Oscar pistorious being released on parole

Oodles Anger management courses don’t work? Well of course not, if your expectation is that you will attend and be cured of your anger issues. They aren’t only attended by abusive men. I’ve taught a number of women who were the abuser in their relationship. I’ve also taught people who weren’t in a relationship at all because personal relationships aren’t the only source of anger management problems.

Pistorius gets out on parole -- the girl he murdered has NO parole. The comments saying it was understandable must be gullible candidates for any scam. Sure, that country is violent, but he heard a noise, knew his girlfriend wasn't in the bed, and still shot through a loo door. Given the high likelihood that any '"noise" was her, all he had to do was say "is that you" before blasting holes through the door and the person behind it? As several have said, he had a history of arrogant behaviour and gun use (actually gun ABuse). If the incident had been the other way round, no way would SHE be getting early parole for killing HIM.

Anger management courses are much less likely to be effective if the participant is in denial.. OP still denies the charges for which he was convicted

He is a murdering scumbag who should still be in prison. The life sentence is for the family of that poor woman he shot and I have NEVER believed the intruder tale. He had anger management issues. I hope he is banned from going in the same area as his victim's family.

Judging by some of the comments on here it's probably just as well it wasn't trial by jury. He would have been hung, drawn and quartered by people who have decided he's guilty even though they have never set foot in court.

I think it was the right decision to send him to jail and with his sort of personality and no anger management strategies in place I think he should have remained there. He is quite likely an even angrier person than he was before.

Chestnut, would you have found him guilty or not guilty of shooting four times into a small space where he thought someone was lurking, knowing that it would possibly kill or at least seriously injure the person there?

In a matter of seconds going from unconscious to awake and in a place where armed burglary is rife? Add in no feet and the vulnerability that adds. So easy to be censorious.

Aveline, you’re right. It is easy to be censorious.
Would you have found him guilty or not guilty of shooting into a small space, knowing that it would possibly kill or at least seriously injure the person there?

I wouldn't have found him guilty of cold blooded murder. His original conviction seemed appropriate to me. Is he still paying the Steenkamp family?

Im not sure why he would murder anyone deliberately with the purpose of killing them. He would know he would be found guilty and sent to prison because there was no-one else there who could have fired the gun. It would be a very stupid thing to do, basically an act of self destruction

chestnut that’s a very innocent idea have you never heard or seen anyone being so incensed with rage that they don’t think He was not thinking he was reacting to someone who dared to walk away from him, he didn’t sit on the side of the bed, head on one side listening for another sound, he didn’t turn to his loved one and see if she was ok he was in the famous red mist moment
How dare this woman walk away from HIM
He REACTED in the same way as he would react to the starting gun at a race …. with immediate reaction
I believe he has served a far too shorter a time incarcerated to be safe for anyone who may get in a future relationship with him or indeed anyone who may defy him in any situation

Do I think it was premeditated …No
Do I think he was appalled at his reactions …probably
Do I think he’s rehabilitated …No

As released he should now be taken handcuffed to women’s refuges to listen to stories and see women mutilated and broken by men like him he should be made to listen to every word and see every tear again and again until he learns some humility and care and fear Far more of a punishment than keeping him in his house not useful to anyone

I'm rather taken aback at your reactions to this BlueBelle. You're rather personalising it all.

Aveline -interesting you accuse BlueBelle of personalising this. Isn’t that what you’re doing

So much anger from gransnetters here. The guy was extremely variable. I had read books about him and his young life long before this ever happened. He was brought up in a very Christian family. He was estranged from his father since he was a young boy. His uncle, brother and sister are the ones who have stuck by him. Yes he killed her. There is no doubt about that. But not deliberately. I don't believe she was scared of him. Who are we to judge? Forgiveness is for everyone

Vulnerable was the the word I meant..predictive text. How would we feel if we had no legs

Bluebelle chestnut that’s a very innocent idea have you never heard or seen anyone being so incensed with rage that they don’t think
No I haven't. Have you ever heard or seen anyone being so fearful of their life that they don't think.

Mollygo Chestnut, would you have found him guilty or not guilty of shooting four times into a small space where he thought someone was lurking, knowing that it would possibly kill or at least seriously injure the person there?
No-one is disputing he fired the gun, but was it in a frenzy of anger or a frenzy of fear? There is no proof either way so the intention is in question. They should have kept the original verdict.

I think chestnut and aveline agree with me

Two swallows do not a summer make.

Chestnut

Judging by some of the comments on here it's probably just as well it wasn't trial by jury. He would have been hung, drawn and quartered by people who have decided he's guilty even though they have never set foot in court.

Actually, I suspect many of us watched the trial from afar as it was broadcast on tv. We heard pretty much what the jury heard. The jury didn't hear legal arguments and so we were in a similar position. If you are a good juror, you make the decision based on the evidence you are shown. The evidence shown convinced the jury it was Murder so maybe Grans who watched the trial were equally convinced.

If I fire a gun four times into a small space where you are, as you lay dying, or seriously injured I hope you’d excuse me too then.
Most people’s responses are based on how they’d feel if their family member had been shot.
Few would believe the killing wasn’t intentional, especially with more than one shot, whether or not he intended to kill RS.
Knowing that, it’s a bit censorious to condemn those who see him as guilty.

Some responses make me concerned as to how those posters would behave as jurors. He was brought up in a very Christian family, estranged from his father, forgiveness is for everyone … it’s for defence counsel to offer mitigation and for the jury (or judge) to decide on guilt based solely on the evidence presented.

Chestnut

Bluebelle chestnut that’s a very innocent idea have you never heard or seen anyone being so incensed with rage that they don’t think
No I haven't. Have you ever heard or seen anyone being so fearful of their life that they don't think.

Mollygo Chestnut, would you have found him guilty or not guilty of shooting four times into a small space where he thought someone was lurking, knowing that it would possibly kill or at least seriously injure the person there?
No-one is disputing he fired the gun, but was it in a frenzy of anger or a frenzy of fear? There is no proof either way so the intention is in question. They should have kept the original verdict.

Chestnut, all I can say is that you are very lucky not to be faced with someone so incensed with rage that they don't think. It is terrifying. As for being in that position of being so fearful of their life that they don't think let me tell you with a gun in the back of your neck with an angry person at the end of it your whole body goes to water and your mind just goes blank apart whilst you listen for that click. When it comes and you are still alive, your bladder empties. What you can't do when trapped in that position, is kill anybody!

There is no proof it was intentional but the judgement was that a reasonable person would have foreseen that firing 4 times into such a small space would have put the person inside at risk of death. If it had been an intruder, they were trapped in the bathroom so he could have called security/police and only needed to shoot if they started to try to leave the bathroom. It wasn't as if he was faced with an armed intruder.

If someone is in a relationship where they do not fear their partner, they would not lock themselves in the bathroom if they needed to go to the loo in the night.
There is no need to lock the door.

Will anyone ever know the truth

People lock bathroom doors automatically. In SA private security firms require people to shout out the agreed 'code' word or the security staff begin shooting. It's obviously hard to convey the background level of fear there.
My SiLs dad's business partner was shot dead at an ATM as he was withdrawing money. My work colleague's mother was raped and given AIDS by an intruder. My neighbour made the mistake of tooting at a car which cut her up. The driver and passengers chased her through the streets with guns. She was lucky to escape. These are just some examples. SA just isn't like here.