View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Dave The Man
Joined: 01 Apr 2005 Location: Someville, Victoria, Australia
|
Post subject: Blade Runner Found Guilty of Murder | |
|
Well with South African Court dismissing there Upgrade Charge.
So he got away with Murder.
Bad as OJ getting Off
UpDate:
Ch7 Report was Wrong _________________ I am Da Man |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005 Location: In flagrante delicto
|
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005 Location: somewhere
|
Post subject: | |
|
sanity is proven and prevails! cold blooded murder!! _________________ You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
HAL
Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.
Joined: 17 Mar 2003
|
Post subject: | |
|
The response ought to be a weather link. |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003 Location: Andromeda
|
Post subject: | |
|
Seems like a more plausible verdict, certainly. But hard to know without knowing all the facts. _________________ All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
partypie
Joined: 01 Oct 2010
|
Post subject: | |
|
Just saying my brother is an amputee and says people have no understanding of what it's like including the panic at night when you literally can't just jump out of bed to see what's going on. Who knows? add that to the violent home invasions in South Africa and you have to wonder. No way I could say he did it and deserves what's coming to him, I have no idea |
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005 Location: somewhere
|
|
|
|
|
Jezza
2023 PREMIERS!
Joined: 06 Sep 2010 Location: Ponsford End
|
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005 Location: somewhere
|
Post subject: | |
|
Jezza wrote: | http://www.enca.com/opinion/oscar-pistorius-what-essential-missing-link’-dolus-eventualis
A good summary of the case. |
Not really
Link is broken! _________________ You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
3.14159
Joined: 12 Sep 2009
|
Post subject: | |
|
He shot point blank (4 x) at someone locked in a toilet.
He must have know he was going to kill who-ever it was in there and was well able to defend himself if they did.
He claims to have be frightened att but he lived in a gated community with a 3 metre fence, alarms amd with fully patrolled security team.
Not only that he had a house built like castle and was loaded with high calibre hand-guns and the deadliest bullets on the market.
(He was a gun nut!)*
If this "hero of SA sport" felt frightened he should have told a doctor about it before he murdered his girl-friend.
Guilty as charged and sanity (as Jo points out) has prevailed.
* http://www.smh.com.au/world/pistorius-fired-gun-through-cars-sunroof-in-rage-witness-says-20140311-34kqr.html#ixzz3tLkgFvjd
Quote: |
Mr Fresco recounted two incidents unrelated to the alleged murder of Reeva Steenkamp, in which Pistorius allegedly fired a weapon, once in fury after the pair had been pulled over for speeding.
He said the double amputee had become so angry that a policeman had touched his weapon that after they drove away and “without prior warning”, Pistorius fired a shot out of the sunroof.
The witness also gave his version of an incident in a Johannesburg restaurant, in which Pistorius is accused of discharging a bullet from Mr Fresco’s weapon. |
|
|
|
|
|
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005 Location: In flagrante delicto
|
Post subject: | |
|
At the end of the day, he fired into the door with intent to kill. Whether he knew who was behind the door is irrelevant, he intended to kill.
Therefore both Manslaughter and self defence are off the table so it has to be murder unless the SA legal system provides like some US states to be able to kill intruders in the defense of the home, which it obviously doesn't. _________________ Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
Tannin
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006 Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
Post subject: | |
|
David wrote: | Seems like a more plausible verdict, certainly. But hard to know without knowing all the facts. |
But we do know the facts. Well I do. TP does. DTM does. Stui does. You could too if you wanted to. It's not hard, in fact it's a simple 2-step process.
1: read 3's post above.
2: if you still don't get it, read 3's post above more carefully. It's all there.
He fired 4 shots at someone with a deadly weapon through a toilet door. There is no plausible claim of self-defence. He claims that he didn't know it was his girlfriend he was murdering, which is complete and total bullshit, but that doesn't matter. As the court stated, it doesn't matter whether he meant to shoot his girlfriend or he meant to shoot some other person, it's murder either way. _________________ �Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives! |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003 Location: Andromeda
|
Post subject: | |
|
I've read a little about the case, probably as much as you have. No questions about the facts as they have been reported. Call me overly cautious, though, but after reading about the Lindy Chamberlain case I have an aversion to people claiming to know the guilt or innocence of a criminal before a verdict has been reached (and thus, responding to a verdict with a cry of "I knew it all along"). None of us, not from this distance, can be totally sure that he intended to kill his girlfriend. We know that he intended to kill someone, but to shrug and say "it's murder either way" ignores the fact that there are alternatives to murder verdicts in such cases - such as the culpable homicide verdict he initially received. I suspect there are also some provisions for mistaken identity in cases of mistaken identity, but you'll happily agree that I'm no legal expert. _________________ All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
Tannin
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006 Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
Post subject: | |
|
He fired shots with a deadly weapon at another human. There is no question of self-defence, said other human wasn't even in the same room as him.
Murder. No other verdict is possible.
There is no parallel with the Chamberlin case. None. In the Chamberlin case there was an alternative explanation, possibly several alternatives. In the original (mistaken) verdict, the court decided that it did not believe the alternative explanation.
In this case, there are two explanations and two explanations only. Either he tried to murder his girlfriend (prosecution case, and almost certainly the truth) or he tried to murder some other person (defence case, and complete bullshit, but theoretically possible). There are two, and only two, possible verdicts: (a) murder, or (b) murder. Take your pick.
You are quite right to be averse to armchair experts deciding cases without knowing the evidence - we do way, way too much of that, and it is an ugly habit. But in this instance the evidence is crystal clear, and not even the defence challenges it. We have this scumbag's own evidence as to his guilt, never mind all the prosecution evidence.
The simple reality is that you have been taken in hook, line and sinker by the fanatical pro-gun, anti-woman South African macho cultire's lies. _________________ �Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives! |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005 Location: In flagrante delicto
|
Post subject: | |
|
David wrote: | I've read a little about the case, probably as much as you have. No questions about the facts as they have been reported. Call me overly cautious, though, but after reading about the Lindy Chamberlain case I have an aversion to people claiming to know the guilt or innocence of a criminal before a verdict has been reached (and thus, responding to a verdict with a cry of "I knew it all along"). None of us, not from this distance, can be totally sure that he intended to kill his girlfriend. We know that he intended to kill someone, but to shrug and say "it's murder either way" ignores the fact that there are alternatives to murder verdicts in such cases - such as the culpable homicide verdict he initially received. I suspect there are also some provisions for mistaken identity in cases of mistaken identity, but you'll happily agree that I'm no legal expert. |
There are other options under SA law, but we don't understand the nuances of these as they don't exist under Aus law where it would be a totally clear cut case.
Mistaken identity doesn't matter. If you fired into a carload of people intending to kill the driver and you missed and killed the kid in the back seat, would it be manslaughter or murder?
Granted that example could be a little more gray than this situation. He fired into a door intent on killing the person on the other side without knowing who that person was. He achieved his goal of killing that person. _________________ Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
|