Oscar P. case
- Thread starter pvr
- Start date
Whether he knew it was her or not, to me murder seems to not fit and it seems fair that he's got off on that count as far as 'prove that it was premeditated murder' goes.
Point remains that she is now dead, and to me manslaughter is an inevitable minimum. But whether he knew it was her or not is still an important factor as it's the difference between aggression, intimidation and the actions of a man with serious issues even if it went wrong and she was shot by ''accident'' ; and a person who was intimidated in his own home and reacted in bad judgement.
I'd like to say I'd shake my mrs and check she was ok if I heard a bump in the night, but at the same time I reckon I could understand if I just went to check it out in the heat of the moment - difference being I don't own a gun..
Point remains that she is now dead, and to me manslaughter is an inevitable minimum. But whether he knew it was her or not is still an important factor as it's the difference between aggression, intimidation and the actions of a man with serious issues even if it went wrong and she was shot by ''accident'' ; and a person who was intimidated in his own home and reacted in bad judgement.
I'd like to say I'd shake my mrs and check she was ok if I heard a bump in the night, but at the same time I reckon I could understand if I just went to check it out in the heat of the moment - difference being I don't own a gun..
By the seaside...
+1StevenH72 said:
Just because the prosecution can't prove that he intended to kill someone that doesn't mean that he didn't - the accused always gets the benefit of the 'Beyond Reasonable Doubt' clause.
Personally, I like the additional Scots option of 'Not Proven', i.e. we know you did it but they can't prove it
Jaw said:
I think a lot of the issue comes down to what life is like living in South Africa. I worked and played cricket/ rugby with a lot of "saffers" and how I would interpret a potentially risky situation in the UK is very very different for them back home. I would say it's almost impossible for anybody who hasn't lived there to empathise.
I think that what ever did happen, and what ever gets decided, his punishment will be psychological.
In my view, if you unload a gun into somebody, you have intended to kill them. You know what a single bullet will do to somebody, let alone unloading half a magazine full.
If it is was a true moment of madness (or 'roid rage. As reports suggest he showed previously), then he has to live with that for the rest of his life. If he is a normal human being, then he will have his punishment in that.
In my view, if you unload a gun into somebody, you have intended to kill them. You know what a single bullet will do to somebody, let alone unloading half a magazine full.
If it is was a true moment of madness (or 'roid rage. As reports suggest he showed previously), then he has to live with that for the rest of his life. If he is a normal human being, then he will have his punishment in that.
so its culpable homicide then....
given the reports ive read and whats been said i would say it sounds about right.
i DONT believe anyone who fires shots though a door into such a small room couldn't think that death was not possible but i DO think that in a fit of rage/anger/terror whatever that in doing so he wasn't intentionally trying to kill her. in the heat of the moment he lost control and irrationally shot through the door.
given the reports ive read and whats been said i would say it sounds about right.
i DONT believe anyone who fires shots though a door into such a small room couldn't think that death was not possible but i DO think that in a fit of rage/anger/terror whatever that in doing so he wasn't intentionally trying to kill her. in the heat of the moment he lost control and irrationally shot through the door.
But he is has also guilty of firing a firearm in the resturant... So that could add another 5 years to his sentence.
Either way... Even if he gets 10 years thats the end of his career... No consolation to reeva's family but atleast he will pay a price dear to him.
Sent from my iPhone 5s using Tapatalk
Either way... Even if he gets 10 years thats the end of his career... No consolation to reeva's family but atleast he will pay a price dear to him.
Sent from my iPhone 5s using Tapatalk
Right verdict imo. They could never pin a murder charge, it was all circumstantial evidence and his word against nobody else's as the other person there is now dead.
I reckon she'll give him 10 years. Then we'll have appeals etc.
The sentence process takes a week in court of to-ing and fro-ing between state and defence again and they could call him back to the witness box as well as Reeva's family.
I reckon she'll give him 10 years. Then we'll have appeals etc.
The sentence process takes a week in court of to-ing and fro-ing between state and defence again and they could call him back to the witness box as well as Reeva's family.
She should... but there seems to be a body of opinion saying that he won't go to jailCarol M said:
"He's almost certainly, in my opinion, not going to be going to jail," Reuters news agency quotes criminal law expert Martin Hood as telling South Africa's ENCA TV channel.
exdos said:
Or Pistorius does a runner :roll: