It is brought to the pitchfork level every time the witch finding finger is pointed and the hysterical cry of 'Pistorian!' is levelled at anyone who doesn't agree with the majority.
No chance of anyone floating off on here... Those sharp glinting pitchforks saw off any white ballooners many threads ago.


Significantly disabled and yes- significantly vulnerable - especially without his legs. He only moved short distances on his stumps in his apartment due to balance issues as well as due to the risk of damaging the stumps themselves.

He rushed as opposed to what? Sauntered? Strolled? Crawled? So he moved as quickly as he could on his stumps...and??

The firearm could stop a whale? No it couldn't
It literally blew a person to pieces? No it didn't
There is no need to stoke up the emotive horror. The ammunition was horrible enough. Reeva's injuries horrific enough not to need the melodramatic exaggeration.

I would like to see a suitable punishment given for the crime that has actually been committed.

It’s been made so by the actions of one person……Masipa

If a competent judge had been appointed to this case then Pistorius would by now be a forgotten man serving out his sentence of 15 years in prison

Can you imagine the likes of Justice Leach lapping up his ludicrous story like star struck Masipa did?? Of course not!!

With respect her arm was hanging off and her skull was shattered, her brain exposed. Perhaps you find that melodramatic, maybe its hard to see/believe he did that to another human being.............me not so much. Stoke up the emotive horror? No, just recognising what this human being did to another human being.............

But I shall retreat for the time being, as you sound very cross, and I don't want to get the thread closed again.

Posted by Curley

I would like to see a suitable punishment given for the crime that has actually been committed




Yes. I am in agreement on that one. Thankfully it will be corrected by SCA when it comes before them.

So let us suppose for a moment that if 5 Justices of the SCA sentence Pistorius to 12 – 15 years in prison you would agree with them?

Well it's heartening to see Curley finally concede that the previous sentences were not suitable. Woohoo, progress at last.

Not cross at all. No retreat necessary.

I don't find her injuries melodramatic. I don't think your description of them in this post ^^ is melodramatic.

Like everyone, I find them horrific, as I said in my earlier post. But to say he blew her to pieces is the kind of unnecessary exaggeration used by sensationalist tabloids who revel in human tragedy, bodycounts and graphic descriptions. IMO.

Pretty sure I didn't say that! When the verdict was CH, I thought the sentence was fair. When it upgraded to murder, the new sentence was less than I had anticipated, but I thought it was fair in the circumstances.

I would think it was a bit harsh given the circumstances. Especially when -as your appeal link brilliantly demonstrated- a similar sentence-upgrade was given to a convicted armed robber who murdered another man whilst on parole, having violated a number of his parole conditions beforehand.

Do you not see that the aggravating factors in your appeal case obliterated any mitigating ones? And that the balance between mitigating and aggravating factors in Pistorius's case is totally different?

I guess in that regard then, we are all a tad 'revelling' surely.............as here we are discussing it.

You have been here practically since the day it happened.

There are all sorts of ways of revelling..............acknowledging the state that Oscar left Reeva in, is no more "revelling" than posting on multiple forums for years on end defending him.

IMO of course.

Acknowledging the injuries Pistorius inflicted upon Reeva or posting a sustained counter-view on two forums, isn't the same as glorying in the horror of her injuries to provoke reaction and interest.

Curley, all I will say is if you honestly believe that then it answers a lot of questions about your rather illogical view of the Pistorius case.

There is no way to the logical mind that the imbalance between the mitigating and aggravating circumstances is anything less than vast

Plus none of Masipa’s mitigating circumstances could be remotely described as significant and compelling.

I think you will find the SCA will be in agreement with that at which point you will have to admit you were badly ‘mistaken’

I hope you will find it not too upsetting as I know how concerned you are about the welfare of a selfish convicted murderer who has never shown a shred of remorse or even acknowledged his guilt.

Perhaps in a few years you could arrange to visit him in prison, tell him how much you stood up for him; no rush he’s going to be there a long time

My view isn’t illogical at all. It just isn't in line with your view.

There is no way to the logical mind that the balance between mitigating and aggravating factors in the Pistorius case is anything less than vastly different to the balance between mitigating and aggravating factors in that appeal case you found, where the sentence was upped by seven years to the 15 year guide point.

If they upped the sentence by 7 years for the convicted armed robber who violated parole conditions, left the scene of a fight to fetch a gun, before deliberately and repeatedly shooting someone- who was already injured and very obviously not posing a threat as he was lying on the ground, then I think you might be a little optimistic in your assured SCA predictions of adding another 5-7 years for Pistorius.

ETA- re your 'add-on' comment. No thanks.

And are you really saying that you don't see that the aggravating factors in your appeal case are more significant and serious than those in the Pistorius case?

3060 posts on this forum alone in support of Oscar Pistorius, boy that is some sustaining.

As to the second part of your sentence.......stop being so melodramatic 😁

Thank you (for your acknowledgement of my sustained effort) .. Although it has been in support of a right to justice and a fair trial more than in support of him personally.

As to your second comment... . Haha- if you think that's being melodramatic, perhaps you aren't acquainted with publications like The Daily Mail.

Not a publication I read myself, I'm afraid

Your first comment.........its nice for you that you took it as a compliment, and I confess to spending more time lately on here than is good for me myself, (in the last few weeks though, not constantly for three years)

So there I go all hypocritical .........................for what its worth.........i truly think you actually think that is what you are doing.

But it baffles me. I'm quite sure you are a nice enough spud just like most of us on here..........but your posts really come across like Billy Graham at a revival meeting

Now I wasn't actually going to post that but then its sort of okish because you have me glorying in Reevas blood............hmmmmm, I'm probably owed that one.

Well....I just had to Google Billy Graham! All square now then

😁 yes yes I'm over 50 thanks for the reminder!

Jibes traded, all square 😀

Unfortunately your search for justice fails completely when you have been unable to embrace or indeed engage with cogent arguments advocating justice for Reeva, her family and all of us on the"other side " who feel that the justice system failed her completely.
Reeva is dead. Murdered indeed at the hand of Pistorius. Justice for the victim should always pre empt justice for the perpetrator. Getting right proper and suitable proportional punishment for murderers must always be paramount.
Masipa has made a pigs ear of this and allowed people to find myriad excuses where there should never have been a shred of doubt that he should serve a lengthy sentence.

Is there a link to the prosecution heads yet?

Here is the NPA's 'Application for Leave to Appeal' document which was heard by Masipa:

http://www.scribd.com/document/31892...Appeal-21-July

Not sure if they are obliged to prepare another for the SCA. I expect it would be quite similsr anyway.

I would agree that the heads for the SCA will be substantially the same as we have already seen. Those were clearly written with the SCA in mind, hence the number of times Nel reminded Masipa that she had not taken note of the SCA judgement. Now after having to follow procedure Masipa is thankfully out of the frame and the matter will henceforth be considered by judges of a completely different calibre.

The only thing that may be added this time is a ‘health warning’ for all Pistorians. Last time they were published it sent the likes of Heather and Dee into a state of apoplexy causing an uncontrollable urge to write mountainous amounts of garbage

Think of all the time money and angst that would have been saved if SCA had just been able to hand down the sentence when it was changed to murder.

I always thought it mad that it went back to Masipa when she had made such a spectacular faux pas and schoolgirl error the first time.

Unfortunately that’s the procedure.

In all honesty I would imagine the SCA had some confidence that after being admonished for her errors Masipa would act appropriately with sentencing.

I would imagine they had not foreseen her embittered attitude which resulted in her bringing the SA judicial system into disrepute for the second time

Difficult to know to what degree Masipa felt slighted by the SCA judgement. She did seem terse in her dealings with Nel at sentencing and sentencing appeal.

It seems Masipa had a problem fully accepting the crime is murder and not CH, and this is reflected in her sentencing. This view is perpetuated by others who continue to claim this crime is some sort of murder-lite or a toss-up with CH. The SCA judgement makes it patently clear that the killing was wholly the result of wilfulness, neither justified nor involuntary, and that it cannot be characterised as negligence.