Post sentencing discussion and the upcoming appeal

Carl Pistorius @carlpistorius 4h 4 hours ago
In hebrew the name Satan (שָּׂטָ&#1503 means prosecutor (accuser) under the law. Know your identity under the blood of Christ! #savedbygrace

A few of the choice replies

J ‏@juanita_le_roux 11h11 hours ago
@carlpistorius @sanscrit52 And what is the word for accused. Angel?

Ronaldinhio ‏@Ronaldinhio 11h11 hours ago
@carlpistorius being a prosecutor is a job not a cast down angel. Thou shall not kill is a commandment. How will God judge you & your brother?

Mamesh ‏@Mamesh85 12h12 hours ago
@barrybateman @carlpistorius so Gerrie Nel is Satan. What must happen here must we let trigger happy killer amputees roam free?! GTFOH!

Judgejudi said:

Carl Pistorius @carlpistorius 4h 4 hours ago
In hebrew the name Satan (שָּׂטָ&#1503 means prosecutor (accuser) under the law. Know your identity under the blood of Christ! #savedbygrace

A few of the choice replies

J ‏@juanita_le_roux 11h11 hours ago
@carlpistorius @sanscrit52 And what is the word for accused. Angel?

Ronaldinhio ‏@Ronaldinhio 11h11 hours ago
@carlpistorius being a prosecutor is a job not a cast down angel. Thou shall not kill is a commandment. How will God judge you & your brother?

Mamesh ‏@Mamesh85 12h12 hours ago
@barrybateman @carlpistorius so Gerrie Nel is Satan. What must happen here must we let trigger happy killer amputees roam free?! GTFOH!

Click to expand...

I think it's disgusting that CP is able to abuse Nel under the cover of "religious" tweets. Is it his ambition for each male in the family to kill a woman and get off free? OP was sentenced to what will probably be less than a year for his crime. You'd think CP would be eternally grateful for such a lenient sentence, show a little humility, and shut up. But he just can't stop!

cottonweaver said:

BIB , I'm starting to think it might be baiting. Is that possible do you think?

Click to expand...

For whatever reason he does this, I think we should all put him on ignore and not give him the attention that he seems to crave.

jay-jay said:

Quite possibly ..!

Click to expand...

In re: Carl ... baiting.


I hate to be dense, but exactly what are you guys talking about?

lithgow1 said:

Some of his tweets seem so clueless that it does make you wonder. Generally though I think that it's more likely a combo of being not overly bright in tandem with an overriding focus on his family's issues and their supposed faith to the point where these things exclude the sensitivities or opinions of anyone else. Uncle Arnold doesn't appear to be a stupid man yet his tweet about 'goodness destroying evil' was quite lacking in intelligence IMO, especially for someone who seems so concerned about the public perception of his family. Essentially I think they just can't (or won't) see or appreciate much beyond what is happening in their own lives. CP's accident was a good case in point where all the PR statements were about him and how he was doing and nothing at all IIRC about the guy in the other vehicle. So to add to Carl not 'doing' irony, it would seem empathy is largely beyond them as well.

Click to expand...

I say this with respect, and I can't speak for every Christian, but my sister is "born again" and the "formula" she explains to me is very simple.

1. God is male. God is love.

2. God sees all and knows all.

3. God forgives all, if only - and at the very moment - you accept Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior.

4. God's will is something humans can/will never understand.

5. There is a purpose for everything "under heaven", which is always for good and is God's ultimate plan.

6. There is evil (Satan, devil, bad ) and there is grace (God, love, good) in the world.

7. The two constantly battle to test human beings faithfulness to God and Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior.

The essentials don't even add up to a "baker's dozen", yet if you come back to these every time you read a tweet from Carl, I'm telling you, none of his tweets are hard to understand.

(Any actual Christians out there, please weigh in. My information is only hearsay.)

RosieC said:

Colonel Mustard: Last thread now closed: Comparing Oscar sentence with poaching rhinos for their horns.

I am an admirer of your posts, with the exception of this comment: #1451 "And, I understand, life without parole if you poach a rhino."

I do wish that people here, on twitter, and everywhere it seems, would stop this comparison. I'm sure there are others which don't involve cruel killing and the destruction of a species. Rhinos are intelligent sociable animals. They have remarkable vocal communication with each other and the baby rhinos are left distraught after their mothers are killed in front of them.

Anyone who has read my comments on the Pistorius trial knows my views on the farcical injustice of it, but please can we retain our humanity and reason on other evils as well. Thank you.

Click to expand...

RosieC, thank you very much for sharing your thoughts. I'm truly sorry that my words sounded crass and unfeeling. It is the opposite of what I'm all about. You thoughts reflect a very, caring, very loving, and very sensitive person.

Let me try to explain my comment.

The essence of my comment was that (if true) and killing some animals is an automatic life sentence, it makes no sense that killing a human being would be anything less. Thus, a trial like OP's (if one is in the majority opinion, that is) should be a no-brainer and, in my opinion should require life without the possibility of parole.

I am against the death penalty and am all about justice/law reform and prison reform. In the US, our prisons are overcrowded and horrible. They "warehouse" in overwhelming numbers, people of color, people with mental illness, and people who are innocent. (Referencing slavery, it is said here, that in America, blacks went right from the auction blocks to the cell blocks.)

Even so, in my opinion, the possibility - especially for kid-glove treatment OP, people can be "rehabilitated" in prison and, if they choose to, make as meaningful a contribution in there as they could on the other side of the barbed wire.

A great example of that, in my estimation, is Karla Faye Tucker http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karla_Faye_Tucker, who has since been executed. For whatever I may think about it's organized form, religion truly turns some people around in there.

In so few paragraphs that's the best I can do to explain.

Beyond that, I've been a vegetarian for 40 years and buy/wear things only made of synthetic material - no leather of any kind. When I'm not on WS and not working, I'm a human and animal rights activist. I'm also a proud, card-carrying cat lady.

I respect that you wrote me, I respect what you said, and I intend to give it more serious thought.

Thank, again!

akp said:

I wouldn't say `illegal'; but exactly the kind of things I would expect one to do if he was in the Police force but working for the accused so that the case against the accused gets weakened, at the same time without giving the State a clear cut opportunity to charge him (the officer) for his actions. I initially got the feeling from the State's unwillingness to involve him in the trial, and also replacing him in the investigation team on a pretext that I found kind of cooked up just for the purpose of giving an official reason. But as I am going through transcripts of the bail hearing, I am getting more convinced about this. If and when I get hold of the transcripts of the entire bail hearing, I should be in a better position to elaborate.

Click to expand...

Do you have links to transcripts of the bail hearing? I would be interested to read those myself since up to now I have had to base anything about that on a few snippets and press reports from the more reliable press.

Certainly from what I read at the time and since I don't see how Botha could have possibly been "working for the accused". Botha was in charge when that morning outside OP's house, shortly after or before OP being charged with murder and taken into custody (I seem to recall OP was in a van on his way to the police station), a police spokeswoman held a press conference saying something to the effect that they were looking at the case as a DV issue. Permission for that spokeswoman to be able to say that can only have come from Botha who in an interview with Vanity Fair in May confirmed he believed it was DV the moment he entered the bathroom. It was also Botha who must have permitted the release about Reeva being battered by the bloody bat before being shot only to have to concede during the bail hearing that forensic evidence fully disproved that possibility. He was also the one who saw 'Test...' on OP's bedside table and released the information about it being a roidrage crime only to have to back down at the bail hearing when his own side, iirc Nel, was forced to correct him to testosterone but which later the defence proved was not even that rather a bottle of a herbal remedy tetis compositum which Botha hadn't even bothered to write down the name of or check out.

So nope. How could raising a murder charge against OP, and a premeditated one at that, be possibly seen as working for the accused? Where did Botha do even one iota of a favour for OP? A favour would have been had Botha pushed for it to be considered PPD or CH which would have avoided OP this 7 month trial and likely ended in a plea bargain at worst.

Judgejudi said:

In a nutshell this is what OP said in his bail affidavit on pp.6-7.

He felt a sense of terror rushing over him. There were no burglar bars on the bathroom window and he knew that the contractors who'd been working on his house had left ladders outside. He thought someone had entered his house but was too scared to turn on the light.

He then went and got his gun. He screamed for the person/s to get out of the house and for Reeva to phone the police. It was pitch dark and he thought Reeva was in bed. He noticed the bathroom window open and the toilet door was closed. It filled him with horror that an intruder/s may be in the toilet and that he/they must have entered through the unprotected window.

He fired shots at the door and shouted at Reeva to phone the police. She didn’t respond. While keeping his eyes on the bathroom entrance, he walked backwards into the pitch dark bedroom. He was still too scared to turn on a light. Reeva was still not responding.

When he reached the bed he realised Reeva was not in bed. That’s when he realised she may have been in the toilet. He returned to the bathroom calling her name. He tried to open the toilet door but it was locked. He rushed back to the bedroom, opened the sliding door, exited onto the balcony and screamed for help.

He put on his prosthetic legs, ran back to the bathroom and tried to kick the toilet door open. He thinks he must have turned on the lights. He went back to the bedroom and grabbed the cricket bat and tried to bash the toilet door open. A panel or panels broke off. He found the key and unlocked the door.

Click to expand...

I always thought it was odd that OP kept emphasizes the plural, "intruder or intruders," or "more than one intruder," he would always say.

Nel keyed in on this by asking why OP, immediately after shooting, ran right back into the bedroom and didn't look out the window first to see whether someone was on the ladder.

If OP thought there was a possibility of more than one and he didn't look out the window then, logically, with ricochet, Black Talon ammo, etc., etc., he had to understand that he may have shot ( and killed) MORE than one intruder in that toilet, yes?

<Respectfully snipped>

ColonelMustard said:

JudgeJudi, from last thread...

I wasn't suggesting that was the sole reason lawyers engage in pro bono work. Goodness no! Many are very, very altruistic. It was just that I thought we were talking about some of the big cases/celebrity cases. I hope that G. Bing's post, which was written later in reply to your post, was helpful.

Judgejudi # 1772

This is a question best answered by mrjitty.

#1477 G.Bing

What?! Never heard of in recent cases, George Zimmerman, Casey Anthony (part pro bono) or theInnocence Project that represents persons wrongly convicted pro bono, especially those facing a death sentence ? Or of the so called, Guantanamo Bay Bar Association that represents, or tries to when ever more draconian laws permit, Guantanamo detainees ? And there's many whose work goes unknown since bar associations in both the US and the UK recommend member advocates to take on a minimum percentage of pro bono work each year.
George Zimmerman, Casey Anthony (part pro bono) or theInnocence Project that represents persons wrongly convicted pro bono, especially those facing a death sentence ? Or of the so called, Guantanamo Bay Bar Association that represents, or tries to when ever more draconian laws permit, Guantanamo detainees ? And there's many whose work goes unknown since bar associations in both the US and the UK recommend member advocates to take on a minimum percentage of pro bono work each year.

Click to expand...

Hi Colonel, A bit of misunderstanding on a couple of fronts. I said on #1263 “Not that I've heard of here in Oz. Surely you're not suggesting pro bono in a huge case? I've never heard of that”

However when you asked in #1272 “What Makes A Lawyer WantTo Take A Case Pro Bono?” I took it that you were referring to pro bona cases per se, not the huge ones. I then gave the reasons.

G.bing on the other hand was obviously referring to the large ones.

So to clarify for all, I only retired last year and never followed any overseas trials until OP’s. Not only had I not heard of any of the cases referred to by G.Bing, neither had I heard of Jodi Arias until I joined the forum. When Australian trials are on the news, the question of whether it was pro bono would never be mentioned. If G.Bing can show me any large Australian trials where it was done pro bono I’d like to see them.

Are we good now?

soozieqtips said:

Col Mustard - when I insert an image, I select it from my computer and then I get this pop up with the upload option.

View attachment 62607

Do you see a different page?

Click to expand...

Let me give this a shot with a few pics of a younger Nel, a couple pic with fans, a pic golfing, and one with Andrea Johnson ( aka Wonder Woman).




Well, I'd be DARNED!! I do see the same thing but I didn't realize the "Upload Files" was a "button".

What I also learned is that there is a max of five (5) photos per post, so I have to add the remaining five (5) to another post!!

Thanks SOOOOOOOOO much!!

ColonelMustard said:

Well, I'd be DARNED!! I do see the same thing but I didn't realize the "Upload Files" was a "button".

Click to expand...

~snipped~

Nor did I for a long time!

Here's Nel golfing, Nel in a line of people, "Nel -- Gerrie Nel" (007), Nel with a fan, and baby Nel the garden gnome!!


Just kidding about that last one. I found it among the weatherbug.com Halloween photos today and thought it was hilarious.

jilly said:

For whatever reason he does this, I think we should all put him on ignore and not give him the attention that he seems to crave.

Click to expand...

I prefer to post them so everyone can see what a hypocritical moron he is and the fact that he doesn't understand the irony of what he's tweeting. JMO

ColonelMustard said:

Lemon Mousse replied to:

1490 Squoozitips
You remember Henke finally admitting the ammo was his? I wasn't sure if I imagined hearing that!

------------------------------
The answer seems to have been yes AND that it was NOT Henke's ammo.

Questions:

1. Was it Oscar's? (logical guess)

2. Even so, why would Henke refuse to sign a (bogus) affidavit (to save his son's a$$)?

If his dad wouldn't help him - and frankly, never had, I can relate to that. My parents were exactly that way ( and it hurt). Some people/some parents are like that. "While [almost] anyone can have kids, not everyone should."

Click to expand...

Along this same note....I'll never forget a small published snippet I read from the book Oscar wrote. There was a few added pages (actually written by his Dad I believe) and it discussed the day Oscar, at 11 months, had his legs amputated. He and his wife had made a decision and scheduled the operation long ago, after much research (sounded like this was mainly done by the wife) and agonizing over what to do. On the day of Oscar's scheduled surgery his Dad decided to attend a business meeting instead and let his wife handle taking Oscar to the hospital and wait through the operation all by herself. He said in the middle of the meeting, he decided he should have gone with his wife and been there. (Yah, ya think?) So 1/2 way through the meeting he explained to everyone what was taking place and he needed to leave. When he arrived at the hospital the operation was already over and Oscar was out of recovery, as I believe the article stated he walked into the room and his wife was holding Oscar.

I couldn't believe a parent could do that. Not just to his 11 month old son, but to his wife. To let her handle one of the most horrific and terrifying days of her life, all alone. Either change the meeting date or if for some reason seriously that crucial, then reschedule the surgery date. But letting your wife fare it alone - not an option. What a class a$$ dirt wad. Pretty much sums up what a poor excuse of a husband, father and human being this man is.

I definitely agree with you Col.Mustard...."while (almost) anyone can have kids, not everyone should".

Cherwell said:

BIB Actually, we don't know that this refers to the Stipps or Mrs vdM. It could conceivably have been other witnesses who were never called.

Click to expand...

Looking at what he testified about the ear witness evidences, it does look like they were the Stipps and VDM (both taken from Guardian.com):

Karyn Maughan (@karynmaughan)
February 20, 2013
Botha: we have a statement from witness who says she heard a fight from 2-3am on morning of shooting. Then gunshots. @encanews #Pistorius

David Smith (@SmithInAfrica)
February 20, 2013
Pistorius said it was dark, but Botha claims a witness heard gunshots, saw the lights on, heard "a female screaming" and then more shots.

In any case, Police already had Stipps' statement - then why would he give distance of someone who lived further away?

Who'd have thunk it.

South Africa has been ranked 18 for gender equality out of 142 countries analysed by the World Economic Forum (WEF).

South Africa has replaced the UK at number 18, with the British slipping eight places since last year, to number 26. The shocking slide has prompted the UK to question why life is getting tougher for women, calling on the government to act.

Both the UK and the US - two of the most advanced economies in the world - fall behind South Africa.

Despite climbing three spaces on the Global Gender Gap Report to 20, the US trails behind us in the equality stakes - as does Canada (ranked 19), Australia (ranked 24), Mozambique (27), Spain (29), and Kenya (37).

http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/Are-SA-women-better-off-than-Brits-or-Americans-20141031

G.bng said:

Do you have links to transcripts of the bail hearing? I would be interested to read those myself since up to now I have had to base anything about that on a few snippets and press reports from the more reliable press.

Certainly from what I read at the time and since I don't see how Botha could have possibly been "working for the accused". Botha was in charge when that morning outside OP's house, shortly after or before OP being charged with murder and taken into custody (I seem to recall OP was in a van on his way to the police station), a police spokeswoman held a press conference saying something to the effect that they were looking at the case as a DV issue. Permission for that spokeswoman to be able to say that can only have come from Botha who in an interview with Vanity Fair in May confirmed he believed it was DV the moment he entered the bathroom. It was also Botha who must have permitted the release about Reeva being battered by the bloody bat before being shot only to have to concede during the bail hearing that forensic evidence fully disproved that possibility. He was also the one who saw 'Test...' on OP's bedside table and released the information about it being a roidrage crime only to have to back down at the bail hearing when his own side, iirc Nel, was forced to correct him to testosterone but which later the defence proved was not even that rather a bottle of a herbal remedy tetis compositum which Botha hadn't even bothered to write down the name of or check out.

So nope. How could raising a murder charge against OP, and a premeditated one at that, be possibly seen as working for the accused? Where did Botha do even one iota of a favour for OP? A favour would have been had Botha pushed for it to be considered PPD or CH which would have avoided OP this 7 month trial and likely ended in a plea bargain at worst.

Click to expand...

I do not have the exact transcripts - what I managed to find are these:

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2013/feb/19/oscar-pistorius-bail-hearing-live-coverage

http://www.theguardian.com/world/blog/2013/feb/20/oscar-pistorius-bail-hearing-day-two-live-coverage

http://www.theguardian.com/world/bl...istorius-bail-hearing-day-three-live-coverage

http://www.theguardian.com/world/blog/2013/feb/22/oscar-pistorius-bail-decision-live-coverage

As for him charging OP for premeditated and not CH, even though he was the lead investigator, there were other officers in the team and they had access to all (or most) the information collected; so it may not have been up to him alone to decide what to charge OP for. What I am suggesting they did is more subtle.

Yet another example of the perpetrator becoming the victim.

Zola Tongo is the driver of the car in the Dewani case. He&#8217;s currently serving 18 years for his part in the murder. This is what he said last week.

Q. What trouble did you go to, to get Monde&#8217;s [the fixer who hooked Tongo up with the two assassins] services?&#8221; asked Van Zyl.

A. I went to a lot of trouble. I used MY phone to phone Monde; I used my petrol. I sacrificed my life for this to happen. There are many troubles I went to,&#8221; Tongo angrily replied. I sacrificed my life.

http://www.dailymaverick.co.za/arti...-oscar-pistorius-and-zola-tongo/#.VFb7_ixxnBw

Judgejudi said:

Who'd have thunk it.

South Africa has been ranked 18 for gender equality out of 142 countries analysed by the World Economic Forum (WEF).

South Africa has replaced the UK at number 18, with the British slipping eight places since last year, to number 26. The shocking slide has prompted the UK to question why life is getting tougher for women, calling on the government to act.

Both the UK and the US - two of the most advanced economies in the world - fall behind South Africa.

Despite climbing three spaces on the Global Gender Gap Report to 20, the US trails behind us in the equality stakes - as does Canada (ranked 19), Australia (ranked 24), Mozambique (27), Spain (29), and Kenya (37).

http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/Are-SA-women-better-off-than-Brits-or-Americans-20141031

Click to expand...

Thanks for this.

Surprising.

I wonder whether, when they are compiling those stats, they take into account that in SA for every woman who gains in equality another less equal one is murdered.

That would skew the results to reflect a net gain, yes?

Judgejudi said:

<Respectfully snipped>



Hi Colonel, A bit of misunderstanding on a couple of fronts. I said on #1263 “Not that I've heard of here in Oz. Surely you're not suggesting pro bono in a huge case? I've never heard of that”

However when you asked in #1272 “What Makes A Lawyer WantTo Take A Case Pro Bono?” I took it that you were referring to pro bona cases per se, not the huge ones. I then gave the reasons.

G.bing on the other hand was obviously referring to the large ones.

So to clarify for all, I only retired last year and never followed any overseas trials until OP’s. Not only had I not heard of any of the cases referred to by G.Bing, neither had I heard of Jodi Arias until I joined the forum. When Australian trials are on the news, the question of whether it was pro bono would never be mentioned. If G.Bing can show me any large Australian trials where it was done pro bono I’d like to see them.

Are we good now?

Click to expand...

Absolutely, we are good!

Another place things went off the rails was when you wrote "oz ". I didn't know that meant Australia. I thought you were talking about Oscar... as in Oz, Ozzie...

This is my first trial. I have no idea how I began to watch it, because it had been going on for a couple of weeks. I had to binge watch to catch up. (Not to be confused with Cousin Binge.)

I found my way to WS via Juror13. I googled ferociously trying to find an intelligent conversation vs the shallow drivel that's everywhere else.

Ha!