I’m not sure how common this is in South Africa, but I find it really bizarre that the verdict had to be spread out over two days in Oscar Pistorius’ case. Yesterday, the judge ruled that Pistorius is not guilty of premeditated murder, and she said she would rule on culpable homicide (which is the equivalent of a manslaughter charge in America) today. And interestingly enough, she found Pistorius guilty of culpable homicide. It’s a lesser charge that carries less jail time than a conviction of premeditated murder, and sentencing is largely in the judge’s discretion, anywhere from “time served” to 15 years.
Oscar Pistorius on Friday in a South Africa courtroom was found guilty of culpable homicide, or negligent killing, in the shooting death of girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp. In her lengthy review that began Thursday, Judge Thokozile Masipa found Pisotirus not guilty of murder and premeditated murder.
On Friday, she ordered Pistorius to stand before she delivered the culpable homicide verdict. (Culpable homicide is similar to involuntary manslaughter in America.) It was reported that he showed no emotion as he was handed his fate.
His sentencing will take place Oct. 13 and will be determined by the judge. It can range from a suspended sentence and a fine to up to 15 years in prison. Immediately after the verdict, Pistorius was placed in a holding cell before being released on bail.
Pistorius was also convicted on one of three unrelated firearm charges. Judge Masipa ruled that the athlete was guilty of unlawfully firing a gun in a public place when a friend’s pistol he was handling discharged under a table in a restaurant in Johannesburg in early 2013 – weeks before Steenkamp’s killing.
Pistorius was acquitted on two other gun charges, including a count of firing a gun in public and a count of illegal possession of ammunition in the Pretoria home where he killed Steenkamp.
Is this justice for Reeva? No. Is this an example of how so many countries have a “celebrity justice versus regular-person justice” problem? Yes. Do I agree with the judge’s ruling? Not really. But I am glad that Pistorius faces some kind of repercussion for his actions and it is my hope that the judge goes hard on him in the sentencing. I was watching the Today Show this morning and their in-house legal expert said that either the prosecution or defense could appeal this ruling. So, basically, no matter what the sentencing ends up being, Pistorius is going to be in and out of courthouses for the next five years, I bet. I wonder if his teenage girlfriend is going to stick around?
Photos courtesy of Getty, WENN.
I’m glad at least found him guilty of something. Hopefully the judge gives him the maximum sentence.
Same here! My fear is that she gives him house arrest or time served. I have a feeling that just like in the case of George Zimmerman that this won’t be the last we’ve heard of him (in terms of committing crimes) and that he’ll break the law again someday and will hopefully be punished properly then.
“..and that he’ll break the law again someday and will hopefully be punished properly then.”
Which is pretty scary when you think about it. Hopefully, if the scenario you describe comes to fruition, it won’t be at the expense of another young woman’s life.
I share the same fear. I really hope that no one gets seriously harmed in his future. It sounds like he had a “I can do what I want” attitude before this. I can only imagine how getting away with murder would strengthen that perception.
He’s been out on bail, so I don’t think he’s actually served any time to get credit for, has he?
I think he’ll get a small amount of jail time. I would predict 2-3 years, maybe 5, but out early on parole. (This is on the basis of absolutely nothing but my feeling – I know zilch about South African law).
Agree. Also, I think he is a danger to society. It it may be a domestic violence case, but he sounds like he could go off any time. Don’t cut him off on the highway!
Poor reeva.
Agreed. I’m just happy he got charged with something because I thought he might get away with it. Hopefully he will have to serve the full amount in a prison. I don’t know how sentencing in SA works though.
All the morning pundits were saying he probably wont do any more time. F him.
Not all pundits, the BBC pundit saw him doing from 7 yrs, or possibly charged w full 15 yrs in Prison and he’s one that saw the Cupable Homicide charge months ago.
Even the CNN analyst who has basically supported his version from the start said he may do some major time and that no one knew how the judge would rule in the end.
Most of the tv pundits got it wrong, yesterday. So I don’t have much faith in what MANY of them they say now after the fact.
It seems to me with this verdict, that he really did get away with it. I am so disappointed that this is the result of what so clearly seems to be murder. I realize we don’t have all the information, but it does seem like celebrity justice.
He could be facing up to 25 years jail sentence. And many analyst are saying that he will not walk free.
I’m from South Africa, and this judge has been pretty hardcore on sentencing in the past – she gave a rapist a 200 year sentence a while back. It looks pretty good for him getting the maximum 15 year sentence. Fingers crossed!
So I’m just gonna say, how many people followed the trial closely? I have witnessed personally how a story gets out long before the trial happens and the story is nothing like the truth. But it’s a good story. It happened to may family which is why I followed the Zimmerman trial very closely. I watched the trial and what actually happened and who presented reliable evidence was far different than the media story. Even now, in comments on here people are comparing this to the Zimmerman case but I strongly suspect those people didn’t watch the trial. My point is Oscar may be an asshole. He may have killed his girlfriend. But unless you watch the trial (which I didn’t follow), you don’t really know if he was guilty of premeditated murder. In other words, did he plan ahead of time to kill her?
Let me be clear. I am not suggesting in anyway that either Pistorius or Zimmerman are nice people. I am not suggesting that the court system is infallible. I am only stating that the media does not present the truth in these cases so if you are relying on the media to draw your conclusions, you are misinformed.
Thanks for the patronising post. I shall start by clarify my definition of the legal system to include the police , the DA and finally the trial.
On my conceal and carry course I was instructed that my gun was to protect myself and did not entitle me to be a quasi policewoman. If I saw what I perceived to be a crime , I was to call the police. I was not entitled to behave as though I was in the wild Wild West , because if I made a misjudgement I would be prosecuted for manslaughter.
Zimmerman left the safety of car, armed with a gun, to accost a teenager he perceived to be a threat, after the police had instructed him to stay in his car. (A place of safety) He then shot this unarmed teenager.
Zimmerman would not have been brought to trial if it wasn’t for the media (which you have such disdain for) and public outcry to right an injustice.
Now some may have the view that the prosecutors did the uttermost to win a case that they were forced to bring to trial. Others may think their performance was lacklustre, due to decision blind spot and they were prepared to lose the case to support their original decision. Those who hold the view that their performance was lacklustre, would see Zimmerman acquittal as a corruption of the legal process.
So I saw the trial and saw what happened before the trial.
Thank god for the media.
I didn’t find that post patronizing at all.
Assuming people who do not share your point of view are misinform, is rather patronising. State you view and allow others to come to their own conclusion. If you didn’t find it patronising.
Good for you are you a clever girl 😉
While I haven’t been following the trial, from what I’ve read about it here, it seems like yet another a$$hole is going to basically get away with the ultimate act of domestic violence.
He is 🙁
Maximum Sentence of 15 years and no minimum sentence. I hope he doesn’t walk out of there with a couple of month.
It’s still better than OJ.
What I find irritating is the fact that I’m pleasantly surprised a horrible piece of work being actually convicted for a terrible crime he committed.
It should be the norm.
+1
Well OJ is in prison for stealing he own stuff back.
But not as bad as
George Michael Zimmerman
Darren Wilson
The non rapey Dominique Gaston André Strauss-Kahn
And Robert Blake who was also had a acquittal and lost the civil case. It is strange that money and influence can really buy off a murder charge.
If they stole his $hit you must acquit.
It is a social class law system in the world. A couple of years ago we had a doctor here in western New York who drove drunk, hit & killed a teenager walking home from work, left her for dead, and was acquitted of murder charges because he had the financial resources to hire excellent lawyers: http://rt.com/usa/doctor-buffalo-corasanti-physician-647/
You get the justice you can pay for. Everywhere in the world. It’s depressing. (In both directions — both the poor people who are wrongly convicted, and the guilty rich who get off.)
GUILTY and I hope he gets 15 Years+ in Prison with the gun charge which he was also found Guilty on, added in.
He’s disgusting.
RIP Reeva.
let’s all stick to this case and not give up or get cynical… until we get #JusticeForReeva
Please! Not a slap on the wrist for the shortened life of Reeva! He needs to go to prison for what he did, not walk free, carry on with his new young girlfriend and enjoy all the good things of life Reeva never will.
Now for his Oscar winning performance as a tragic, suicidal victim to escape a prison sentence, q the recent media reports the he’s a risk of ‘self harming’.
He’ll get away with no prison sentence – his legal team will hide behind his disability.
So sad for Reeva’s family and friends – justice hasn’t been done for her.
I think he’s going to get many many years in Prison . 15+ I’m hoping.
I Hope he gets full maximum time for Homicide verdict of GUILTY.
Maximum sentence for Homicide GUILTY verdict of killing Reeva and I hope he is made to serve every day of a maximum sentence.
He’s a disgusting person.
Yeah, funny how when he was an athlete he was always going on about how he doesn’t think of himself as disabled. The guy is an athlete FFS – He is probably more able bodied than most men with legs. Now he’s trying to use it to say he should be treated differently?
It really grates when someone is CLEARLY and BLATANTLY lying and manipulating. We can all see it. AND can’t believe that anyone would be so disrespectful to go out and try to pick up chicks in the middle of a murder trial. That tells me EVERYTHING I need to know bout oscar and how he felt about Reeva… No regard for her or her family.
I hope he gets what is coming to him… This is a slap in the face to Reeva, to her family and women everywhere.
Yes, I also hope he doesn’t get a few months. Somewhere around 5 or 6 years would be better. (Well, 15 years would be better, but I don’t suppose he will get that).
I was surprised that the judge found yesterday that it wasn’t reasonable to assume that he would kill someone in his bathroom by firing four times into the door. I don’t know the layout of the bathroom, but it seemed from what I read that it was fairly small. Unless he shot four times upwards (ie so the bullets would be going over the occupant’s head), I feel like it would be reasonable to think that four shots, at body height, would have a good chance of killing whoever was behind the door.
I don’t think that’s what was meant. He was simply found not guilty of PREMEDITATED murder, meaning he didn’t plan it ahead of time.
The judge used that as a reason to support her thinking that Pistorious’s conduct was largely due to his anxiety disorder:
“I am not persuaded that a reasonable person with the accused’s disabilities in the same circumstances would have fired four shots into that small toilet cubicle.”
So yeah, I guess that would fall in line with “not premeditated” but it still seems ridiculous to excuse that kind of action, as if it wouldn’t be reasonable to assume that 4 shots into a small toilet would result in death.
@theoriginalkitten I don’t know about South Africa, but in US there’s subjectivization of liability at times depending on factors like age, disability, etc. Because, for example, the necessary care/precautions a blind person would take to safely walk down the street are not the same as someone with sight. The “reasonable man” standard is a way of standardizing a judge of your conduct. Usually with the subjectivity the courts judge your behavior as what a reasonable person with the same affliction would do. I think this point was likely the court responding to the defense strategy.
I wish he got life in prison, but from the evidence I’ve heard I don’t think it can be argued it was premeditated that in a heated argument that night was going to be the night he killed her. I hope he gets the maximum and it’s unfortunate the min/max times in South Africa, but the judges hands are tied by the system it seems. If she were to rule premeditated simply bc he’s an evil prick it could easily be overturned on appeal and then he would walk. At least this way he is punished. Fingers crossed 15 years plus time for each additional charge.
I completely agree, Emma. When they said that they didn’t think that he intended to kill someone (anyone) by firing 4 times into the door, it completely shocked me. That is some seriously twisted logic. We can’t blame the prosecution there. The court shouldn’t have needed a splashier presentation to understand that firing 4 shots at mid-body range into a small room when you know another person is in there shows intent to kill.
The problem here is the standard of proof – the charge must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. In this case, the only evidence they have is the physical evidence and Oscar’s version of events. If the accused presents a scenario that the judge finds is plausible and cannot be contradicted by other evidence, then the charge has not been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. I didn’t watch much of the trial, so I can’t say whether I agree with the ruling that he did not shoot through the door with the premeditated intent to kill. The lesser charge is easily established though – his behaviour was clearly negligent. A reasonable person would know that shooting through the door of a closed bathroom could cause injury/death to the person behind that door.
“A reasonable person would know that shooting through the door of a closed bathroom could cause injury/death to the person behind that door.”
He was cleared of that charge yesterday. I believe there were two different types of murder he could have been convicted of: intentionally killing Reeva or intentionally killing “someone behind the door”. They said that they didn’t think he intended to kill “someone behind the door”, because the judge said that the shots weren’t high enough to show that he was trying to kill someone. I disagree with that.
IMO, even if we buy that he didn’t know it was her behind the door, the number of bullets and the mid-body placement says to me that he intended to kill someone.
I think the evidence, the bullet holes, show that he intended to kill the person behind the door. I don’t think his testimony countered the 4 bullet holes at mid-height.
That’s the other thing that is sh-tting me: what evidence did Oscar have to believe there was an intruder in his toilet? No signs of a break in, his bedroom was upstairs, come ON. Its unreasonable to assume it was an intruder when there was zero evidence to support that and when a quick glance at the bed could have told him it was his gf in the toilet. I wish the judge hadn’t upheld that little story.
Thank gød for this at least. The bail extension alarmed me, because whilst you’d hope he has nowhere to run to because he’s seen as a pariah, this is clearly not the case.
The infamous, despicable statement from the International Paralympic Committee, that the verdict does not affect Pistorius’ standing as a great ambassador for sport, and as a competitor, is the real insult to Ms Steenkamp, and to the cause of taking seriously the abuse of women. The judge had legal limits to her influence in that respect…..the IPC has none, and chose to overlook bloødy murder. Is there any sporting body anywhere, with a shred of decency?
In the BTL comments under the live feed reports in the Guardian, someone suggests that when OP runs competitively in the future, the other athletes should remain on the starting line and refuse to race with him. That’s how I feel about sporting authorities at the moment, I’m spitting feathers in disgust.
Are you kidding me? It doesn’t affect his standing. I see. Wow.
What. The. Actual. F*ck.
Go home, IPC, you’re drunk.
That is sick.
The bail issue is awful – even if he gets 15 years, he wouldn’t start serving it till all appeals are up. Didn’t he surrender his passport?
I was wondering about competition. Lance Armstrong has a lifetime ban for Pete’s sake, and he didn’t kill anybody. Thanks for that info.
WOW..I hadn’t heard that, Chris. Way to keep it classy, IPC.
I certainly wouldn’t want a murderer representing my sport, but that’s just me.
Wow, that is just disgusting. What a great message to send.
omg, that is beyond disgusting.
Same as the NFL. Sickening.
He better get at least 15 years but I think the judge is being way too easy on him. He killed her and I don’t buy his story, the judge might off but most people find it hard to believe she just stood there and never screamed as he shot her. He deserves some real time if he doesn’t it just goes to show how easy it is to buy justice.
I agree, the judge did not believe the prosecution’s case but fortunately they can appeal and I hope they do. #Justice for Reeva.
Yes I hope the State appeals the case and tries him again.
Can they try him on a different murder charge ? Not premeditated which they already lost.
They tried him with premeditated murder and dolus eventualis(common murder), both charges dropped.
That made me sad when the judge said this woman being shot full of bullets didn’t scream. Then also said her Texts did not matter. Reeva’s voice was totally wiped out of the trial, sadly.
I know she based her decision on legal reasons, but it saddens me terribly thinking of Reeva in that locked bathroom screaming for her life and the judge saying she never screamed!
Of course she scream. I will always believe REEVA scream was her last voice heard.
Oscar’s houseman who lived with him,never was called? I wonder if he was paid by Oscar to shut his mouth on what he heard ?
It sickens me that this judge believed Oscar’s purely cockamamie story over the extremely plausible and sadly all-too-frequent way that women die of daily; domestic violence. Essentially, to me, the judge accepted that Reeva died from some scenario as unlikely as her dying from a lightening strike as opposed to the tragically common story of death by a gun-crazy rage-aholic boyfriend.
There is no justice here, even if he does time. Which I don’t even think he will get. And if he does it won’t be significant, nor commensurate to the crime. If I were reeva’s family, I might never find peace knowing he got away with her cold-blooded murder.
Ridiculous. He intended to kill her. HER. He should spend the rest of his life in prison. I know, I know, they couldn’t “prove” intent. I bet if he had been poor they would have felt satisfied that it was intentional.
That poor woman. She started going out with a handsome man she thought was a hero. That was her “crime,” and her penalty was death.
Poor Reeva, she dated a hot tempered, killing Monster. IMO
I hope he gets the Maximum and is made to serve everyday.
@Goodnames
+1
I guess I am pretty naïve. I honestly thought there was no way he could get away with this.
I saw photos of him in court for the first ruling. He was sobbing with such ferocity that a river of mucus ran out of his nose. It was genuinely disgusting, and not because the flow of bodily fluids was copious. Instead, it was repugnant because this, it seemed, was a true expression of his inner landscape: no self control whatsoever, histrionic, and self-absorbed to the extreme. The kind of person who, when thwarted, loses all control and cannot, simply cannot, calm down and behave like an rational adult.
And Reeva was the victim of this.
I am so sorry for her family and her loved ones. I hope that justice will ultimately be served, and that he receives a substantial prison sentence when the day comes.
Insightful comment. Basically, he has the emotional intelligence of a bratty 3-year old.
Frida_K, Very well said. His true self is truly frightening and, as you said, disgusting to behold.
+1
Perfect summation of his character. I hope for a substantial sentence as well, but am skeptical, unfortunately.
Great comment. So perfectly stated.
I agree that his actions in the courtroom were a very obvious indication of his self-absorption and his temperament.
Well said Frida
Volatile, violent, abusive, petulant, given to histrionics…..and given to impetuously firing guns as a family recreation.
That type, even had there been ‘only’ non-fatal wounding, should be off the streets until they accept that they have to abide by a code of safety, at the bloødy least.
@Frida_K your comment is spot on.
Well said!
It takes a long time because there’s no jury. In the UK, sentencing takes the judge forever and a day because they go through the case point by point in light of the verdict, explaining which parts of the case apply to which parts of the law, what the sentencing guidelines say, and what case law/precedent says. If you’ve no jury, just a judge and her assessors, this explication part comes with the verdict, rather than with the sentencing.
The SA legal guy they’ve been using on Sky here in the UK is very good – he’s a lawyer and has just been appointed a judge and he’s been on the money so far with everything. I hate to break it to you guys, but he ISN’T expecting jail time. He’s expecting probation – although was at pains to point out that in SA, there’s a form of probation similar to house arrest.
I don’t expect jail time from this judge, either.
I do.
I hope you’re right. I just feel like she will let him off as easily as she can.
Unfortunately, (and that is the understatement of the year) I don’t expect jail time from this judge based on the verdict, and the comments that have been made.
So glad this Monster was found GUILTY.
The BBC legal analyst Said He expects 15 yrs with Oscar possibly serving only 7 if he behaves while incarcerated and he’s been on the money about everything.
Another analyst said she expects maximum sentence for him.
We will just have to wait and see.
Hope he gets the full 15yrs.
He won’t get 15 years, brace yourself, he will walk with a smallor next to nothing sentence.
There is no mandatory sentence and the way the judge is going with this I can’t see her giving him a heavy sentence.
She even believed a trained gun owner wasn’t aware that he could kill someone when firing 4 times into a small toilet.
There is some in the legal community that says the judge was wrong in the way she is interpretated this part of the law and that prosecution might appeal.
You brace yourself, because I do think he WILL get many years in Prison.
I think Oscar is going down on this Homicide GUILTY verdict.
Well I think you are being naive. Like sixer said a lot of experts now say he will walk.Hope you are right though.
I shudder to think how this ruling makes it possible for people to use the excuse that they did not know they could kill someone by shooting repeatedly into a confined space.
You can call me a name such as naive, but I continually said Yesterday he would be found GUILTY of this current charge. The truth is, we won’t know what the Judge does until the October hearing.
I won’t call you any such names as you have referred to me, I will show you respect and say you are entitled to YOUR opinion.
I am not being disrespectful my friend. That certainly was not my intention please do not take it that way.
I am talking about the case and how it seems naive to believe that he will get a heavy sentence given the signs so far from the judge. He is cleared of every serious charge, more than likely he will get a short sentence at the most.
It so sad for this girls parents the way her voice has been viped out like you said in your previous post. It’s also an terrible ruling in the face of south Africa’s problems with domestic violence.
I am not saying that he should have been sentenced to pre meditated murder if there wasn’t the evidence. But the notion that he did not know that he could kill whoever he thought was behind that door is ridiculous.
I agree with the injustice of law when it comes to wealthy people but in this particular case, it would be highly unlikely that for him to be found guilty of pre-meditated murdereven if he wasn’t rich and famous. And if you add that South African Police Service bungled the whole process (no surprise), that is what we get.
He is a criminal now ,guilty of killing Reeva.
I hope this criminal serves a maximum sentence in Prison for the crime he was found GUILTY of!
RIP Reeva.
Sad. So really sad. My heart goes out to Reeva’s family.
I have to say I do agree with the judge on elements of the ruling. She’s made it very clear that it was the job of the prosecutor to prove, conclusively, that Pistorius committed murder, either premeditated – i.e., that he planned it beforehand and tried to make it look like an accident – or spur of the moment. That’s an incredibly hard thing to prove. Clearly she didn’t believe their case for murder was strong enough to establish that he DEFINITELY intended to kill her – and that’s what you need, for a murder conviction.
Culpable homicide means that he didn’t behave ‘reasonably’ – that he didn’t call for help, call the police, leave the apartment, or do anything a RATIONAL person would do if they thought an intruder was in the bathroom. Instead of getting a gun and shooting through the damn door. It means that he is responsible for Reeva’s death, even though he may not have intended to cause it, by acting ‘negligently’.
I agree Jen (though not re bail)
I can’t imagine that the judge was impressed by the defendant nor in any way swayed from a clean decision.
Obviously public sentiment must have no influence in the sentence, but the judge can, I hope, indicate that though she was constrained from judging it ‘Murder One’, she’ll give the lesser charge a heavy penalty to show that he tips the scale at the worse end of ‘culpable’.
Point is…..I’m praying the judge didn’t accept the major charge as she knew such a conviction would be unsafe = chalkenged= free OP. So this verdict may work better, and be unchallenged. (I’m probably being clueless)
Indeed. If she’d tried to convict him of murder, I’m fairly sure it would have fallen apart on appeal. Culpable homicide is much harder to argue against.
We can disagree with the decision all we want but the judge made the only decision she could. I might attract some negative reaction here but the fact is that, commenters are taking it very ‘western’. In Pretoria, it is unfotunately not that uncommon to find someone lurking in your house and criminals are extremely violent. I do believe Oscar is guily. The guy knew who was behind that door and nobody can convince me otherwise . But it is very hard to understand crime mentality in SA for US or most if not all European countries. Judge has to base her decision on all of these things.
Her decision on not guilty of premeditation was based on that HE was the only witness to events that night, when all is said and done. Since he was the only witness, she based her finding on his words and testimony. Even though she said herself he gave a poor performance on the stand.
IMO He’s guilty as sin, but it doesn’t matter.
@maybeiamcrazy
There were 2 different murder charges, Pistorius was cleared of both. The second,dolus eventualis, is what many in the legal community in south africa, feel might have been wrongly interpreted. There is some controversy around that particular ruling, there could be an appeal by state prosecutors.
The judge’s only witness is Oscar and he is not accepting that he knew Reeva was in the bathroom. And it cannot be ‘legally’ proven that his actions meant to kill. Dolus evantualis means he ‘did’ see his action’s consequences. But there are no ‘legal’ proof that he did. South African judges are divided into two at this point and I hope that the decision can be revaluated and Oscar can be found guilty of murder. But I doubt that.
It doesnt just pertain to him thinking his girlfriend was in there, it pertains to anyone that was in the bathroom. Even a stranger. Legal experts including a professor in constitutional law in south africa feels the judge may have misinterpreted this part of the law and as such there is an opening for an appeal.
He ‘suspected’ there was someone in the bathroom. It makes a difference unfortunately. I WISH he was found guilty of murder. He is a trigger-happy asshole. I am not defending him. But law, not only protects people but protects itself as well. Actually sometimes protecting the law becomes more prevalent than protecting the people. This case is only a part of it. How many times courts found people not guilty of the things they were clearly guilty of or vice versa? It is the way it is. Depressing but true.
Now the world knows why in South Africa rate of intimate femicide is 5 times higher than global average….
That stat is true, but a bit misleading. The overall murder rate in SA is also 5 times the world average. It’s not that SA has a specific problem with domestic violence or violence against females … SA has a problem with violence, full stop.
Does South Africa not have a charge for un-premeditated murder? Because I’m pretty sure that’s what happened here.
That’s what he was found guilty of! culpable = being guilty of; homicide = killing a person. !!
Okay, for some reason I thought this charge meant that he accidentally killed her. (As opposed to deliberately killing her, but without planning it beforehand.)
In the US involuntary manslaughter would be “accidentally killing someone” and manslaughter is basically what you’re describing–unpremeditated murder and in SA it’s referred to as culpable homicide.
Culpable murder means he did not see the consequences of his actions but he should have. Dolus evantualis and pre-meditated murder charges are dropped. He is not guilty of murder according to SA law at the moment. This decision is criticised by pretty much everyone at this point and I hope there will be a reevaluation. Because he ‘suspected’ that someone was in the bathroom, murder got out of the question. I am not an expert on law, but my cousin called it culpable homicide from the start ( he is studying law). I really cannot see how they can find him guilty of murder with no witnesses and inedaquate proof. But some SA judges think that Masipa interpreted the situation wrong.
I’m with you Emily. I misunderstood what this meant.
His decision to hire an acting coach really payed off!
He probably watched the movie Klute (Donald Sutherland, Jane Fonda) several times to perfect that mucus cry.
Or that movie with Jeff Bridges and Glenn Close from the 80s, Jagged Edge.
Ok If I’m understanding the situation correctly now, his acting really didn’t have anything to do with it. My understanding now is that the prosecution could not prove that he premeditated (planned) the murder.
I don’t think the judge would’ve been swayed by his “acting” one way or the other. She only would’ve been interested in the evidence.
I really dont think he got this sentence simply because he’s a celebrity. When this trial started I figured he would never get sentenced with homicide simply because there wasn’t enough hard evidence. Having people go on the stand to say how much of a gun nut he is doesn’t prove that he purposefully decided to murder her.
That is true, but there is more to it than that. People are getting caught up in premeditated murder charge, but forget he was also cleared of the second part of the murder charge. Does a person foresee killing someone as a probable outcome when firing 4 shots into a toilet? The judge says not. Many legal experts are now disagreeing with her.
That 2nd part is what gets me. That seems so cut and dry, I don’t see how that portion could be discounted.
Right. I mean, what other possible outcome did he foresee when he fired those shots through the door? It makes NO sense.
His story is that he thought there was an intruder in his house. Because (according to him) he only *thought* there might be someone in the bathroom rather than actually *knowing* and *seeing* that there was someone in the bathroom, it can easily be argued that causing death or injury was not an inevitability.
From watching the entire trial, I agree with all rulings that Judge Masipa gave; I thought she did a great job. When I watched the prosecution rest, I was shocked at how flimsy their case was.
So manslaughter. Pfffttt! He’ll get 10-15.
Which he will hate and probably be livid about, because he thinks he’s entitled and Not suppose to serve a day in prison. I hope he is sentenced to many years, so the smugness gets wiped off his evil face.
Like everyone else is saying I hope he gets at least fifteen years.
I can’t take this BS anymore. I’m glad that he is guilty of something, but I have not much hope for a max sentence. I am calling my local DV shelter to begin volunteering. I know this may not be ok to post, so if the mods need to cut it, so be it-but if you can’t volunteer local DV shelters also need things like clothes, bedding and hygiene supplies as the women/kids who do leave usually leave with nothing but the clothing they are wearing. That’s what happpened to me-thank god the friend I stayed with was the same size and was more than generous with her clothing and shoes.
Thank you, kri. That’s a wonderful suggestion.
This case has inspired me to do the same.
Well, getting something is mos def better than nothing. Let’s all pray that something is 15yrs.
It is more wise for Oscar to spend time in jail than to walk free. SA Public is very unforgiving. He spent one night at a night club during the trial and he was thrown out of the club, so trust me, it will be hell for him if he is not sentenced.
I followed the entire trial and what got Oscar off the murder wrap was the lack of proof of intent, however there are grounds for appeal for Dolus Eventualis. I am of the opinion that if he gets 10 years or more, the prosecution may not appeal.
I agree.
Don’t worry. Oscar Pistorius will get EXACTLY what’s coming to him at some point. Remember O.J. Simpson? After all of his lying about not killing his wife, he finally screwed up and ended up behind bars for a long time. Karma is a BITCH!!! I hate it when this guy cries, honestly he looks as if he is pretending and forcing it and he also sometimes sits with a smug look on his face.
So basically the judge has said that the prosecution failed to prove that Oscar knew it was Reeva he was shooting at.
Yes yes yes Jasrine
Thanks karma for OJ. It seems she may be working her magic on Dominique Struass-khan on trial in Paris and brilliantly portrayed in the film Dsk ( a must see), she may be getting around to Zimmerman, caught threatening to kill a driver in a road rage accident. If only she could work it was he can move in to his juries’ neighbour, that would be sweet.
She need her to make up for missing up on ,
Jimmy saville paedo-king
Can someone explain one thing.
During the trial it was said Security called Oscar and he said everything was fine….this was supposedly after he had shot Reeva, but had not made security aware of it. Is the judge saying that call meant nothing or the timeline couldn’t be determined? Aren’t those security calls logged in ?
That’s one part that baffled me. How could she say Oscar behaved normally, when security phoned and Reeva was dead, but he said everything is OK?
Is she saying Reeva was probably alive when security first phoned him to see what was going on at the house? If so why would security have been worried enough to phone the house to see what’s wrong?
This has baffled me since her statements when she read why she made her verdict.
Did security call him when Reeva was already dead, but he said everything was ok, or not?
Or did she just throw that entire part out as circumstantial , but if so, aren’t those calls logged and recorded?
The security guard claimed that he made the initial call, phoning Pistorius after seeing a light on at Pistorius’s house – at which point Pistorius said everything was okay. But that doesn’t match the phone records.
The records (which were presented by a police expert testifying for the prosecution so it’s not like this is a defence claim), showed a 9s call from Pistorius to security, followed by security calling Pistorius back. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/25/oscar-pistorius-reeva-steenkamp-trial-day-14
So the security guard misremembered who made the first call, and the reason it was made (it clearly can’t have been because there was a light on). That casts serious doubt on whether the security guard got any of it correct, so the judge accepted Pistorius’ version, which matched the phone records better. (Note: I don’t think the guard was intentionally lying, it’s just that eyewitness accounts are notoriously unreliable. Your brain will quite happily make stuff up and present it as a true perception/memory.)
It’s unfortunate the prosecution called the guard to testify when their own expert was going to shoot down his story. Made it look like the prosecution was just throwing out theories, hoping one would stick.
That part was confusing to me. I followed the trial every day, so I wanted to know what happened concerning the security testimony.
Thank you.
Run, teenage girlfriend. Far and fast.
He will not be able to hide or contain his temper.
She should get away from him immediately.