He trod a fine line between respecting the court system and retaining the prerogative to differ. It will be interesting to see what they decide in the coming days.
More like akin to kids peering over a wall to see a load of fish floundering in a dried up garden pond and wondering if they actually need stamping on to put 'em out their misery.
More like akin to kids peering over a wall to see a load of fish floundering in a dried up garden pond and wondering if they actually need stamping on to put 'em out their misery.
I guess so, but to me it seemed odd. He obviously had intent to shoot so she must be talking about the intent to kill. But the warnings, the relatively measured actions up until he fired and just a few shots not at chest height were some of her reasons for intention not to kill.
It was a little odd, possibly the closest to saying what she believed happened rather than was she can legally judge ( that being her job like!). I agree she was likely talking about the intent to kill, but find it confusing if she found him not guilty based on "perceived danger to life" which doesn't involve intent. I'm not sure of all that. I don't think four shots is "just a few shots" and I'm pretty confident that Masipa didn't either, I thought she saw that as pointing towards intent to kill, together with the small cublicle, although in the judgement she sort of said it couldn't be proven unless he admitted it.
I think the lack of shots to the right hand side at chest height indicates he knew where the "target" was, especially after the first shot when the "deceased" possibly fell on the magazine rack.
Very interesting. He stated that he talked to ( Lawyer/Nel? ) yesterday and they have to appeal.
It seems apparent that Aimee is cut from the same cloth as Oscar in the personality department. Very antagonistic and manipulative. It adds doubt for me that her motives in removing Reeva's handbag was due to good intentions.
Did anyone state conclusively if or when Aimee handed the bag over,and to whom?
With mounting evidence of OP being so hot headed,recklessly foolish about his own safety as well as very controlling,how can those who believe his intruder version be in any way comfortable with their findings?
More like akin to kids peering over a wall to see a load of fish floundering in a dried up garden pond and wondering if they actually need stamping on to put 'em out their misery.
What type of fish would you describe yourself as being?
An Aholehole?
It seems apparent that Aimee is cut from the same cloth as Oscar in the personality department. Very antagonistic and manipulative. It adds doubt for me that her motives in removing Reeva's handbag was due to good intentions.
It's interesting how many irate comments there were on here about the Steenkamp family not being on trial when the money given to them by OP was under discussion, yet people are happy to cast all sorts of aspersions on the Pistorius family at every opportunity...
I believe the Badger lady would support your disgust. However m'lady preferred the version of the acting commissioner. The guy who put the PR in "prison"
Welcome back.
Congratulations on predicting 5 years. You didn't foresee the only serving 10 months inside bit though. Neither did anybody else.
It's interesting how many irate comments there were on here about the Steenkamp family not being on trial when the money given to them by OP was under discussion, yet people are happy to cast all sorts of aspersions on the Pistorius family at every opportunity...
It is not an aspersion that the police directed those burly STATE WITNESSES into those seats near to Aimee. They did not choose to sit there. They also have stated that the police and court officials witnessed Aimee's conduct towards them and that these guys did nothing to instigate her behaviour.
The Steenkamp's did not sanction the cold blooded murder of their daughter. They where however,destitute to some degree and took legal advice on excepting that money.
The Steenkamp's have done absolutely nothing that could bring their integrity into question.
If it was my daughter I could not promise that I could say the same about myself.
Could you?
After reading their core values I would have thought that they had no choice but to strip him of the honour.
I agree with you.
I thought it was disgraceful that OP's defence dragged a lot of peoples good name through this bloody mess in order to make himself look good.
Perhaps OP can go to University when he gets out and actually do a Degree for real and do something amazing...Time will tell if he is capable of doing good in the future.
And it won't be lost on some of you that for the next 5 years (or 10 months) he really won't be imagining that there is a stranger taking a shit in his bathroom.
It is not an aspersion that the police directed those burly STATE WITNESSES into those seats near to Aimee. They did not choose to sit there. They also have stated that the police and court officials witnessed Aimee's conduct towards them and that these guys did nothing to instigate her behaviour.
The Steenkamp's did not sanction the cold blooded murder of their daughter. They where however,destitute to some degree and took legal advice on excepting that money.
The Steenkamp's have done absolutely nothing that could bring their integrity into question.
If it was my daughter I could not promise that I could say the same about myself.
Could you?
Please can you tell me what Aimee is alleged to have done to state witnesses? I heard there may have been an incident at some point but because I wasn't following the case closely I missed it. Thanks.
My take was CH and the sentence "8 years all but a few months suspended and no appeal"
Which was what he got. 5 years for the CH and 3 for the gun charge.
The actual time inside has been stated as 10 months by the DT. Others seem to differ.
But take it from me. There will be NO appeal.
He can convert the majority of his 5 yrs custodial to something else at some point in time not quite fully agreed yet. But most have said it would be converted to house arrest, not suspended. Not the same thing, but might amount to being pretty close depending on the terms of the house arrest.
Comments
He trod a fine line between respecting the court system and retaining the prerogative to differ. It will be interesting to see what they decide in the coming days.
Or kids peeing over a wall?
Accompanied by the odd crab it would appear.
Some lotion will sort those out for you.
It was a little odd, possibly the closest to saying what she believed happened rather than was she can legally judge ( that being her job like!). I agree she was likely talking about the intent to kill, but find it confusing if she found him not guilty based on "perceived danger to life" which doesn't involve intent. I'm not sure of all that. I don't think four shots is "just a few shots" and I'm pretty confident that Masipa didn't either, I thought she saw that as pointing towards intent to kill, together with the small cublicle, although in the judgement she sort of said it couldn't be proven unless he admitted it.
I think the lack of shots to the right hand side at chest height indicates he knew where the "target" was, especially after the first shot when the "deceased" possibly fell on the magazine rack.
Blood red to emphasise the Pistorii.
You changed it now, you actually had to think about the non-sense you speak I see.
Very interesting. He stated that he talked to ( Lawyer/Nel? ) yesterday and they have to appeal.
It seems apparent that Aimee is cut from the same cloth as Oscar in the personality department. Very antagonistic and manipulative. It adds doubt for me that her motives in removing Reeva's handbag was due to good intentions.
Did anyone state conclusively if or when Aimee handed the bag over,and to whom?
With mounting evidence of OP being so hot headed,recklessly foolish about his own safety as well as very controlling,how can those who believe his intruder version be in any way comfortable with their findings?
What type of fish would you describe yourself as being?
An Aholehole?
It's interesting how many irate comments there were on here about the Steenkamp family not being on trial when the money given to them by OP was under discussion, yet people are happy to cast all sorts of aspersions on the Pistorius family at every opportunity...
After reading their core values I would have thought that they had no choice but to strip him of the honour.
I think the only **** his family can bring in are ciggy's
Some say he didn't smoke, but didn't OP say somewhere that he smoked weed at one point?
I could be wrong though.
Welcome back.
Congratulations on predicting 5 years. You didn't foresee the only serving 10 months inside bit though. Neither did anybody else.
It is not an aspersion that the police directed those burly STATE WITNESSES into those seats near to Aimee. They did not choose to sit there. They also have stated that the police and court officials witnessed Aimee's conduct towards them and that these guys did nothing to instigate her behaviour.
The Steenkamp's did not sanction the cold blooded murder of their daughter. They where however,destitute to some degree and took legal advice on excepting that money.
The Steenkamp's have done absolutely nothing that could bring their integrity into question.
If it was my daughter I could not promise that I could say the same about myself.
Could you?
I agree with you.
I thought it was disgraceful that OP's defence dragged a lot of peoples good name through this bloody mess in order to make himself look good.
Perhaps OP can go to University when he gets out and actually do a Degree for real and do something amazing...Time will tell if he is capable of doing good in the future.
I hear people will bend over backwards to get a comfortable ride inside, for those commodities.
That didn't seem to cross Masips's mind.
And it won't be lost on some of you that for the next 5 years (or 10 months) he really won't be imagining that there is a stranger taking a shit in his bathroom.
Night night Oscar
Just as well it was not a gang of baddies in the toilet, OP could be looking at a multiple murder charge instead.
Just imagine the danger he would have been in then, Gang banging in the Bathroom/toilet.
Thanks
Actually I did forsee the sentence...
http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/showpost.php?p=74863652&postcount=1556
My take was CH and the sentence "8 years all but a few months suspended and no appeal"
Which was what he got. 5 years for the CH and 3 for the gun charge.
The actual time inside has been stated as 10 months by the DT. Others seem to differ.
But take it from me. There will be NO appeal.
Please can you tell me what Aimee is alleged to have done to state witnesses? I heard there may have been an incident at some point but because I wasn't following the case closely I missed it. Thanks.
Welcome back.
Hope menu choice No 28 wasn't chicken legs
He can convert the majority of his 5 yrs custodial to something else at some point in time not quite fully agreed yet. But most have said it would be converted to house arrest, not suspended. Not the same thing, but might amount to being pretty close depending on the terms of the house arrest.