Oscar Pistorius - Discussion Thread #65~ the appeal~

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
JudgeJudi said:
Angelonline

I think the reason you've had no reply is because we really don't know. This is the best I can offer from the SCA itself, and there’s nothing else of interest in the link.

"A written judgment is usually handed down shortly after the argument."

http://www.justice.gov.za/sca/aboutsca.htm

All 5 judges will already have read the trial transcript together with the Heads of Argument re the appeal. I imagine they have already made up their minds by now subject only to listening to oral argument. The court has allowed one day for this appeal, although Barry Roux said his argument would take 5 hours - which I don’t believe he’ll be granted.

Once the appeal is over on Tuesday the court will no doubt announce when it's decision will be handed down. We may have to wait a couple of weeks at most.
Click to expand...
Thank you so much for "coming to the rescue" here!

I found this of interest under Court Roll which appeared on subject link... the names of the five judges on the panel:

Tuesday: 3 November 2015
COURT A
5. Director of Public Prosecutions, Gauteng v Oscar Leonard Carl Pistorius - 96/2015 (GP)
Judges: Mpati P, Mhlantla JA, Leach JA, Majiedt JA, Baartman AJA
 
ApplesInMyBra said:
State's argument that Pistorius murdered Steenkamp is strong - criminal law expert

According to Booth, the small size of the toilet cubicle, coupled with the four shots Pistorius fired through the door could bolster the State's appeal.

http://www.news24.com/Live/SouthAfrica/News/States-argument-that-Pistorius-murdered-Steenkamp-is-strong-criminal-law-expert-20151020
Click to expand...
And the fact he used expanding bullets meant he couldn't have not known the damage they'd cause.
 
I wonder how much money was given to her family. I only ask because they seemed satisfied with the 5 year sentence at first. And they are not causing too much of an uproar now.

It was said that Reeva did try to help them financially. So did OP just give them money to hush their thoughts about him.

Idk. But they seemed too forgiven. Jmo
 
DexterMorgan said:
I wonder how much money was given to her family. I only ask because they seemed satisfied with the 5 year sentence at first. And they are not causing too much of an uproar now.

It was said that Reeva did try to help them financially. So did OP just give them money to hush their thoughts about him.

Idk. But they seemed too forgiven. Jmo
Click to expand...
I think June said they were going to pay back every penny (about £6000). They took the money because they couldn't afford the rent, and I guess they didn't want to worry about losing their home at such a difficult and stressful time. I'm sure it stuck in June's craw to accept money from him so they must have been absolutely desperate. The money issue came up towards the end of the trial and it must have been really mortifying for the Steenkamps to have it aired in that way. Some people can't understand why they accepted it, but I can. Desperation can mean doing things you'd never normally do, and I bet Reeva, who was generous and kind hearted to a fault, would never have held it against them.
 
soozieqtips said:
I think June said they were going to pay back every penny (about £6000). They took the money because they couldn't afford the rent, and I guess they didn't want to worry about losing their home at such a difficult and stressful time. I'm sure it stuck in June's craw to accept money from him so they must have been absolutely desperate. The money issue came up towards the end of the trial and it must have been really mortifying for the Steenkamps to have it aired in that way. Some people can't understand why they accepted it, but I can. Desperation can mean doing things you'd never normally do, and I bet Reeva, who was generous and kind hearted to a fault, would never have held it against them.
Click to expand...

I agree. You don't want to be evicted while attending your daughter's murder trial. But to accept money from her killer and say that you're content with Massipa ruling and sentence is ridiculous. So it seems like op lawyer made them sign a be content clause with the money that was given. Jmo.
 
DexterMorgan said:
I agree. You don't want to be evicted while attending your daughter's murder trial. But to accept money from her killer and say that you're content with Massipa ruling and sentence is ridiculous. So it seems like op lawyer made them sign a be content clause with the money that was given. Jmo.
Click to expand...

....which makes you wonder if they could do that with Reeva's family how about Frank ?........
 
I really am still hoping that Frank will pop up someday and tell everything he saw or heard that night.
 
katydid23 said:
I really am still hoping that Frank will pop up someday and tell everything he saw or heard that night.
Click to expand...

The world would say "Thank you" to him, he would be the next Hero or Golden Boy (perhaps not in SA).
 
Hi judge Judy and Mr. Fossil, I cannot for the life of me access your wordpress link. It says I have to be invited or a member??? I am accessing from Dubai and am dying to read your report on trajectories and everything else you guys do. Please can you help? Thanks

JudgeJudi said:
Wow, imagine coming here first. Where is everyone - fast asleep I guess.

Mr Fossil and I look forward to hearing all your comments and questions. We're still working hard, looking at things, researching and discussing in order to get as much out as quickly as we can. Things will be updated from time to time but Mr Fossil will let you know.

Let me assure you that a great deal of research has been and is still being done. We decided to take a forensic approach rather than theorize on what may or may not have happened. We're letting the evidence speak for itself as much as possible but ultimately it's your decision as to whether or not you agree with our conclusions. We hope you're enjoying our blog.
Click to expand...
 
foxbluff said:
For our review:

http://pod702.co.za/Eyewitnessnews/docs/150818OscarAppeal.pdf
Click to expand...

Interesting. Particularly agree with this:

"We respectfully submit that the Court a quo only paid lip service to the fact that it took “all the evidence into consideration and that includes all the exhibits and all the submissions
by counsel.”

Plenty of valid points about how Masipa didn't take relevant evidence into account, especially given that the photographic evidence in the bedroom was never successfully challenged by the defence (meaning it should have been accepted as fact).

Other bits of interest:

The court accepted a version that was not the respondent’s defence.

43
The respondent’s defence is that he never willingly fired the shots. That excludes any acceptance of “why he shot” and “why” at a certain height or why he fired four shots.

We respectfully argue that the Court merely ignored the bulk of the evidence of the crime scene bedroom and more specifically the bedroom, the toilet cubicle reconstruction, which is in our view the gravest misdirection and a clear mistake of law in the application of legal principles pertaining to circumstantial evidence.

It is respectfully submitted that a classic formulation of dolus eventualis, in the context of the crime of murder, is to be found in the decision of R v Horn, where this Honourable Court pointed out that such intent involves foreseeing “a risk of death”, even if “the risk is slight”, but where the accused notwithstanding an appreciation of such risk proceeds to ‘take a chance’ and, as it were, gamble with the life of another.”
 
And this.

It is respectfully submitted that in S v Beukes en ‘n Ander, this Honourable Court
pertinently held that since: “The chances of an accused admitting, or of it appearing from other evidence, that he had indeed foreseen a remote consequence are very thin”, a Court “draws an inference concerning an accused’s state of mind from the facts which point to it being reasonably possible, objectively seen, that the consequence would eventuate.”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 164 more.
Total: 1,397 (members: 165, guests: 1,232)

Online statistics

Members online
165
Guests online
1,232
Total visitors
1,397
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,780
Messages
17,958,729
Members
228,606
Latest member
wdavewong
Back
Top