Pistorius

I so disagree with an eye for an eye , doesn't allow for so many things, think of the people hanged in this country who should not have been sent to the gallows

I didn't realise the bathroom door was locked? I reckon they must have had a row, in that case, and she was keeping out of his way.

Ladybird really? An eye for an eye? Even Shakespeare all those hundreds of years ago wrote about the ' quality of mercy'. This is 2015. Surely we have moved beyond such old testament thinking. I still think manslaughter is a more appropriate charge but the jail sentence was a bit too short. He above all of them knows he's done a terrible thing. He has a miserable life ahead of him. If you're still of an eye for an eye mentality them how about Vengeance is mine saeth the Lord!?

A terrrible waste of lives, his life, his girlsfriends life, her parents and family, his parents and family, no doubt he wishes that he could turn back the clock and handle his problems differently because alas, NO ONE is entitled to take anothers life without bearing the consequences. SUCH A WASTE, we do not pass through this life for shear fun, we must be responsible for the wrongs we do to others.
A tooth for a tooth, and eye for an eye, there should no exception.

I've never been Jane10 and understand that you know more about the climate of fear over there.
Just saying that the appeal judge seemed to be very meticulous and wondering if the first judge was perhaps intimidated by the tv cameras being there and also there still seems to be a 'rich white, poor black' mentality from what we see in the media. That may not be true, however.

Sorry you don't like what I posted Rosequartz. Its what I really think. SA is a scary place to live. Guns, steroids, fear and adrenalin fuelled reactions are understandable but not of, of course, what you or I would do. Its just not like over here. Various SA relatives can quite understand what happened that awful night.

I'm just very thankful I don't live in SA.
DH's elderly aunt was beaten up and raped in her house by an intruder, she was trying to get to the 'safe room'.
She was 89 and died within 6 months.

Firing multiple shots through a door isn't exactly self defence imo; he must have known that he was shooting to kill. If he really thought it was an intruder wouldn't he have yelled at Reena to call the police, and realised she wasn't in the bed?
Surely the bed wasn't so big he didn't know she wasn't in it?
As guilty as hell so far as our SA friends are concerned, but he thought he could get away with manslaughter or less because he has money. Our friends said corruption is rife, and money helps.

Poor old Oscar is just plain unpopular with other South Africans. Tall poppy syndrome? What sentences do others who shoot intruders get? Many get off Scott free. Its a really messy case.
I am quite shocked by that remark.

The case is not messy if one weighs up the evidence. He was not found guilty because of 'Tall Poppy Syndrome'. Every single fact and piece of evidence has been carefully analysed by two judges, the second one found faults in the first judgement. He has not been judged by the SA public but in a court of law then a court of appeal.

I must say I'm a bit surprised at the concrete thinking of some of the respondents on this thread

All one can do is read/hear the evidence as presented and form an opinion which is what a jury would have done.
I wonder what the verdict would have been if they had the jury system in SA?

Agreed Anniebach

We have no idea what happened that night, did they row? Raised voices were heard. I don't know if he fired the gun with the intention of killing her, of frightening her, in trying to stop her leaving him, only he knows, we know he fired the gun and she died . No one can look at him crying and say they were crocodile tears, they can choose to think they were but do not know.

One life is taken and one life is broken

Mollie

He can appeal to the highest court in SA but not about the verdict and sentence but as you say about human rights especially as this was the first trail televised in SA. So I think there will be another chapter.

Poor old Oscar is just plain unpopular with other South Africans. Tall poppy syndrome? What sentences do others who shoot intruders get? Many get off Scott free. Its a really messy case.

I have close friends in SA, and can't think of a single family member who hasn't either been seriously attacked, car jacked, burgled, held hostage. You name it, they've experienced it. None of them support Oscar's reactions and each of them feel it's clear, he knew Reeva was in the bathroom.

He didn't for one moment look above the law. He was plainly beyond devastated. His actual time in jail seemed a bit short but the terms of his house arrest were very restricting. Its clear that his whole life as he knew it is over. I must say I'm a bit surprised at the concrete thinking of some of the respondents on this thread. Life isn't that straightforward and especially not in SA. Check how many burglars get shot and homeowners attacked.

This feels like the right verdict for all the reasons given above.

I don't feel anyone is in a position to criticise Reeva's parents. Money for loss of earning is the norm in SA and it's clear they depended on Reeva to help support them financially. As for the Hello mag I'm sure they were under siege from reporters and I find it distasteful to criticise them .

I wondered about the case at the time I'm relived it has been revisited no one should be above the law I feel let's hope justice is served and those who deserve it get it .on all sides.

But the fact that the judge who is presumably high up, together with her advisors, seem to have interpreted the law wrongly, is concerning in itself for the legal system of SA.
What about lesser judges? And what if cases are not so much about legality, but about discernment and facts, or lack of them.
I am very glad that this country has the jury system it has.

teacher any decent justice system includes an appeal process. In this instance, the appeal was raised by the State as they were dissatisfied with the legal interpretation made Judge Masipa. It is not a willy-nilly-go-back-for-another-attempt matter.

I think the system of justice strange whereby if the verdict doesn't suit they go back for another attempt. Who could feel safe under such a code?

I think it is a normal part of the justice system in SA for the victims to be offered reparation from the perpetrator.
Why should they not accept it for all the costs they may have had to incur? Who knows whether or not they donated it to a charity for victims of domestic violence?

soon it is wrong to assume that the decision is down to one person (the judge). Supreme Court judges in South Africa always have assessors who assist and advise them in arriving at a verdict. The assessors are also senior members of the Bench.

I'm not usually one for Hello-type interviews but can understand the parents participating - I doubt if it was for money.

They obviously were aggrieved at his light sentence and wanted to put across how devastated they were and maybe to keep the case in the public eye. They must have been very troubled at the unfairness of scant justice for their dead daughter.

As for taking money from Pistorius - why not? It's not as though it was 'blood money' (money paid to get off the hook) more some sort of recompense and punishment. Better the money with them than to cushion his future life IMO.

Any money they gained could have been intended for lawyers fees for example a private prosecution if the state failed to act or if he gets out early again.

I am not saying whether they were right or wrong to do it. Up to them, and nothing normal about a situation like this. Who knows what their reason for doing it was.

I dont see why a poster cannot post their opinion though.

Personally I agree with Anniebach about it being ok to say what she posted.