|
Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
Originally Posted by paulry
(Post 11236702)
It all seems to hinge on the push-pull of the two words: "reasonably believe" - Both for the defence who is claiming that Pistorius reasonably believed he was shooting intruders and the prosecution who is saying no-one can reasonably believe Pistorius' story.
|
Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
Originally Posted by Beoz
(Post 11236724)
Exactly. So then the prosecution needs to come up with a believable set of events. If they cannot then it can't be murder. It will just have to default back to culpable homicide one would think.
But nice to see that you're beginning to harmonise your opinions with mine :p http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...h-african-law/ Pistorious faces the challenge of convincing an experienced judge that he made an honest mistake in believing that he was firing at an intruder. But even if Pistorious passes the subjective test of convincing the judge that his mistake was honest — that he personally believed he was firing at an intruder — and he is acquitted of murder, the Paralympic star must overcome a higher burden, the objective test of convincing the judge that his mistake was reasonable — one that an ordinary person would also make. |
Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
Originally Posted by paulry
(Post 11236772)
I understand that the onus is more on the defence to convince their version of reasonable belief than it is on the prosecution to convince theirs
But nice to see that you're beginning to harmonise your opinions with mine :p http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...h-african-law/ |
Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
Originally Posted by Beoz
(Post 11236673)
and only had a couple of stumps as legs, running may be no go. ?
|
Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
Originally Posted by Beoz
(Post 11236673)
If I liked guns, had a history of being reckless
|
Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
Originally Posted by Sally Redux
(Post 11236997)
Not sure that's a defence.
|
Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
Originally Posted by Beoz
(Post 11237022)
A defence of what? Murder? I think a history of shooting off guns in restaurants and crashing speedboats display's an excellent previous history of being a dick rather than a murderer.
|
Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
Originally Posted by Sally Redux
(Post 11237028)
Are the two mutually exclusive?
|
Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
Originally Posted by moneypenny20
(Post 11237029)
Depends. All murderers are dicks however not all dicks are murderers.
|
Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
Originally Posted by Sally Redux
(Post 11237030)
Dicks with guns seem to like to use them sooner or later.
|
Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
Originally Posted by moneypenny20
(Post 11237029)
Depends. All murderers are dicks however not all dicks are murderers.
|
Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
Originally Posted by Beoz
(Post 11237022)
A defence of what? Murder? I think a history of shooting off guns in restaurants and crashing speedboats display's an excellent previous history of being a dick rather than a murderer.
Are previous convictions admissable in SA law? S |
Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
Originally Posted by stevenglish1
(Post 11237230)
Nor do all murderous dicks inspire 20 pages of utter bollox, makes ya think doesn't it ;)
|
Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
Originally Posted by Swerv-o
(Post 11237258)
Are previous convictions admissable in SA law?
S |
Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
Originally Posted by moneypenny20
(Post 11236049)
But surely, purely by his recklessness in this respect, he put bullets in a live person who then died so he is a murderer? Regardless of whether he did it by accident or on purpose.
The reality is that it is at least manslaughter.
Originally Posted by Tegwyn
(Post 11236269)
Just how threatened are you to shoot someone FOUR times behind a locked door? Then you take a bat to smash open the door to open it so you can face the supposed threatening intruder! Would you not run thinking you have time to escape from the supposed threat.
It's your home....
Originally Posted by paulry
(Post 11236772)
I understand that the onus is more on the defence to convince their version of reasonable belief than it is on the prosecution to convince theirs
But nice to see that you're beginning to harmonise your opinions with mine :p http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...h-african-law/ He'll almost certainly either get a form of manslaughter but ludicrously other people in the US and SA have been successful in relying on a castle defence...unlikely in this case. When people have shot in self defence it's normally face to face with an intruder. |
Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
Originally Posted by BadgeIsBack
(Post 11237311)
Killing in self defense; especially in your own home, in places like the US and probably South Africa is often a defense: people have got off in the Uk I believe too. I think it's based on common law.
The reality is that it is at least manslaughter. |
Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
Originally Posted by BadgeIsBack
(Post 11237311)
Killing in self defense; especially in your own home, in places like the US and probably South Africa is often a defense: people have got off in the Uk I believe too. I think it's based on common law.
If you feel threatened then you can shoot. Then if you feel you have nullified the threat you might want to gain access... It's your home.... That quote talks about what a reasonable person would have done which is a test used in criminal justice systems, as I have said. He'll almost certainly either get a form of manslaughter but ludicrously other people in the US and SA have been successful in relying on a castle defence...unlikely in this case. When people have shot in self defence it's normally face to face with an intruder. He's a world-class athlete. He's used to managing stress, and being in very stressful situations. He's used to guns, and being around and firing them. The reasonable test suggests (but doesn't prove) that he knew exactly what he was doing. |
Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
Originally Posted by ededed
(Post 11237445)
The reasonable test suggests (but doesn't prove) that he knew exactly what he was doing.
|
Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
Originally Posted by Swerv-o
(Post 11237258)
Are previous convictions admissable in SA law?
S |
Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
Originally Posted by ededed
(Post 11237445)
Even if he knew that there was a murderer behind the door, he isn't allowed to shoot him until he can see him. That's the law, and he absolutely knew it.
Whether or not he knew it was his girlfriend behind the door is largely a red herring. He went armed, and knew that he was a reasonable distance from a locked door, and therefore safe - shooting through the door was murder no matter what. Should have gone with the 'roid rage defence - he'd have had more chance of making it stick. |
Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
Originally Posted by Beoz
(Post 11237463)
.... and because you are guessing, most legal systems would run with this being reasonable doubt.
Originally Posted by paulry
(Post 11237498)
Not sure about previous (old) convictions being admissible but the restaurant and other charges are on the same bench sheet as the murder charge so they should all be cross reference-able.
Originally Posted by GarryP
(Post 11237509)
Yep, which is why I think he's going down.
Whether or not he knew it was his girlfriend behind the door is largely a red herring. He went armed, and knew that he was a reasonable distance from a locked door, and therefore safe - shooting through the door was murder no matter what. Should have gone with the 'roid rage defence - he'd have had more chance of making it stick. |
Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
Originally Posted by ededed
(Post 11237517)
They are - but only after innocence or guilt has been established. They are taken as pleas in mitigation or aggravation and influence sentencing, but not guilt.
|
Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
So, now with all the armchair experts weighing in ( me included), when does this case conclude? Does Oscar get to do more travelling overseas whilst he waits for his demise?
|
Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
Originally Posted by BadgeIsBack
(Post 11237311)
If you feel threatened then you can shoot. Then if you feel you have nullified the threat you might want to gain access...
It's your home.... |
Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
Originally Posted by GarryP
(Post 11237509)
Yep, which is why I think he's going down.
Whether or not he knew it was his girlfriend behind the door is largely a red herring. He went armed, and knew that he was a reasonable distance from a locked door, and therefore safe - shooting through the door was murder no matter what. Should have gone with the 'roid rage defence - he'd have had more chance of making it stick. |
Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
Originally Posted by Tegwyn
(Post 11238030)
In Oscar's case, he claims he was at a disadvantage because he was on his stumps. In that case, shooting, why not call armed response/security or whoever he is contracted with (police are a waste of time) to get over there pronto so he has support when opening the door. He was using his handicap as an excuse.
|
Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
Originally Posted by Beoz
(Post 11238228)
That was the good point Moneypenny made. He obviously intended to shoot something behind the door and with his own self admission thats beyond reasonable doubt. If self defense is a no go here then he's gone.
Originally Posted by Beoz
(Post 11238234)
You are speculating again :)
|
Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
Originally Posted by paulry
(Post 11238276)
I think most of us were already mindful of that. The only thing in question really is why. :)
We're all speculating but that is an excellent point. In SA, calling in the police is like calling in the keystone cops. If anyone feels seriously uneasy about security then they would have panic buttons installed upstairs and downstairs - linked by telephone to a rapid reaction security force. |
Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
Originally Posted by Beoz
(Post 11238234)
You are speculating again :)
|
Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
Originally Posted by Tegwyn
(Post 11238554)
The fine Mr Pistorius lived in a secured area and had a good security detail at his disposal.
|
Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
No one can seriously believe he is in any way innocent, he knew exactly what he was doing, his story is so full of holes you would have to be a Pistorious family member to believe his side of things.
|
Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
Originally Posted by chris955
(Post 11238763)
No one can seriously believe he is in any way innocent, he knew exactly what he was doing, his story is so full of holes you would have to be a Pistorious family member to believe his side of things.
|
Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
Originally Posted by chris955
(Post 11238763)
No one can seriously believe he is in any way innocent, he knew exactly what he was doing, his story is so full of holes you would have to be a Pistorious family member to believe his side of things.
It's not a matter of what is believed, it's a matter of what the prosecution can prove beyond all reasonable doubt. While his story is full of holes, it seems to be casting enough chaff to distract from the murder charge. In my opinion, I think he's angling to get manslaughter (or the SA equivalent) with home detention rather than prison on the grounds of his disablement. S |
Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
Originally Posted by Beaverstate
(Post 11238766)
Aw come on, he shot her 4 times by ACCIDENT, it could happen to anyone.
|
Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
Originally Posted by Swerv-o
(Post 11238769)
It's not a matter of what is believed, it's a matter of what the prosecution can prove beyond all reasonable doubt. While his story is full of holes, it seems to be casting enough chaff to distract from the murder charge.
In my opinion, I think he's angling to get manslaughter (or the SA equivalent) with home detention rather than prison on the grounds of his disablement. S |
Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
Originally Posted by Swerv-o
(Post 11238769)
It's not a matter of what is believed, it's a matter of what the prosecution can prove beyond all reasonable doubt. While his story is full of holes, it seems to be casting enough chaff to distract from the murder charge.
In my opinion, I think he's angling to get manslaughter (or the SA equivalent) with home detention rather than prison on the grounds of his disablement. S |
Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
Originally Posted by chris955
(Post 11238774)
I bet some people believe that exactly the case but as I say I think you would have to be part of the Pistorious family.
Or shall she take the Chris view on life? |
Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
Originally Posted by moneypenny20
(Post 11237329)
Not quite what I meant. If one kills someone, imo obviously, they have, in simple terms, become a murderer regardless of intent. Someone found guilty of manslaughter doesn't get described as a manslaughterer, they get described as a murderer.
I think you have to be careful: people have been found guilty of manslaughter due to recklessness but have not been considered murderers and have had public sympathy. Actually remember Lee Clegg...different scenario, different place...bad example almost certainly... Pistoruous has a right to use self defence as a defence...but it will carry only so far.
Originally Posted by ededed
(Post 11237445)
You can't shoot someone in SA unless your life is directly threatened - which means you can see the danger and you have no other option but to open fire. Completely against what happened in this case. Even if he knew that there was a murderer behind the door, he isn't allowed to shoot him until he can see him. That's the law, and he absolutely knew it.
He's a world-class athlete. He's used to managing stress, and being in very stressful situations. He's used to guns, and being around and firing them. The reasonable test suggests (but doesn't prove) that he knew exactly what he was doing. |
Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
Originally Posted by Beoz
(Post 11238778)
Or angling for manslaughter as its far better on your CV than murder.
In some jurisdictions you escape the death penalty too. |
Re: Pistorius. Guilty or not?
Originally Posted by BadgeIsBack
(Post 11239218)
Of course, and you get less time.
In some jurisdictions you escape the death penalty too. |
| All times are GMT -12. The time now is 12:52 pm. |
Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.