darrenm Posted September 13, 2014 Share Posted September 13, 2014 Well I think it's fairly obvious that the judge has arrived at the right decision here and has thrown out all of the rubbish surrounding this case which a jury would have been suckered by. Crowds are stupid. Juries are fallible. It's the equivalent of a witch trial, people want to see people who they don't identify with get taken down. I've done it and I'm proud to say I was the only one who wasn't prepared to throw someone in jail after 5 minutes of deliberation just because he looked like a drug dealer. Judges might have their own prejudices but it certainly seems that if you get the right judge (like in this case) you'll get a decision based on logic and common sense, rather than the lowest common denominator of who can be most persuasive in a jury. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eames Posted September 13, 2014 Share Posted September 13, 2014 Yep. Agree with Darren. I would far rather have a knowledgeable, qualified, intelligent, independent legal professional preside over my guilt or innocence than 12 tabloid reading idiots dragged from the local council estate. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted September 13, 2014 Share Posted September 13, 2014 (edited) In my opinion the problem with having just one person giving the verdict is that, as hard as you might try, it is impossible to be completely impartial. You will always have an overriding feeling, one way or the other. Juryies aren't perfect but they normally work out the right verdict which in this case, in my opinion the judge hasn't. Forget the witchhunt, my reasons for believing his guilty of murdering his girlfriend are that I don't believe he got out of bed after hearing a noise and then did what he said in his testimony before picking his gun and going into the corridor before shooting four shots through the toilet door, without knowing his girlfriend was not in there bed still. Theres no way he would think she was still in the bed..... I believe any unbiased jury would have found him guilty on that point alone. Edited September 13, 2014 by PaulC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leemond2008 Posted October 21, 2014 Share Posted October 21, 2014 sentencing today Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted October 21, 2014 VT Supporter Share Posted October 21, 2014 In my opinion the problem with having just one person giving the verdict is that, as hard as you might try, it is impossible to be completely impartial. You will always have an overriding feeling, one way or the other. Juryies aren't perfect but they normally work out the right verdict which in this case, in my opinion the judge hasn't. Forget the witchhunt, my reasons for believing his guilty of murdering his girlfriend are that I don't believe he got out of bed after hearing a noise and then did what he said in his testimony before picking his gun and going into the corridor before shooting four shots through the toilet door, without knowing his girlfriend was not in there bed still. Theres no way he would think she was still in the bed..... I believe any unbiased jury would have found him guilty on that point alone. But you believing something is a world away from proving it beyond reasonable doubt. Your post basically confirms everything Darren has said. You'd have given a verdict based on your belief. Not based on the evidence. I agree with Darren, although I think maybe having some sort of jury or panel may be a better solution than laying the burden on one person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted October 21, 2014 VT Supporter Share Posted October 21, 2014 (edited) 5 years prison. Plus 3 years suspended for the firearms charge. Edited October 21, 2014 by Stevo985 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eames Posted October 21, 2014 Share Posted October 21, 2014 I'm surprised that he has gone to prison in all honestly. I thought they'd go for a whacking fine with community service and house arrest. His athletics career is over then. Wonder what he will do when he gets out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leemond2008 Posted October 21, 2014 Share Posted October 21, 2014 His defence expect him to do 10 months inside before being released under house arrest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villarule123 Posted October 21, 2014 VT Supporter Share Posted October 21, 2014 Farce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted October 21, 2014 VT Supporter Share Posted October 21, 2014 Farce. I love comments like this. It's really not a farce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimzk5 Posted October 21, 2014 Share Posted October 21, 2014 Spending 10 months in prison of a 5 year sentence seems incredibly lenient. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villarule123 Posted October 21, 2014 VT Supporter Share Posted October 21, 2014 Farce. I love comments like this. It's really not a farce. How can you prove someone murdered someone without a CCTV camera? Every house murder someone could make up any kind of bollocks excuse if there is no camera evidence, according to this logic. There's talk of him only going to jail for 10 months and spending the rest in house arrest. Even if it was manslaughter, which it clearly wasn't, 10 months for killing someone is a joke. 5 years is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted October 21, 2014 Share Posted October 21, 2014 Yes it's a bit of a joke that you can shot an intruder who poses no immediate threat to you and only get 10 months in prison but that's the South African judicial system I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimzk5 Posted October 21, 2014 Share Posted October 21, 2014 Just read its he's legal team that expect him to only do 10 months, prosecution think it will 2 years but he will spend it in the hospitle wing of the prison Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted October 21, 2014 Share Posted October 21, 2014 He's too rich, famous and white to spend his time in the general population. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rodders0223 Posted October 21, 2014 Share Posted October 21, 2014 I'm surprised that he has gone to prison in all honestly. I thought they'd go for a whacking fine with community service and house arrest. His athletics career is over then. Wonder what he will do when he gets out. Write 50 books, makes his millions back. Happy days. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ads Posted October 21, 2014 Share Posted October 21, 2014 So he's not going to be bummed silly by the Number then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted October 21, 2014 VT Supporter Share Posted October 21, 2014 Farce. I love comments like this. It's really not a farce. How can you prove someone murdered someone without a CCTV camera? Every house murder someone could make up any kind of bollocks excuse if there is no camera evidence, according to this logic. There are a myriad of ways murder can be proved (beyond reasonable doubt) without CCTV. The prosecution didn't find one in this case. The 10 months thing is wrong, imo. He should serve the full term, but that happens everywhere. The actual trial has been far form a farce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted October 21, 2014 Share Posted October 21, 2014 there would have been carnage If she had let him off a custodial sentence so 5 years ( and out in 10 mths) is probably a compromise to appease the jail him camp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted October 21, 2014 Share Posted October 21, 2014 (edited) He has to serve 1/6 off his sentence in prison and if he meets certain conditions he can serve the rest of his sentence under house arrest, excluding what he gets for parole. The prosecution will almost certainly appeal the lightness of the sentence. The defence won't appeal for obvious reasons, I thought the judge was very thorough in the reasons behind the length of the sentence but can't help feeling that too much consideration was given to the vunerability of Pistorius and not enough consideration for the victim or her family. How vunerable is he. We are talking about a man who had the strength of will to come back from adversity and comepete against able bodied men in the Olympics. Edited October 21, 2014 by PaulC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts