You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
SA appeal court has changed verdict to murder.
So what does that say about the reasoning capacity for the original judge ?
.... just watching the news, says that the original judge must now give him a new sentence against the new murder charge. . . . bizarre
Wont bring the lass back but bloody good job.
This feels like the right verdict.
His story didn't add up, and coupled with his known love of guns + known fiery temper it looks very likely he did deliberately shoot her in a moment of rage.
One news commentator mentioned that defence would try and argue he would be liable to attack in prison if sent there because of his disability. ... surely he could outrun em?
From what i read, the original conviction did seem at odd to the circumstances.
IMO this is the correct verdict, I struggle to understand how the judge reached the original verdict but different legal systems have different decision processes. Indeed @fisha it's a bizarre twist that the original judge will have to re-sentence.
As above this doesn't bring her back a tragic victim of domestic violence, RIP.
Most commentators at the time said that the original judge had got it wrong and misinterpreted the law. Hopefully the **** will get the sentence he deserves now.
don't think the original Judge handled being in the spotlight very well. Trying too hard appear even handed to the media caused her to be overly lenient to the accused IMHO.
SA appeal court has changed verdict to murder.
[img]
[/img]
surely he could outrun em?
Might he encounter the occasional locked door impeding his progress?
[i]the occasional locked door impeding his progress[/i]
he's not let a locked door stop him in the past 🙁
I don't really have an opinion on the conclusion of murder versus manslaughter but this 'change of mind' is really messed up. How totally bizarre. Once a verdict is given it should stick.
Hands up those who think it was not a case of a stroppy testosterone fuelled bully flying into a rage and murdering his girlfriend. Still, at least he'll spend more time inside even if not for quite the right reason.
So what does that say about the reasoning capacity for the original judge ?
It says she should be tried for perverting the course of justice or whatever the equivalent is in SA. She is either incompetent,weak or corrupt.
No, she was just a bit thick. That's not a criminal offence, in SA or anywhere else. The point of having an appeals procedure is so that errors can get corrected, and it seems to have worked well in this instance.
It's not like we don't endlessly have appeals in the UK with the verdict changing at each level as it goes higher and higher up the appeals process...
I agree with the ruling, never felt right at the time but...I am surprised that it can be changed after being decided, appealed and he has served part of his sentence.
Could this be done with other historic cases too and going how far back?
Once a verdict is given it should stick.
The verdict has not changed - it's what he he was found guilty of that has changed.
No, she was just a bit thick
This was a judge with a previously good reputation so I don't buy the thick conclusion at all. I don't think I saw or read a single credible defence or explanation for the original verdict.
All seems very odd situation to me.
I get the Appeal, think thats right and proper if there is due diligence to be performed. Don't understand the overturn of the original Charge, but would have expected a sentence review based original sentence.
As for the original Judge being brought back in, thats not objective and I see that being an issue for Appeal too when that happens.
The verdict, well being a layman I viewed it as Murder too, however rage is and can be deemed Manslaughter too and thats where I stop handing out my POV. Its not for me to pass sentence.
Its a very sad situation and would like to know if this case has brought about any change in SA's attitude to Guns, this I doubt.
"It's not like we don't endlessly have appeals in the UK with the verdict changing at each level as it goes higher and higher up the appeals process..."
it is and we don't.
In terms of guilt or innocence We can only have appeals against conviction and they can only usually result in a retrial not a change of verdict.(usually is an important word in that sentence)
however rage is and can be deemed Manslaughter too
Yes but that can't be a defence unless you actually say in court I'm very sorry it's just that I'm a horribly spoilt and utterly inadequate little mummy's boy and can't stand it if anyone doesn't see me as the centre of the universe and it makes me very very mad so I shot her.
[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-africa-36685772 ]6 years[/url] 🙄
Appalling, a disgrace. The original sentence wasn't much different. I would hope the state appeals the length of the sentence.
Sentence for murder is supposed to be 15 years minimum, I fail fo see what circumstances lead her to give 1/3rd of that. [s]As I understand it under SA law he will serve only 2 years in jail, so this I think means he goes back to jail less than a year ?[/s] Being reported previous time doesn't count so it will be 3 years in jail. Seems very little for shotting someone.
We can only have appeals against conviction
Not any more. A few years ago the double jeopardy law was changed so that someone found not guilty can be retried if new evidence emerges.
, I fail fo see what circumstances lead her to give 1/3rd of that
Doesn't like being told she was wrong?
Sentence for murder is supposed to be 15 years minimum, I fail fo see what circumstances lead her to give 1/3rd of that.
He tried to say sorry to her parents, if it wasn't so serious you'd laugh.
Pisspoorius
I was in Johannesburg on the day it happened and of course we discussed it in every meeting, the universal opinion amongst my customers was "'roid rage" as he was known to be taking drugs and to have a love of guns, even having discharged a gun under a restaurant table at one time. Afrikaaners are a tight-knit tribe and gossip travels.
I was in Johannesburg again two weeks ago and the universal opinion was still that he killed Steenburg deliberately in a rage.
Strength to her family.
The richer you are the less prison time you do - it's a well established mathematical equation.
Therefore based upon 6 years for murder - Oscar must be moderately well off but not super rich
Pathetic star-struck judge. I'd bet dollars to doughnuts this arrogant aggressive entitled testosterone-fuelled jerk lost his temper and murdered her in an argument. Made-up story of imagining a burglar is preposterous.
So the sentence for murder in SA is 6 years.......I bet crime is low there??.......what a joke