Oscar Pistorius: will one of most hyped murder trials in history be fair?
 

More at the link here

http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...istorius-trial

Key players in the Oscar Pistorius trial

The judge: Thokozile Masipa
At the centre of the biggest media circus in South African legal history is a former crime reporter who was never short of stories during the dog days of the apartheid era. Masipa, top, was also a social worker after leaving school in 1976, and only completed her law degree at 43. In 1998 she became the second black woman on the Transvaal bench, and has spoken out strongly about violence against women in her judgments and twice handed down maximum sentences to men convicted of such crimes. One was in 2009 against Freddy Mashamba, a police officer who shot and killed his former wife after a row over their divorce settlement. "No one is above the law," Masipa said. "You deserve to go to jail for life because you are not a protector. You are a killer."

The second was in May against Shepherd Moyo, a serial rapist and burglar whose

sentence of 252 years was intended to serve as a deterrent, she said. "The worst in my view is that he attacked and raped the victims in the sanctity of their own homes where they thought they were safe."

The prosecutor: Gerrie Nel
Nel, middle, a career prosecutor with more than 30 years' experience, has handled some of South Africa's biggest cases and is unlikely to be disconcerted by the spotlight. He has known worse. In 2008, when he was prosecuting Jackie Selebi, the country's most senior police officer and later president of Interpol, Nel was arrested by 20 police officers in front of his wife and children in the early hours one morning. Fraud charges against him were later dropped and, two years later, Nel secured a corruption conviction against Selebi, who was sentenced to 15 years behind bars. "Everything he touches turns to gold," Mthunzi Mhaga, a former national prosecuting authority spokesman, told South African media.

The defence: Barry Roux
In a case being compared to the OJ Simpson trial before it even opens, South Africa's answer to the charismatic American defence lawyer Johnnie Cochran is Barry Roux, bottom, who will strive to prevent Pistorius from going to jail. Roux was admitted to the Johannesburg bar in 1982 and is a senior advocate with a colourful history of clients. – including Dave King, a Scottish-born businessman and former Rangers football club director who risked jail for ignoring the biggest tax bill in South African history. It is speculated that Roux could be earning around 50,000 rand (£3,600) a day. He stole the limelight during Pistorius's bail hearing when he tore into the evidence of the lead detective Hilton Botha. "This is like watching a baby seal getting clubbed," one South African journalist tweeted.

So do you think it will be a fair trial? what's your opinions of this case?

Discuss

Some African sh**?

Some vaguely famous once athlete?

no thanks

He's the fastest man on no legs, very famous actually..

but I never asked if you would be watching/following I asked if you think it will be a fair trial? it's being televised to prove that famous people are given the same treatment as non famous people so what do think?

Comparisons with OJ were inevitable, and like OJ he's as guilty as sin. Unlike OJ though I don't think he'll get away with it. I like legal stuff so will find this interesting and am optimistic for a fair trial yes.

Its in Africa

there is no chance of fairness

and he was the fastest man with no legs below the knees who decided to take up running and that, is a small sample size

It's not that small, Pistorious is the most successful paralympian ever, worth more than most able bodied athletes, has been a figurehead of disabled sports, won numerous gold medals and has also competed alongside able bodied athletes

Anyway I think his story is farfetched but just about possible, I wouldnt be too surprised if there was enough doubt not to convict him. If he is found guilty though hes in for absolute hell in South African jail

Has he even tried to come up with an excuse why he did not shoot her in a jealous rage?

Claims he was outside on the balcony, came back in and heard a noise in the bathroom and cos he was on his stumps felt vulnerable so went to to the locked toilet door thinking it was a burglar in there and shot through it

Didn't think to check his girlfriend was still in bed or anything apparently

He is guilty
Live on every TV news in Court soon.

in first with...

He has not got a leg to stand on

Thats why its going Worldwide on Every TV News Live
to stop people like you going on about the past

Never heard of him/it, Amanda Knox's trial is bigger

Oh actually I have heard of it

they wont stop me

NOONE WILL STOP ME ...(echo: noone will stop me, noone will stop me..)

Didn't know murder trials were in competition with each other to try and be 'bigger' than the others

But you can Watch it Live on TV News

Hopefully he'll be sent to prison for ever, the evidence is overwhelmingly

- He & gf had a massive fight
- She then locks herself in the bathroom & he goes to balcony
- He walks through the bedroom, past the empty bed & shoots four times through the bathroom door on his prosthetic leg [Not once - FOUR times]
- He lied and said he was not on his on his prosthetic leg, when his girlfriend was shot from a high angle, so he was lieing, he actually had time to put on his prosthetic legs before the shooting. - So there was no panic or rush before the shooting, i.e. no bugular
- He was seen at a shooting range a day before
- he did not have a license for a .38-caliber weapon and consequently his possession of ammunition for such a weapon was illegal

Yes on my New LG 84'' Ultra HD TV

The prosecution has admitted that he may well not have been on his legs now after ballistic experts said it was unlikely

Other than that I do agree the evidence is strong

It'll be a disgrace if he's not found guilty

And yet, he probably will be. He's been given FAR too long to construct a solid narrative and some of the forensic evidence is already conspicuously different from what was released at the time. The entire thing absolutely reeks of corruption.

I actually think he will be found not guilty somehow.
What I dread is if it is the same judge presiding who did his bail hearings.
His summing up will likely take 3/4 days at least.

Either way he's guilty.

One way he killed her because he thought she was a burglar - that's murder.

The other way he killed her because he knew it was her - that's also murder.

He should just get put in jail for life and the money that is saved on his trail should be given to an amputee charity or something.

I just think it's a crying shame that in all of this, Reeva Steenkamp has mostly been forgotten. People are making more out of the fact a paralympian who had it all murdered/accidentally killed his hot girlfriend and newspaper are rather grotesquely publishing bikini pictures of her... but it's all from his point of view, the focus is on him and not on her, in the media. Her family must be absolutely heart broken.

eh, I'm not really the strongest advocate of the (all-encompassing, gun-toting) right to defend your home but what are South Africa's laws on that? Because I think it's a bit extreme to say that's murder.

..I would be really surprised if he was found guilty of murder and would it not have been better to be a manslaughter charge because unlike OJ, there was never a question that he didn't shoot and kill her..only what the intent was/whether he thought she was an intruder/threat or whether it was an intentional killing...

Hearing a noise in the bathroom and blindly just firing a gun at someone on the other side of a door 4 times I would think is murder.

I don't think that would count as self defence or anything.

Yes, it's hardly what I'd expect the instinctive reaction to be. My first thought would be instantly to go to check on my partner, phone for help, and get out of there.

..I don't know, it's a bit of a tricky one in a way, Marsh...it's a completely different world to the one we're used to with the threat and fear of intruders etc, so it's hard to really predict what would be 'typical behaviour' maybe..

Do i think it'll be fair? no. I don't think celebrity trials are fair in any country, so I doubt South Africa will be any different.

I don't think there is a single country on earth where everyone is treated equally by the law.

Agree, SA is one of the most violent countries in the world and the fear of break ins or armed intruders will be massively heightened there, I think Pistorious once admitted before all this in an interview that he slept with a gun, a baseball bat and a cricket bat for fear or burglars. If he was also on his stumps and lacking any real mobility that would only make it a more frightening situation

According to this article:

but he wasn't really worried about intruders. He was just angry at his woman, who he considered his property, and when she locked herself in a bathroom to get away from him, he was so frustrated that she wouldn't open the door, that he just started shooting through the door.

That's what I think at least.

You may well be right, I was just talking hypothetically if he really did think it was an intruder he probably wouldn't be convicted of murder

..I have an aunt and uncle who lived in South Africa for many years and my uncle was shot three times during their lives there and two of those times it was by intruders in their home...we hear about dreadful situations on the news etc and obviously we take precautions for our safety but we don’t live with the day to day real threats and fears that people in some countries do so it’s really hard to fully understand it or the precautions they take compared to what we think we would do..?..

..there’s no question that he shot her, obviously...that’s where I think this differs from most other cases..and there obviously is also a chance that he deliberately killed her but if had to say, do I 100% believe that it was an intentional killing..?..I really couldn’t say that and even if I felt 97/98/99% sure...that’s enough isn’t it to say there is element of doubt...and enough for an innocent verdict and I think that’s the way it could go...

innocent of 1st degree murder maybe, but completely innocent? no. Certainly he's guilty of a crime that at least deserves 20 years in jail. Why didn't he ask who was in the bathroom? why didn't he check on Reeva if he really thought they were danger?

He didn't do anything right in that scenario. Whether he was murdering his girlfriend, or just killed her by accident because he was paranoid about intruders, either way it was a horrible crime and he deserves to be in jail for a very long time. He acted recklessly either way.

None of his actions, no matter which story you believe, were appropriate or reasonable actions.

..yeah but I think that's the thing though, Alex..he's being tried for premeditated murder and I'm not saying that I believe that he felt under threat from an intruder/intruders but I think it's going to be something that's going to be extremely hard to establish for certain, which is why I think there will be an element of doubt and I don't think he'll be found guilty, so there is no alternative other than 'innocent'...

"Who's in there?"
"It's me, Reeva"

That's all it would have taken to prevent this from happening. So either he crept up to the door and shot whoever was behind it without asking any questions or he knew it was her. Shoot first and ask questions later. Not nice.

Why would an intruder go into his bathroom and lock himself in though? It makes absolutely no sense

Exactly. You would think that he'd be more likely to assume that his girlfriend was in his ensuite bathroom than a burglar, why on earth would a burglar sneak into his bedroom only to lock himself in the toilet, it doesn't make any sense

he'll get off. OJ simpson all over again. mark my words.