Oscar Pistorius - Discussion Thread #68 *Appeal Verdict*

Status
Not open for further replies.

bessie

Verified Insider
Joined
Aug 19, 2008
Messages
31,771
Reaction score
1,605
Pistorius could return to jail with appeal ruling this week
Reuters JOHANNESBURG
Sports | Tue Dec 1, 2015 12:47pm EST

South Africa's Oscar Pistorius will find out if he will return to jail when the Supreme Court of Appeal announces on Thursday if it will scale up the track star's conviction for killing his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp from manslaughter to murder.

The Paralympic gold medallist was released on parole in October after serving a fifth of his five-year prison term for the "culpable homicide" of Steenkamp, whom he killed by firing four shots through a locked toilet door on Valentine's Day 2013.

Prosecutors said Pistorius, 29, should be convicted of murder and sent back to jail because he knew the person behind the door could be killed when he fired. A murder conviction would result in a minimum sentence of 15 years in prison.

"The judgment will be delivered at 09:45 (0745 GMT) on 3 December 2015 at the Supreme Court of Appeal," the court said in a statement on Tuesday.

Thread 67


Link to Oscar Pistorius Forum Index
 
Oscar Pistorius granted bail after murder conviction

images

Link

South African Olympic athlete Oscar Pistorius has been granted bail while he awaits sentence for murdering his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp in 2013.
Judges changed his conviction from manslaughter to murder last week. He has already served one year in prison.
Pistorius now faces a minimum sentence of 15 years' imprisonment - to be set after a hearing on 18 April 2016.
He will also appeal against his murder conviction in the Constitutional Court, his lawyer has said.
 
Still have not been able to watch - issue with my satellite but it sounds as if he was quite cocky judging from all accounts, tweets etc: once again it's as if he is playing games and intentionally trying to wind people up. Oh well, he just confirms the (universally shared) low opinion. Reminds me of am arrogant teenage punk in the dock UK, over here last week , smirking in the dock etc. I know it's only a bail appln. but it's still a serious matter.

"I have never seen #OscarPistorius this relaxed. Slouched in the dock, texting away on his phone, occasionally breaking off to crack a smile"

"is this what privilege looks like coz it sure doesn't look like remorse- its chilling (not the relaxed sort)"

"That's arrogance personified"

Other people said he looked medicated.
 
New thread cake... We need something to cheer us up!

cake.jpg
 
So he is NOT enrolled at the LSE in fact

Aislinn Laing ‏@Simmoa 1h1 hour ago
"A source close to Pistorius confirms he's studying at the University of London but it's an London School of Economics-accedited course."

He is enrolled at Univ London, wholly separate institution. Accreditation is entirely different matter, you cannot say you are studying there.

If you wrote what he has put in the bail appn in a CV it would be classed as employment related fraud in the UK these days.
 
So he is NOT enrolled at the LSE in fact

Aislinn Laing ‏@Simmoa 1h1 hour ago
"A source close to Pistorius confirms he's studying at the University of London but it's an London School of Economics-accedited course."

He is enrolled at Univ London, wholly separate institution. Accreditation is entirely different matter, you cannot say you are studying there.

If you wrote what he has put in the bail appn in a CV it would be classed as employment related fraud in the UK these days.

In a new affidavit submitted in support of his bail application, he said: “I have enrolled at the London School of Economics for a BSc business with law degree. I study by way of correspondence and need daily access to the internet for this purpose.”

However, an LSE spokesman insisted this was “an error” because it did not offer correspondence courses.

He said the University of London did offer such courses through its International Programmes, with some courses “informed” by LSE staff.

On the ULU website, a business with law degree does not appear to be available for distance learning, although a BSc in management with law “with academic direction from the London School of Economics and Political Science”, costing £4,205 was available, suggesting Pistorius might have made a mistake in his court documents.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/worl...-sentencing-for-reeva-steenkamp-a3132351.html
 
Just a couple of thoughts about this morning's proceedings.
The smiles and laughs displayed in court today by mr.OP are in direct contradiction with the words expressed last week by his manager , who described him as devastated by the SCA verdict. Sorry but IMO that's not the face of a devastated man.

And if this trial was supposed to show the world the SA justice system.... Boy did it do that! The impression that it must have left to a lot of people can't be that positive. Right from the start.

As for today's decision , i'm still struggling with words. But i'm not surprised , just found it to be inappropriate.
 
The point about him being a 'free' man from 7-12 daily under house arrest should be totally irrelevant here. He was serving out his sentence for a different verdict. He's now convicted of murder. Someone tell the judge. He doesn't seem to know!!

I have brought Soozie’s post over. I hope that is OK. I was in the middle of answering and the thread closed before I posted.

Soozie, I wondered that myself. What was he thinking? I am very unimpressed with the SA judiciary. This guy seemed oblivious that OP was a convicted murderer. What did he think the bail hearing was about?

Nel struggled IMO because all this had been thrashed out and agreed prior to the bail hearing. He appeared flustered when the judge started to intervene by altering the already agreed terms. Surely the judge should have rubber stamped what had already been agreed, after negotiations, between the parties involved unless there was an important error which needed correction. I do wonder what the SA public will make of this.

As those of you who have followed this case closely will know I have never felt that Nel has been comfortable during this trial. I am unsure whether it is due to an insufficient grasp of English but he seems to struggle with fluent argument, whereas Roux has a total grasp of the English language. I am sure Nel has sufficient knowledge but lacks cogency (convincing argument by virtue of forcible, clear, or incisive presentation).

I hope the public in SA were as appalled and unimpressed as we are with OP's smirking and general demeanour.

With respect to the judge, was he up to the job? I think not. He did not seem to have a clear understanding of what this hearing was all about or something else interfered with his rational thought. He was dealing with a convicted murderer and yet gave him bail conditions less strict than the OP's original bail conditions, apart from the tagging, when OP was still unconvicted.
 
So he is NOT enrolled at the LSE in fact

Aislinn Laing ‏@Simmoa 1h1 hour ago
"A source close to Pistorius confirms he's studying at the University of London but it's an London School of Economics-accedited course."

He is enrolled at Univ London, wholly separate institution. Accreditation is entirely different matter, you cannot say you are studying there.

If you wrote what he has put in the bail appn in a CV it would be classed as employment related fraud in the UK these days.

Are any of us surprised? OP seems to struggle with the truth whatever it is.
 
I have brought Soozie’s post over. I hope that is OK. I was in the middle of answering and the thread closed before I posted.

Soozie, I wondered that myself. What was he thinking? I am very unimpressed with the SA judiciary. This guy seemed oblivious that OP was a convicted murderer. What did he think the bail hearing was about?

Nel struggled IMO because all this had been thrashed out and agreed prior to the bail hearing. He appeared flustered when the judge started to intervene by altering the already agreed terms. Surely the judge should have rubber stamped what had already been agreed, after negotiations, between the parties involved unless there was an important error which needed correction. I do wonder what the SA public will make of this.

As those of you who have followed this case closely will know I have never felt that Nel has been comfortable during this trial. I am unsure whether it is due to an insufficient grasp of English but he seems to struggle with fluent argument, whereas Roux has a total grasp of the English language. I am sure Nel has sufficient knowledge but lacks cogency (convincing argument by virtue of forcible, clear, or incisive presentation).

I hope the public in SA were as appalled and unimpressed as we are with OP's smirking and general demeanour.

With respect to the judge, was he up to the job? I think not. He did not seem to have a clear understanding of what this hearing was all about or something else interfered with his rational thought. He was dealing with a convicted murderer and yet gave him bail conditions less strict than the OP's original bail conditions, apart from the tagging, when OP was still unconvicted.

:goodpost: You've encapsulated all my thoughts completely.
 
How can a judge think something is too severe that the convict has already agreed to as terms for his bail?

I'm on the verge of giving up caring.
 
This is like 'innocent (despite conviction in the Supreme Court) until proven guilty in the Constitutional Court'
 
I have brought Soozie’s post over. I hope that is OK. I was in the middle of answering and the thread closed before I posted.

Soozie, I wondered that myself. What was he thinking? I am very unimpressed with the SA judiciary. This guy seemed oblivious that OP was a convicted murderer. What did he think the bail hearing was about?

Nel struggled IMO because all this had been thrashed out and agreed prior to the bail hearing. He appeared flustered when the judge started to intervene by altering the already agreed terms. Surely the judge should have rubber stamped what had already been agreed, after negotiations, between the parties involved unless there was an important error which needed correction. I do wonder what the SA public will make of this.

As those of you who have followed this case closely will know I have never felt that Nel has been comfortable during this trial. I am unsure whether it is due to an insufficient grasp of English but he seems to struggle with fluent argument, whereas Roux has a total grasp of the English language. I am sure Nel has sufficient knowledge but lacks cogency (convincing argument by virtue of forcible, clear, or incisive presentation).

I hope the public in SA were as appalled and unimpressed as we are with OP's smirking and general demeanour.

With respect to the judge, was he up to the job? I think not. He did not seem to have a clear understanding of what this hearing was all about or something else interfered with his rational thought. He was dealing with a convicted murderer and yet gave him bail conditions less strict than the OP's original bail conditions, apart from the tagging, when OP was still unconvicted.
BIB - there's just no making sense of that at all. To be honest, I feel a bit sick about the whole thing. The 'broken' and 'devastated' OP managing a little grin when the judge agreed to a 20km radius for his travels. The dirty look he gave Nel when Nel correctly pointed out he was now a convicted murderer. And the laugh he shared with Roux? I was hoping to see a little more humility but no. There he was. The same "I'm a star. I always win" attitude.
 
This is like 'innocent (despite conviction in the Supreme Court) until proven guilty in the Constitutional Court'
Actually he is currently guilty of murder and if by the smallest chance he wins case at con court he will be guilty of CH, at no point is he innocent!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
113
Guests online
772
Total visitors
885

Forum statistics

Threads
589,928
Messages
17,927,774
Members
228,002
Latest member
zipperoni
Back
Top