Pistorious
Posted by: winkyincanada on 21 February 2013
In the courtroom........
"Did you ever retire a human by mistake?"
Being a rich white bloke in the SA legal system obviously trumps a heinous act of domestic abuse.
Debs, I can assure you my experience of an SA court does not fit in with your comment .... I found the SA system & lawyers very focused on following the correct legal process & IMO that is how the judge came to his ruling on this case.
Your points over his mental state might well turn out to have some substance in due course, but I don't think the state either succeeded or even tried to make any of the points you mention, they seemed to be mostly all rumours & hearsay pushed out by the press.
But Mike, it does fit in with my comment.
He has been granted bail, a dangerous rich white man who has murdered his partner.
He would not have gotten out of clink if he were an ordinary guy.
It's not rumours that Olympians often cheat by pumping themselves up with testosterone. It builds muscle and makes the body stronger but has many unhealthy side effects, one being aggression [which could be impulsive] and this could have been an attributing factor.
It seems to me because he’s a hero gold medallist Olympian white bloke millionaire they’re doing the up-most to bollock up this case and have him walk free.
Also sends out completely the wrong message to all the women in SA who suffer or fear domestic abuse.
Just my thoughts anyway ~
Suppose we’ll just have to wait until June for the next ripping instalment of this bathroom soap opera.
Debs
No need for a trial then.
What there is no need for is bail. He's obviously far too dangerous.
The trial isn't until June.
I would have thought the most appropriate action would be to hold him in a secure psychiatric hospital for mental health assessment.
Was he blood tested for alcohol, drugs, steroid abuse [testosterone]?
There are reports of him having a violent temper, has this been verified?
Why was he so insecure he needed to own six guns, at least one of them being a powerful assault rife with the capability of killing someone half a mile away?
He didn’t seem all there to me before this happened, now it’s just conformation of the fact he’s a man with serious issues.
Letting him out on bail is a huge mistake, he’s a dangerous man who could kill again.
Being a rich white bloke in the SA legal system obviously trumps a heinous act of domestic abuse.
Debs
Having lived most of my life in South Africa I can assure you that your last sentence is wide of the mark. If anything rich white blokes have a target on their back a mile wide. Although I will concede that, just like any Western country, money does buy the best legal representation. However that is not unique to South Africa.
But to elaborate on my initial comment, the South African legal system is incredibly robust and respected and is built on sound law and judicial precedent - there is little room for emotional or political motives to sway a judgement. So much so that corrupt politicians in South Africa have literally needed to bring in new laws or disband investigative units to escape prosecution (although that is another matter entirely, as is the largely inept Police force). There is a piece on the BBC website that would largely support my opinion here
It is important to note I am not standing up for Oscar Pistorius merely the legal process. Even the judge who granted him bail said that there are a number of points in his affidavit that were improbable or problematic.
As for the question about gun ownership and insecurity, gun ownership in South African is relatively common place, especially in the Afrikaner culture - it has nothing to do with insecurity. While I never owned one myself I knew people who did and personally witnessed guns being used both in committing crimes and self defence. Neither was pretty.
But Mike, it does fit in with my comment.
He has been granted bail, a dangerous rich white man who has murdered his partner.
He would not have gotten out of clink if he were an ordinary guy.
Debs you are making assumptions about another countries legal system that does not fit into my experiences in SA & I doubt you have any experience of that country based on your comments. The SA state, the legal system & the police are mostly black/coloured these days. The old apartheid days are long long gone.
Your opinions seem to indicate you have a down'er on rich & white & SA in general & now its Olympians.
You are assuming what you have heard in the press about his metal & other characteristics is fact - the state did not pursue any of these to any degree as a basis for objecting to bail.
He is not considered dangerous by the magistrate (a coloured man) he is also not considered a flight risk as he is so well known & hiding anywhere in the world would be next to impossible for him; so why keep him in jail at the expense of the state.
No need for a trial then.
What there is no need for is bail. He's obviously far too dangerous.
The trial isn't until June.
June? Reliable link please.
You do know that however strongly you express opinions doesn't actually make them facts?
He is not considered dangerous by the magistrate (a coloured man) he is also not considered a flight risk as he is so well known & hiding anywhere in the world would be next to impossible for him; so why keep him in jail at the expense of the state.
Yeah, let him go free,
and why not give him back all his guns and tell him to go shoot a few more women 
The trial isn't until June.
June is another bail hearing
The trail will probably not take place for another year or more. The backlog - a serious concern in SA - has resulted in some being in held in custody pending trail over 2 years.
liar killer lock him up simple
In the UK there is a presumption of innocence until proven guilty in a court of law. I assume it is the same in SA? Whatever resident bigots and or those not privy to facts as yet undertermined might think or wish for.
I'm with Derry here. Trial by media is never a good idea, sentencing even less. I'm sure many of us have the occasional emotional reaction to what we read about and think some who are guilty of particularly heinous crimes should be taken out and shot. Thankfully we have a judicial system that on the whole seems pretty good at removing emotion from trails and sentencing.
On a lighter note, I wonder if one of the conditions of Mr P's bail is the wearing of an electronic ankle tag? Ho Ho.
MDS
He is not considered dangerous by the magistrate (a coloured man) he is also not considered a flight risk as he is so well known & hiding anywhere in the world would be next to impossible for him; so why keep him in jail at the expense of the state.
Yeah, let him go free,
and why not give him back all his guns and tell him to go shoot a few more women
...and here is a perfect example of why 'trial by your peers' is problematic. The potential for emotions and prejudice to obfuscate the truth or ignore the rule of law.
A jury is simply 12 people too stupid to figure out how to get out of doing jury duty. I hope my fate is never in the hands of such a group of of untrained, inexperienced and often ignorant people. The sooner we do away with the notion the better.
But nobody seemed to get my joke...
Thanks for that insult.
steve (Who has done UK just service three times)
What I don't understand is why the (it would seem international) media are giving this whole event so much publicity.
It's just another tragic death. There are thousands very day of the week, why the fuss about this one? Why does the alleged perpetrator justify this amount of attention?
steve
Because it involves the most famous paralympic athlete in the world. The media feel they have had to 'big up' the paralympics events and athletes for the last couple of years. "Wow, they're just like us!" , "And they're so noble too..", excellent back stories, tragi-TV, more coverage = more money = more jobs. And now, now they have the fallen hero, the real tragedy. So bad, so good, they didn't even have make it up. It's real life death drama. And "...sh*t, the dude really fkd up. Big time. He really is just like a normal person". "Hang him. Save him. Hang him. Save him. No tell you what, if he's guilty we get to crucify him, if he's innocent, he's another OJ Simpson, only he's got no legs...!" "Fkn brilliant!"
Yes, and the victim being very, shall we say, 'photogenic' is probably an additional attraction for the media too.
MDS
A jury is simply 12 people too stupid to figure out how to get out of doing jury duty. I hope my fate is never in the hands of such a group of of untrained, inexperienced and often ignorant people. The sooner we do away with the notion the better.
But nobody seemed to get my joke...
Odd isn't it.
If decisions were placed in the hands of the 'ruling elite' I suspect we'd complain. If Juries are given the role they are 'inexperienced and ignorant'.
As for getting out of jury duty, personally I consider it a responsibility. I am subject to the system therefore I should be prepared to contribute to the system if called. I don't see it as 'somebody else's problem'.
I'd rather be tried by me peers than by somebody appointed from a very narrow section of society in ways that are totally opaque to me.
Bruce
My own experience of Jury duty was something of an eye opener. 11 sensible people and one nutcase who had it in for the police saying they fitted everyone up and it should be them in the dock. The accused was clearly guilty in our case but he would not shift from his fixed view that the fuzz were scum....as he put it. G
in the family is brother is charge with killing someone , car incident
The police have apparently told Reeva's family that her PM shows she was beaten to death with a cricket bat before being shot. If true this puts a slightly different light on things.
The police have apparently told Reeva's family that her PM shows she was beaten to death with a cricket bat before being shot. If true this puts a slightly different light on things.
If you saw that on the Internet, it MUST be true!
A jury is simply 12 people too stupid to figure out how to get out of doing jury duty. I hope my fate is never in the hands of such a group of of untrained, inexperienced and often ignorant people. The sooner we do away with the notion the better.
But nobody seemed to get my joke...
Odd isn't it.
If decisions were placed in the hands of the 'ruling elite' I suspect we'd complain. If Juries are given the role they are 'inexperienced and ignorant'.
As for getting out of jury duty, personally I consider it a responsibility. I am subject to the system therefore I should be prepared to contribute to the system if called. I don't see it as 'somebody else's problem'.
I'd rather be tried by me peers than by somebody appointed from a very narrow section of society in ways that are totally opaque to me.
Bruce
A jury is simply 12 people too stupid to figure out how to get out of doing jury duty. I hope my fate is never in the hands of such a group of of untrained, inexperienced and often ignorant people. The sooner we do away with the notion the better.
But nobody seemed to get my joke...
I knew a gun maniac once who thought it was better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6...