That is why a Jury would never have worked in a trial of this magnitude. Lay people would not have the capacity or knowledge
to understand as your post so obviously demonstrates.
What?
No one, even her fans, and those that see Op as innocent, ACTUALLY UNDERSTANDS what Masipa actually meant, and THAT is a reason that a jury trial would fail?
Doesn't it occur to you at all, that confusion and incomprehension isn't CLEVER?
It's STUPID.
You are saying that 'incomprehensible bollocks' is too bloody clever for ordinary people.
Strange how retired South African High Court Judge Chris N Greenland disagrees with the verdict.
And for everyone that disagrees there is another that agrees. It begs the question regarding the ethics of his profession belittling himself in the Media. IMO because he got it wrong, he is now trying to save face.
And for everyone that disagrees there is another that agrees. It begs the question regarding the ethics of his profession belittling himself in the Media. IMO because he got it wrong, he is now trying to save face.
I think he really cares about justice and had some faith in it, having devoted his life to it.
And sees how SHITE and stupid this verdict is and is prepared to say so.
I suspect that in SA after this it will be ever more difficult to question anything.
This judgement is horrible evidence of serious ROT made PUBLIC, in SA justice, and it must have been HORRIBLY disappointing for Greenland, who has believed in integrity and truth and TRIED all his life to be the embodiment of that in his job.
No one, even her fans, and those that see Op as innocent, ACTUALLY UNDERSTANDS what Masipa actually meant, and THAT is a reason that a jury trial would fail?
Doesn't it occur to you at all, that confusion and incomprehension isn't CLEVER?
It's STUPID.
You are saying that 'incomprehensible bollocks' is too bloody clever for ordinary people.
Such a sweeping statement that makes no sense to me. How do you know what Oscars Family understand , or for that matter anybody else. The most ridiculous comments have been made regarding this trial. It becomes boring after a while.
Couldn't agree more. If there's one thing I've realized from following various trials, it's how often the supposed legal experts get it wrong! I think what adds to the problem is that their reason for commenting isn't (just) to provide legal analysis but to provoke controversy and TV ratings and, of course, to grab their five minutes of self-promotion. Very disconcerting how many of them jumped on the bandwagon to criticise Masipa before she'd even finished speaking, and often without apparently having listened to all of what she had said.
My feelings exactly so I couldn't agree more both with post and reply. Hovering around like bees to a honey pot a plethora of bottom feeders, lawyers and journalists alike paying little attention to more than stirring up and stringing along watchers, readers, and listeners to bolster their own egos and bank accounts.
Such a sweeping statement that makes no sense to me. How do you know what Oscars Family understand , or for that matter anybody else. The most ridiculous comments have been made regarding this trial. It becomes boring after a while.
You think that NO JURY could possibly handle this case because it's so damned complicated
What the EFF has OPs family got to do with the price of fish?
Are you OP's MAD auntie?
I accept that my posts seriously GET TO YOU.
It's the 'i CAN'T MAKE SENSE OF THE BOLLOCKS' fear, and not having anything to argue with
I offer a human hug in the face of all this irrational torment.:)
I think he really cares about justice and had some faith in it, having devoted his life to it.
And sees how SHITE and stupid this verdict is and is prepared to say so.
I suspect that in SA after this it will be ever more difficult to question anything.
This judgement is horrible evidence of serious ROT made PUBLIC, in SA justice, and it must have been HORRIBLY disappointing for Greenland, who has believed in integrity and truth and TRIED all his life to be the embodiment of that in his job.
Well his five minutes of fame are almost up. There is little respect for people of this type who have no ethics, have heard of him on this forum only, and dare I say it one would have to question why a man in his retirement would just go on a Cruise or something, and stop with the Media hype. Maybe it is for the Money.
My feelings exactly so I couldn't agree more both with post and reply. Hovering around like bees to a honey pot a plethora of bottom feeders, lawyers and journalists alike paying little attention to more than stirring up and stringing along watchers, readers, and listeners to bolster their own egos and bank accounts.
Maybe people are just having their say just like you are in here. ;-)
Funny how the same people who will be aghast at this accusations of corruption etc of Masipa, feel they can blithely accuse lawyers and judges (such as Judge greenland) of having an agenda.
Funny those people might complain about trial by media, but can accuse people of an agenda without any evidence at all.
Well his five minutes of fame are almost up. There is little respect for people of this type who have no ethics, have heard of him on this forum only, and dare I say it one would have to question why a man in his retirement would just go on a Cruise or something, and stop with the Media hype. Maybe it is for the Money.
Why do you think he has ONLY five minutes of fame? Judge Greenland had massive credentials over thirty years of working in Africa.
He has demonstrated a very sharp mind over this time and publicly on the channel, he had been immensely rational and fair and understandable throughout the trial with his contribution,
Have you EVER watched him or heard him or researched him? He is MASSIVELY impressive on every count.
No you haven't.
You damn him on NO knowledge and have NO experience of even LISTENING to him in order to judge him.
You REVEAL yourself here as somone who doesn't UNDERSTAND the background and will not CONSIDER the thoughts of those who have lived and endured and who have a MASSIVE INVESTMENT in justice and the success of the country of SA.
And Judge Greenland thinks this judgement is a travesty.
And YOU think no one understands except the 'best legal brains'? He's that, and Masipa can't make SENSE of anything, that's 'GCSE' fail.
Funny how the same people who will be aghast at this accusations of corruption etc of Masipa, feel they can blithely accuse lawyers and judges (such as Judge greenland) of having an agenda.
Funny those people might complain about trial by media, but can accuse people of an agenda without any evidence at all.
Sheer hypocrisy at its finest.
I really don't understand why? Are they all really irrational 'fanboygirls'? I just can't get my head around it.
Irrational is the keyword though, and 'desperate' to believe is important.
A jury system doesn't mean the jury run the court.
They are overseen by a judge.
They are instructed by the judge on what they can and cannot do.
There is a foreperson appointed at the start.
In during diliberations, any person not abiding by the rules including the foreperson, it would be reported to the judge.
You may have your opinions which may differ from some, but you shouldn't allow your opinions lead to insulting the Nations people.
That's not cricket. ;-)
Not meaning to insult any Nation but this Trial is a prime example of why a Jury would not have worked. The combined knowledge of of the Three people on the bench cannot be questioned IMO and that should be respected..
Not meaning to insult any Nation but this Trial is a prime example of why a Jury would not have worked. The combined knowledge of of the Three people on the bench cannot be questioned IMO and that should be respected..
Not meaning to insult any Nation but this Trial is a prime example of why a Jury would not have worked. The combined knowledge of of the Three people on the bench cannot be questioned IMO and that should be respected..
That would be Dictatorship.
That's not how Democracy works.
We are allowed to question everything.
Many trials have been appealed. And there have been many miscarriages of justice.
You can't say a judge or a jury can never get it wrong no matter what type of system a Country has.
Did she? and if she did why did she just sit there and not query Nel at the time.
.
Masipa in her judgement said 'we do not KNOW how Mr VDM knew it was OP'' but she used it anyway...
From the judgement - "Although it was not established how her husband knew that it was the accused who was crying, this piece of evidence is enough to throw some doubt on the evidence of the witnesses who are adamant that they had heard a woman scream."
Masipa in her judgement said 'we do not KNOW how Mr VDM knew it was OP'' but she used it anyway...
From the judgement - "Although it was not established how her husband knew that it was the accused who was crying, this piece of evidence is enough to throw some doubt on the evidence of the witnesses who are adamant that they had heard a woman scream."
I am not sure i fully understand Masipa's reasonings tbh.
For example, if a bully says he wants to kill me, next day i fire a rocket (well lets say i live in the middle east) into a bus full of schoolchildren and kill them, shouldn't i only be liable for culpable homicide according to Masipa? if i state i did so in self-defense, stating i thought the bully was in there and he would try and kill me?
I don't see how, in practice, anyone could be convicted of dolus eventualis or directus, indeed, even a statement beforehand that 'i knew firing a rocket is wrong' would not be enough, according to Masipa, because Pistorius did the same thing with the gun test.
Dr Vorster told the court that OP told her he wanted to kill the intruder..... Funny how THAT wasn't used... An actual person in court, giving evidence...
I was just reading the judgement again and as regards OP's evasiveness Masipa says ' one of the reasons for his evasiveness was because he didn't listen to the questions properly."
I'm not making it up!!
How does she know this, only HE knows his mind according to Masipa.
I don't think you understand how basic human group dynamics work.
If the Judge got her Legal facts wrong the Assessors could overrule her on this, Judge Masipa however made the final decision mindful of their knowledge and contribution. What's so hard to understand the group dynamics in this.
Comments
What?
No one, even her fans, and those that see Op as innocent, ACTUALLY UNDERSTANDS what Masipa actually meant, and THAT is a reason that a jury trial would fail?
Doesn't it occur to you at all, that confusion and incomprehension isn't CLEVER?
It's STUPID.
You are saying that 'incomprehensible bollocks' is too bloody clever for ordinary people.
And for everyone that disagrees there is another that agrees. It begs the question regarding the ethics of his profession belittling himself in the Media. IMO because he got it wrong, he is now trying to save face.
Exactly!!!!
I think he really cares about justice and had some faith in it, having devoted his life to it.
And sees how SHITE and stupid this verdict is and is prepared to say so.
I suspect that in SA after this it will be ever more difficult to question anything.
This judgement is horrible evidence of serious ROT made PUBLIC, in SA justice, and it must have been HORRIBLY disappointing for Greenland, who has believed in integrity and truth and TRIED all his life to be the embodiment of that in his job.
Such a sweeping statement that makes no sense to me. How do you know what Oscars Family understand , or for that matter anybody else. The most ridiculous comments have been made regarding this trial. It becomes boring after a while.
My feelings exactly so I couldn't agree more both with post and reply. Hovering around like bees to a honey pot a plethora of bottom feeders, lawyers and journalists alike paying little attention to more than stirring up and stringing along watchers, readers, and listeners to bolster their own egos and bank accounts.
A jury system doesn't mean the jury run the court.
They are overseen by a judge.
They are instructed by the judge on what they can and cannot do.
There is a foreperson appointed at the start.
In during diliberations, any person not abiding by the rules including the foreperson, it would be reported to the judge.
You may have your opinions which may differ from some, but you shouldn't allow your opinions lead to insulting the Nations people.
That's not cricket. ;-)
You think that NO JURY could possibly handle this case because it's so damned complicated
What the EFF has OPs family got to do with the price of fish?
Are you OP's MAD auntie?
I accept that my posts seriously GET TO YOU.
It's the 'i CAN'T MAKE SENSE OF THE BOLLOCKS' fear, and not having anything to argue with
I offer a human hug in the face of all this irrational torment.:)
Well his five minutes of fame are almost up. There is little respect for people of this type who have no ethics, have heard of him on this forum only, and dare I say it one would have to question why a man in his retirement would just go on a Cruise or something, and stop with the Media hype. Maybe it is for the Money.
Maybe people are just having their say just like you are in here. ;-)
Funny those people might complain about trial by media, but can accuse people of an agenda without any evidence at all.
Sheer hypocrisy at its finest.
Why do you think he has ONLY five minutes of fame? Judge Greenland had massive credentials over thirty years of working in Africa.
He has demonstrated a very sharp mind over this time and publicly on the channel, he had been immensely rational and fair and understandable throughout the trial with his contribution,
Have you EVER watched him or heard him or researched him? He is MASSIVELY impressive on every count.
No you haven't.
You damn him on NO knowledge and have NO experience of even LISTENING to him in order to judge him.
You REVEAL yourself here as somone who doesn't UNDERSTAND the background and will not CONSIDER the thoughts of those who have lived and endured and who have a MASSIVE INVESTMENT in justice and the success of the country of SA.
And Judge Greenland thinks this judgement is a travesty.
And YOU think no one understands except the 'best legal brains'? He's that, and Masipa can't make SENSE of anything, that's 'GCSE' fail.
I really don't understand why? Are they all really irrational 'fanboygirls'? I just can't get my head around it.
Irrational is the keyword though, and 'desperate' to believe is important.
Not meaning to insult any Nation but this Trial is a prime example of why a Jury would not have worked. The combined knowledge of of the Three people on the bench cannot be questioned IMO and that should be respected..
Are you Odin?
Should we BOW?
You are very cool.
I admire it.
That would be Dictatorship.
That's not how Democracy works.
We are allowed to question everything.
Many trials have been appealed. And there have been many miscarriages of justice.
You can't say a judge or a jury can never get it wrong no matter what type of system a Country has.
Masipa in her judgement said 'we do not KNOW how Mr VDM knew it was OP'' but she used it anyway...
From the judgement - "Although it was not established how her husband knew that it was the accused who was crying, this piece of evidence is enough to throw some doubt on the evidence of the witnesses who are adamant that they had heard a woman scream."
Incredible.
I am so sad about all of this. Really sad for SA,
For example, if a bully says he wants to kill me, next day i fire a rocket (well lets say i live in the middle east) into a bus full of schoolchildren and kill them, shouldn't i only be liable for culpable homicide according to Masipa? if i state i did so in self-defense, stating i thought the bully was in there and he would try and kill me?
I don't see how, in practice, anyone could be convicted of dolus eventualis or directus, indeed, even a statement beforehand that 'i knew firing a rocket is wrong' would not be enough, according to Masipa, because Pistorius did the same thing with the gun test.
Dr Vorster told the court that OP told her he wanted to kill the intruder..... Funny how THAT wasn't used... An actual person in court, giving evidence...
I'm not making it up!!
How does she know this, only HE knows his mind according to Masipa.
If the Judge got her Legal facts wrong the Assessors could overrule her on this, Judge Masipa however made the final decision mindful of their knowledge and contribution. What's so hard to understand the group dynamics in this.