Wits School of Law Professor Stephen Tuson said the five years imposed on Pistorius was significant, because a longer sentence would not have given him a chance of house arrest.
“The number ‘five years’ was not an ordinary number, it was carefully selected,” he said. According to Section 276 of the Criminal Procedure Act, one-sixth of a jail sentence can be converted to house arrest, if the sentence is not more than five years.
This meant Pistorius could spend only 10 months in prison. “That is why it was carefully chosen,” Tuson said.
Fishwives in fishing villages such as Cullercoats and Newhaven were noted for their beauty, hardiness and industry and were celebrated by artists and royalty.
I think the snide little fishwife comment may have been directed at me.
Whatever - name calling on forums comes across as just sooo desperate as well as violating T&Cs....
Plus a user name beginning 'mrs' is no proof of anything.
There be fishhusbands out there too...
I just read that Masipa could have given a 'normal' 5 year sentence, in which case parole could only be granted after 1/2 the sentence. Instead, she gave 5 years subject to a clause which means parole can be given after 1/6 of the sentence. I hope Nel appeals.
I think that snide little comment may have been directed at me.
Name calling on forums comes across as just sooo desperate as well as violating T&Cs....
Plus a user name beginning 'mrs' is no proof of anything.
There be fishhusbands out there too...
It wasn't directed at anybody, it was just a light-hearted aside.
I really don't think that's accurate. Most people had no idea of the facts of the case before it started - just the headlines. That created a lot of interest. But it was only when people heard the 4 state witnesses, plus OP's own quite dreadful testimony that the anger kicked in.
For it was only at that point that the public reaslised that not only was OP's version hugely improbable, but that OP was a thoroughly nasty piece of work. When the verdict was handed down, the anger at what he had done was heightened by what seemed to be an incorrect verdict and sentence.
I do. It's why I got involved in the thread in the first place.
I just read that Masipa could have given a 'normal' 5 year sentence, in which case parole could only be granted after 1/2 the sentence. Instead, she gave 5 years subject to a clause which means parole can be given after 1/6 of the sentence. I hope Nel appeals.
She always went with the best possible outcome for OP both in the verdict and sentence. I'm deeply surprised he is in prison at all. Will he even do 10 months I wonder.
Wits School of Law Professor Stephen Tuson said the five years imposed on Pistorius was significant, because a longer sentence would not have given him a chance of house arrest.
“The number ‘five years’ was not an ordinary number, it was carefully selected,” he said. According to Section 276 of the Criminal Procedure Act, one-sixth of a jail sentence can be converted to house arrest, if the sentence is not more than five years.
This meant Pistorius could spend only 10 months in prison. “That is why it was carefully chosen,” Tuson said.
I just read that Masipa could have given a 'normal' 5 year sentence, in which case parole could only be granted after 1/2 the sentence. Instead, she gave 5 years subject to a clause which means parole can be given after 1/6 of the sentence. I hope Nel appeals.
Masipa apparently playing semantics with us the uninitiated. No one quickly popping in or seeing the verdict would have thought it actually meant 10mths!
I just read that Masipa could have given a 'normal' 5 year sentence, in which case parole could only be granted after 1/2 the sentence. Instead, she gave 5 years subject to a clause which means parole can be given after 1/6 of the sentence. I hope Nel appeals.
Apparently it's possible they the prosecution could appeal the conviction itself, meaning hopefully that he would then get a more appropriate sentence.
I think the snide little fishwife comment may have been directed at me.
Whatever - name calling on forums comes across as just sooo desperate as well as violating T&Cs....
Plus a user name beginning 'mrs' is no proof of anything.
There be fishhusbands out there too...
I just read that Masipa could have given a 'normal' 5 year sentence, in which case parole could only be granted after 1/2 the sentence. Instead, she gave 5 years subject to a clause which means parole can be given after 1/6 of the sentence. I hope Nel appeals.
The judge got it wrong again and doubt there will be an appeal.
I did hear that when OP is on house arrest he has a curfew of 6am til 6pm and can imagine he will be watched like a hawk by the GBP if he steps out of line.
He should have served at least 10 years with no parole. Feel for the women of SA
I suppose we have at least that to be thankful for.
Was there mention of OP being stopped from holding a gun again? I think that would be good too because a) he loves guns and b) has shown himself not to be trusted with them.
Bit like a lifetime driving ban...
Wits School of Law Professor Stephen Tuson said the five years imposed on Pistorius was significant, because a longer sentence would not have given him a chance of house arrest.
“The number ‘five years’ was not an ordinary number, it was carefully selected,” he said. According to Section 276 of the Criminal Procedure Act, one-sixth of a jail sentence can be converted to house arrest, if the sentence is not more than five years.
This meant Pistorius could spend only 10 months in prison. “That is why it was carefully chosen,” Tuson said.
I just read that Masipa could have given a 'normal' 5 year sentence, in which case parole could only be granted after 1/2 the sentence. Instead, she gave 5 years subject to a clause which means parole can be given after 1/6 of the sentence. I hope Nel appeals.
I hope Nel pipes down, realises his time in the spotlight is finally over and gets on with other cases. Pistorius has been sentenced and is going to prison. The matter should be left at that and everyone move on.
I suppose we have at least that to be thankful for.
Was there mention of OP being stopped from holding a gun again? I think that would be good too because a) he loves guns and b) has shown himself not to be trusted with them.
Bit like a lifetime driving ban...
Is there anything to stop him using a gun in the privacy of one of Uncle Arnie's game reserves once his 10 months are up?
Gun Free SA said it was surprised at the suspended sentence for the firearm offence. “It is one of the most serious offences in terms of the [Firearms Control] act,” it said.
“The act says you can get up to 15 years… and that signals that the law sees this as a serious offence.” The organisation said it was irrelevant whether someone was hurt or not.
“The point is the discharge of a firearm puts people’s lives at risk… “We are not sure if [the suspended sentence] sends a strong enough message to gun owners that that behaviour is unacceptable.”
Gun Free SA welcomed the decision by the court to declare Pistorius unfit to own firearms and that all his existing certificates and guns be handed in.
I wonder if there's going to be protests throughout SA at the sentencing?
Comments
Your use of love is patronising perhaps?
“The number ‘five years’ was not an ordinary number, it was carefully selected,” he said. According to Section 276 of the Criminal Procedure Act, one-sixth of a jail sentence can be converted to house arrest, if the sentence is not more than five years.
This meant Pistorius could spend only 10 months in prison. “That is why it was carefully chosen,” Tuson said.
http://mg.co.za/article/2014-10-21-pistorius-sentenced-to-five-years-in-jail?ars=true
Whatever - name calling on forums comes across as just sooo desperate as well as violating T&Cs....
Plus a user name beginning 'mrs' is no proof of anything.
There be fishhusbands out there too...
It wasn't directed at anybody, it was just a light-hearted aside.
I do. It's why I got involved in the thread in the first place.
Not a day for laughing but I couldn't help it.
And I agree, it's a harsh sentence but on reflection it's probably the correct one considering the conviction.
She always went with the best possible outcome for OP both in the verdict and sentence. I'm deeply surprised he is in prison at all. Will he even do 10 months I wonder.
Masipa apparently playing semantics with us the uninitiated. No one quickly popping in or seeing the verdict would have thought it actually meant 10mths!
She must have known this.>:(
Stinks
Apparently it's possible they the prosecution could appeal the conviction itself, meaning hopefully that he would then get a more appropriate sentence.
Mr S Grumpy ? S for seriously ?
The judge got it wrong again and doubt there will be an appeal.
I did hear that when OP is on house arrest he has a curfew of 6am til 6pm and can imagine he will be watched like a hawk by the GBP if he steps out of line.
He should have served at least 10 years with no parole. Feel for the women of SA
Certainly does.
Was there mention of OP being stopped from holding a gun again? I think that would be good too because a) he loves guns and b) has shown himself not to be trusted with them.
Bit like a lifetime driving ban...
Does nothing to dampen the suspicion that matters were already pre-ordained
I hope Nel pipes down, realises his time in the spotlight is finally over and gets on with other cases. Pistorius has been sentenced and is going to prison. The matter should be left at that and everyone move on.
Is there anything to stop him using a gun in the privacy of one of Uncle Arnie's game reserves once his 10 months are up?
Gun Free SA said it was surprised at the suspended sentence for the firearm offence. “It is one of the most serious offences in terms of the [Firearms Control] act,” it said.
“The act says you can get up to 15 years… and that signals that the law sees this as a serious offence.” The organisation said it was irrelevant whether someone was hurt or not.
“The point is the discharge of a firearm puts people’s lives at risk… “We are not sure if [the suspended sentence] sends a strong enough message to gun owners that that behaviour is unacceptable.”
Gun Free SA welcomed the decision by the court to declare Pistorius unfit to own firearms and that all his existing certificates and guns be handed in.
I wonder if there's going to be protests throughout SA at the sentencing?
That's how I read it. Just enough to save SA's face...
Sneaky
Sumptious
Sexy
Seductive
And a bit squeaky!
Given that judges are afforded a significant level of discretion in sentencing for this crime, i'm not sure how you can conclude she "got it wrong".