he fired deliberately
That he used thought..
That there was no threat and therefore that the defence could not be used = murder

I think the information about it being Ms Steenkamp has somehow muddied the waters.
We all became involved in the did he love her or not debacle. Whether he did or didn't it doesn't prove or disprove domestic violence.
We were all swayed (including the judge) by his actions after the killing. Whereas many of us know that abusers are often very sorry after the act as are criminals when faced with a life in prison as are men who mistakenly kill their girlfriends?

It is utterly impossible to get your head around legally

Which is why I accept the judge. - and assessors' - decision

And if it is overturned on appeal by the state. Well, I would accept that too.

I still think he will get a pretty stiff sentence.

One difficulty I see for the authorities in this case is that the prosecution was unable to prove OP knew RS was in the bathroom and therefore any prosecution for murder would be on the basis of OP killing an "uninvited stranger" in his apartment.

Even if the law permits this, which doesn't seem to be clear, looking at this in the context of South Africa, the authorities know they would stir up a nightmare of a public opinion storm if they present the law as prohibiting the use of lethal force against uninvited strangers in the home.

Although it doesn't provide justice for RV, to me a pragmatic solution looks like going with CH and making sure there's a meaningful prison sentence. This would be to provide some comfort to her family and to send a message to the public that they risk prison if they shoot people in their own homes.

SA law does prohibit the use of lethal force against home invaders except in a very few circumstances
If those circumstances aren't met, then the person is charged with murder

I presume that is why many SA lawyers and judges think that Judge Nasipa has mis-interpreted the law and not actually addressed the intent to kill element of murder - irrespective of who was behind the door - given Oscars own defence stance?

Ronald thanks for the link to the article. It was interesting and it raised the same question I'm continually coming back to ie how can justice be delivered in cases like this in the absence of a confession.

Judge Masipa's ruling is available to download here:

constitutionallyspeaking.co.za/the-complete-oscar-pistorius-judgment-can-be-accessed-here/

I wouldn't say "many" SA Judges and Lawyers have criticised the ruling, people criticising to ruling is more of an interesting story, so that's been reflected in the media.

Bbc3 tonight at 9pm