JudgeJudi
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2014
- Messages
- 10,462
- Reaction score
- 29,803
Who will have to pay for Roux' representation of OP at the SCA?
OP will have to pay.
Who will have to pay for Roux' representation of OP at the SCA?
Denying the right to appeal the ammo possession was a bad decision, in my opinion. I don't think there's a single legal person who would say that storing ammo in your own safe in your own house doesn't amount to possession. OP was not en route to the police station with this illegal ammo. He didn't find it. It was in his bloody safe. Getting Masipa to decide whether her own decision was incorrect or not is like getting schoolkids to mark their own homework. If Masipa was so confident in all her rulings, she should have just given permission to appeal all of them.
Is it just me, but this step in the appeal process appears to be a waste of time in this particular case?
I can understand how this step is used to avoid petty appeals, but in this case Judge Masipa's appeal decision has little or no effect. If Nel still wants to appeal the sentence and the ammo charge he can still petition the SCA to see if they want to hear his arguments. Masipa has stopped nothing.
Sure, the SCA will see that Masipa does not support the sentence and ammo appeal, but so what. If the SCA want to hear Nel's argument, they will.
Have I missed something ?
How an appeal might work
The court decides cases upon the record of the proceedings before the lower court and after considering the written and oral arguments presented. Witnesses do not appear before the court, and the parties need not be present during the hearing of an appeal. A written judgment is usually handed down shortly after the argument.
The court hears appeals on fact and since there are no jury trials, it has a relatively wide discretion to make its own factual findings. Because of this jurisdiction, judges have to read the record of the full proceedings in the lower courts
The court sits in panels of five or three judges, depending on the nature of the appeal. The composition of the panels differs for each case. The senior judge on each panel presides in that case. There may be more than one judgment in a case if there is a difference of opinion. The decision of the majority is the decision of the court.
The dates on which the SCA sits are also fairly limited the next session does not start until 15 February 2015.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2014/dec/10/oscar-pistorius-judge-appeal-murder-acquittal-live
Karyn Maughan ‏@karynmaughan 2m2 minutes ago
Mncube says state will ask that #OscarAppeal be heard as soon as possible. On normal timelines, would be heard in at least a year @eNCAnews
Yes
if he is convicted of murder a new sentence will be imposed.
if the state loses the appeal - his sentence on CH cannot be changed.
Of course the state can still apply direct to to the SC for leave to appeal sentence & ammo
Denying the right to appeal the ammo possession was a bad decision, in my opinion. I don't think there's a single legal person who would say that storing ammo in your own safe in your own house doesn't amount to possession. OP was not en route to the police station with this illegal ammo. He didn't find it. It was in his bloody safe. Getting Masipa to decide whether her own decision was incorrect or not is like getting schoolkids to mark their own homework. If Masipa was so confident in all her rulings, she should have just given permission to appeal all of them.
I remember reading somewhere way back, can't recall exactly where or when, but that Pistorius could apply for bail if leave to appeal was granted. Maybe I've got it wrong?
I agree
1- On a human nature level, when one is confident about something, one is not afraid of being challenged and welcomes scrutiny.
2- On a professional level, a Judges is a custodian of Justice and the Law, not a defender of their own personal beliefs and values as such, a Judge should welcome any reasonable oversight of their decisions.
3- The Law is a living breathing organism ever evolving in the service of society no one enjoys being proven wrong but accepting the possibility of having erred without embarrassment is one of the pillars of wisdom.
Is it just me, but this step in the appeal process appears to be a waste of time in this particular case?
I can understand how this step is used to avoid petty appeals, but in this case Judge Masipa's appeal decision has little or no effect. If Nel still wants to appeal the sentence and the ammo charge he can still petition the SCA to see if they want to hear his arguments. Masipa has stopped nothing.
Sure, the SCA will see that Masipa does not support the sentence and ammo appeal, but so what. If the SCA want to hear Nel's argument, they will.
Have I missed something ?
It's virtually a certainty that it will be Roux. Counsel will just present heads of argument, and it will probably only take a day, with the decision being handed down a couple of days later.
Chicken or egg question.
BIB What comes first, the appeal to apply to the SC for leave to appeal sentence or do they first try and get a conviction for murder and if that fails, then they appeal the sentence?
Judge Masipa announced the ruling in a Pretoria court on Wednesday.
"I cannot say... that the prospect of success at the Supreme Court of Appeal is remote," she said.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-30408424
...
I was surprised when Masipa said the State had to pay. Is that usual? Or is it because Masipa believes that this member of a family worth millions can't afford to pay OP's legal costs?