Blade Runner becomes Blade Gunner **Mod Warning Read OP""

Macavity.

They should take away his fake legs as punishment.

Pumpkinseeds

Yarf Yarf wrote: »

I can't see him getting back into sport in a major way. Who would give him sponsorship now? Everyone in the world bar the judge thinks he's a murderer. It would be a public relations nightmare. He'd be a liability more than anything.

I find this whole business of arguing about what kind of punishment he should get a bit bizarre. The whole thing seems to be more concerned with how difficult certain kinds of punishment would be for him than what is actually a fitting way to hold this guy accountable. Prison isn't supposed to be easy. The punishment should fit the crime and he killed someone, whether it was deliberate or not. House arrest or community service is an insult to the victim and her family.

Yeah, listening to his lawyer argue that he should be sentenced to house arrest in a relatives mansion and should do something like carrying water as part of a community service programme:eek: How in Hell is that a punishment. It's still all about 'poor Oscar'. I can see him getting a suspended sentence, so essentially getting away with it. As for sponsorship, I'm cynical enough to believe that there are still companies out there who believe the old no publicity is bad publicity line. Maybe some gun manufacturer will use him in their advertising.:D

bodhrandude

I love the 8 bit madness of Circlont 6A, its like Aphex Twin's ode to the Pac Man EP, the dubsteppy madness in the middle and the way he introduces the indie guitar effect at the end, quite a cool track actually.

Guy:Incognito

So what are we betting the sentence will be?
My money's on something non custodial. House arrest or somesuch.

robinph

I'd reckon a couple of years custodial, enough that the number sounds big enough now, but he'll be out on licence at half the term. I think they would stick him in a hospital wing.

gramar

I don't think he'll serve any time in jail.

Mr Freeze

robinph wrote: »

I'd reckon a couple of years custodial, enough that the number sounds big enough now, but he'll be out on licence at half the term. I think they would stick him in a hospital wing.

That's what should happen.

But I don't think he will serve a day. Nothing surprises me any more with this case.

ThisRegard

This judge is painful. Suspended suspense or house arrest is all I'd say.

FactCheck

The prosecutors indicated that if the sentence does not include a significant prison sentence, they will be appealing the judge's verdict on unpremeditated murder.

I think the circus is far from over.

brimal

Judge has ruled out suspended sentence or community service/house arrest

ThisRegard

brimal wrote: »

Judge has ruled out suspended sentence or community service/house arrest

The way she was going on earlier about how she has never ever seen someone as remorseful as him, it sounded like she might let him walk.

She must be getting paid by the hour.

Meathlass

It's very drawn out isn't it.

I suppose though we get an idea of the judge's rationale in choosing the sentence but presumably this opens the door to appeals.

brimal

I think he will get 10 years.

She cited a similar case that resulted in 8 years, although OP's case is more serious

Meathlass

5 years

Meathlass

What would a manslaughter charge get here?

ThisRegard

brimal wrote: »

although OP's case is more serious

Oscar started this thread :eek:

Albertofrog

He just got a max of 5 years

brimal

Albertofrog wrote: »

He just got a max of 5 years

I heard her say max. too, that's interesting. Didn't think the max. was so low

Meathlass

He got 3 years for the firearms charge which was suspended for 5 years

Lone Stone

5 years what a load of bollox, the poor family must be furious.

Rory28

Madness. If he was caught with a bit of drugs he would get longer than that.

robinph

Sounds appropriate to me considering the case before the judge.

Can't see any grounds for appeal from anyone on this now.

Merkin

At least he got a custodial sentence. Thought at one stage he might not.

AudreyHepburn

The correct verdict overall IMO. No matter what way you try to spin it there was just never enough evidence for premeditated murder. Any other verdict would have been easily and rightly appealed by the defence.

Akrasia

The judge had a crush on him

ABajaninCork

Joke of a sentence. If he wasn't famous, he'd have been looking at a murder rap and death sentence. SHAME, SHAME, SHAME on the judge and the South African judicial system. :mad:

jobless

so he'll be out in under 3 years with good behaviour?

Notorious97

He will only serve 10 months in prison thats crazy!

Spokesperson is a cracker though haha

Call me Al

I just heard someone say 10 months in jail and the rest under house arrest.

Lone Stone

He will probaly serve 10 months aparently according to sky

SweetChaos

Yeah he will serve 10 months and the house arrest for the remainder of his sentence

SweetChaos

They said he will serve his 10 months in a hospital wing of the prison

robinph

ABajaninCork wrote: »

Joke of a sentence. If he wasn't famous, he'd have been looking at a murder rap and death sentence. SHAME, SHAME, SHAME on the judge and the South African judicial system. :mad:

No he wouldn't.

They don't have the death sentence in South Africa, and the prosecutions case would have still been just as dodgy. As evidenced during the trail, the defence really didn't need to do anything much at all (everyone here was screaming about how incompetent the defence was and how great the prosecution was).

The prosecution may have been great, but the one thing they were missing from the outset was ANY proof. The judge knew that, the defence knew that and even the prosecutions opening statement said that they had no real evidence. It really didn't need the expensive legal teams to come to this conclusion, the judge found the right verdict on the evidence available and the legal teams on either side was really just a bit of a distraction.

ABajaninCork

robinph wrote: »

No he wouldn't.

They don't have the death sentence in South Africa, and the prosecutions case would have still been just as dodgy. As evidenced during the trail, the defence really didn't need to do anything much at all (everyone here was screaming about how incompetent the defence was and how great the prosecution was).

The prosecution may have been great, but the one thing they were missing from the outset was ANY proof. The judge knew that, the defence knew that and even the prosecutions opening statement said that they had no real evidence. It really didn't need the expensive legal teams to come to this conclusion, the judge found the right verdict on the evidence available and the legal teams on either side was really just a bit of a distraction.

Sorry. We'll have to agree to disagree. IMO He murdered that poor girl. But - it's just that. My opinion.

And he won't be doing any jail time. You can bet on that.

robinph

ABajaninCork wrote: »

And he won't be doing any jail time. You can bet on that.

Where do you think he is heading to spend tonight then?

How much you willing to bet?


Edit...news just coming in...ABajaninCork has lost their bet...

https://twitter.com/justteaplease/status/524486960262701056/photo/1

ArmaniJeanss

ABajaninCork wrote: »

Sorry. We'll have to agree to disagree. IMO He murdered that poor girl. But - it's just that. My opinion.

And he won't be doing any jail time. You can bet on that.

Its not an 'agree to disagree' thing really.
You said that he would have got the death sentence, there is no such sentence in South Africa. Therefore you are wrong.

ABajaninCork

robinph wrote: »

Where do you think he is heading to spend tonight then?

How much you willing to bet?


Edit...news just coming in...ABajaninCork has lost their bet...

https://twitter.com/justteaplease/status/524486960262701056/photo/1

I'm well aware he's left in a prison van. You know very well what I meant. This sentence will be appealed...

Ash.J.Williams

I think i can hear his girly cry!

efb

His team arnt appealing his sentence I doubt the prosecution will either

ABajaninCork

I feel very sorry for the guy. I feel even more sorry for the girl and her family. All I know is that he did wrong. Very wrong.

And the punishment is not appropriate IMO.

robinph

ABajaninCork wrote: »

I'm well aware he's left in a prison van. You know very well what I meant. This sentence will be appealed...

Have to say I don't know what you meant in that case.

He is going/ gone to prison which is very much not fitting with your line "And he won't be doing any jail time. You can bet on that."

There isn't anything for anyone to appeal as far as I can see from either side in this case. The judge has handled it very well. The prosecution, not so much...but they were dealt an incredibly bad hand by the investigating police which basically meant that the defence didn't need to do anything.

AudreyHepburn

ABajaninCork wrote: »

I feel very sorry for the guy. I feel even more sorry for the girl and her family. All I know is that he did wrong. Very wrong.

And the punishment is not appropriate IMO.

I don't think anyone on any side of this has ever said what he did was right.

The point is though that Judge Masipa had to make a decision based on the set of cards she was dealt and the hand played by the prosecution just didn't work with the verdict they were looking for.

There is not, and never has been, enough solid evidence for murder. You can't convict some-one of murder just because he has an interest in guns or is reckless. You can't even base it on the fact that he may or may not have been arguing with the victim before she died.

Masipa has made the only call she could based on the evidence.

Kunkka

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

I don't think anyone on any side of this has ever said what he did was right.

The point is though that Judge Masipa had to make a decision based on the set of cards she was dealt and the hand played by the prosecution just didn't work with the verdict they were looking for.

There is not, and never has been, enough solid evidence for murder. You can't convict some-one of murder just because he has an interest in guns or is reckless. You can't even base it on the fact that he may or may not have been arguing with the victim before she died.

Masipa has made the only call she could based on the evidence.

This is all very true and it just echoes to me how many holes there are in the law. Reasonable doubt within reason, it's pretty much a case of if you're a very good liar and have a good lawyer you have a shot of getting off or getting a joke of a sentence like this. I have no doubt in my mind he murdered her and I wasn't of that opinion before the trial. It was his own story and body language that done it for me. Just seemed a complete fabrication of something very obvious. Jealousy over something --> a fight ensued --> Reeva ran to the toilet with her phone --> She locked herself in to a toilet in an apartment she was in with JUST her partner(why?) --> he approached the door probably shouting and shot her through it in a rage. It's normally the most simple answer in cases like this but unfortunately OP is a pretty ****ing good liar and held his nerve enough to cause reasonable doubt. Joke

Soups123

Absolutely disgusting, If this case was in Ireland I would be 100% participating in any movement to have this looked out.

You can speak about reasonable doubt and evidence all you want but you can be 100% certain a regular Joe Soap would have been charged with murder with the same deck of cards dealt.

This guy deliberately killed his girlfriend in cold blood and has got off because of who he is and what he paid, shame of those is South Africa that have allowed this to happen.

Holsten

Soups123 wrote: »

Absolutely disgusting, If this case was in Ireland I would be 100% participating in any movement to have this looked out.

You can speak about reasonable doubt and evidence all you want but you can be 100% certain a regular Joe Soap would have been charged with murder with the same deck of cards dealt.

This guy deliberately killed his girlfriend in cold blood and has got off because of who he is and what he paid, shame of those is South Africa that have allowed this to happen.

Haha why?

Does him serving 10/20/30 years being her back to life? No, so what's the point then.

Will he re offend? Probably not. Is he a danger to others? Nope.

You want revenge plain and simple.

robinph

It is really scary the number of people who would claim to be looking for "justice" but are able to completely disregard anything to do with the evidence that was actually put before the court. If you had any additional evidence to help with the prosecutions case then you really should have let them know about it sooner.

No expensive lawyers were really needed for this case, and despite people singing Nels praises during the trial he really can't have been that great as he didn't manage to make the dodgy charge that the initial dodgy cop came up with stick. The defence team seemed to be getting criticised through the trial as being incompetent, how then does that fit with peoples claims that Pistouris got off due to having an expensive legal team?

Pistouris didn't get found guilty of pre-meditated murder because there was zero evidence for that charge. It didn't need an expensive legal team to get him off that charge, it was never going to stick anyway.

Philo Beddoe

robinph wrote: »

It is really scary the number of people who would claim to be looking for "justice" but are able to completely disregard anything to do with the evidence that was actually put before the court. If you had any additional evidence to help with the prosecutions case then you really should have let them know about it sooner.

Their gut-instinct and ability to read body language and sniff out liars trumps any of this so-called 'evidence'.

AudreyHepburn

Soups123 wrote: »

Absolutely disgusting, If this case was in Ireland I would be 100% participating in any movement to have this looked out.

You can speak about reasonable doubt and evidence all you want but you can be 100% certain a regular Joe Soap would have been charged with murder with the same deck of cards dealt.

This guy deliberately killed his girlfriend in cold blood and has got off because of who he is and what he paid, shame of those is South Africa that have allowed this to happen.

If this is what you believe I suggest you go study the law and how the courts work and then come back and comment.

The outcome of this case had nothing whatsoever to do with OP's financial situation, skin color, fame etc.

It was, as it should have been, based purely on the evidence presented and there was nothing to prove he intentionally murdered Reeva.

Soups123

Holsten wrote: »

Haha why?

Does him serving 10/20/30 years being her back to life? No, so what's the point then.

Will he re offend? Probably not. Is he a danger to others? Nope.

You want revenge plain and simple.

Is he a danger to society? No? Really tell that to the victims family.

I want revenge? Nope I want him to get what he is due and a few years in prison is not that

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

If this is what you believe I suggest you go study the law and how the courts work and then come back and comment.

The outcome of this case had nothing whatsoever to do with OP's financial situation, skin color, fame etc.

It was, as it should have been, based purely on the evidence presented and there was nothing to prove he intentionally murdered Reeva.

My complaint is about the law here or the lack of and inconsistency of it, he has been treated leniantly because of who he is, I'm sure of that

robinph

Philo Beddoe wrote: »

Their gut-instinct and ability to read body language and sniff out liars trumps any of this so-called 'evidence'.

Are they also able to let me know the lottery numbers?