ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags murder cases , Oscar Pistorius , South Africa cases

Reply
Old 11th March 2016, 09:37 PM   #481
newyorkguy
Penultimate Amazing
 
newyorkguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: NY
Posts: 10,052
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
I think there are several very solid reasons to suspect that Pistorius must have known it was Steenkamp behind that door...there HAS to have been sufficient opportunity for Steenkamp to have slipped silently out of bed and walked to the bathroom area without Pistorius seeing or hearing anything - even though he says he was only bringing the fan in over a matter of seconds.

And also, I find it very hard to believe that Pistorius was (per his version) standing in the bathroom yelling "Get the ... out of my house!" directly towards the closed toilet door, and yet Steenkamp wouldn't have made some sort of calling out to tell Pistorius that it was her behind the bathroom door...

I'm quoting an edited version of the above because I think those are excellent points, the kinds of factors that would undoubtedly lead an experienced homicide detective to suspect deliberate murder, and that the the intruder story was exactly that: a story. However I don't think they would be particularly valuable to the prosecutor in seeking a conviction.


Two other facts I'd be interested in knowing are: Steenkamp was removed from the crime scene by Pistorius, I wonder when he found her were her shorts pulled down indicating she was actively using the toilet when shot. The other is whether the police found urine in the toilet. Again, these are things that might convince a veteran homicide cop that Pistorius was lying -- that this was essentially a domestic quarrel gone bad -- but really wouldn't amount to much I don't think, in a court of law.

Finally, I find it very discouraging that Samson continues to claim the trial judge "believed," or "ridiculed" or "bought into" Pistorius' version of the shooting. When Judge Masipa actually said (and I have already stated this and provided a link to her the text of her decision), only that "There was a reasonable possibility" that Pistorius believed he was shooting at an intruder.

How do we know what Judge Masipa's personal opinion is? She might privately think it's a slam dunk that Pistorius killed Reeva Steenkamp deliberately. But she's acting as a professional, a criminal court judge and can only rule based on the evidence she was presented. I also suspect Pistorius knew it was Steenkamp he was shooting at yet, I also agree with the judge: the evidence doesn't support it.
newyorkguy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2016, 09:38 PM   #482
whoanellie
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 444
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
This is a bad analogy. He caught them together, no such parallel exists here.
What do you mean by "together"?

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk
whoanellie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2016, 10:02 PM   #483
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,274
Originally Posted by newyorkguy View Post
I'm quoting an edited version of the above because I think those are excellent points, the kinds of factors that would undoubtedly lead an experienced homicide detective to suspect deliberate murder, and that the the intruder story was exactly that: a story. However I don't think they would be particularly valuable to the prosecutor in seeking a conviction.


Two other facts I'd be interested in knowing are: Steenkamp was removed from the crime scene by Pistorius, I wonder when he found her were her shorts pulled down indicating she was actively using the toilet when shot. The other is whether the police found urine in the toilet. Again, these are things that might convince a veteran homicide cop that Pistorius was lying -- that this was essentially a domestic quarrel gone bad -- but really wouldn't amount to much I don't think, in a court of law.

Finally, I find it very discouraging that Samson continues to claim the trial judge "believed," or "ridiculed" or "bought into" Pistorius' version of the shooting. When Judge Masipa actually said (and I have already stated this and provided a link to her the text of her decision), only that "There was a reasonable possibility" that Pistorius believed he was shooting at an intruder.

How do we know what Judge Masipa's personal opinion is? She might privately think it's a slam dunk that Pistorius killed Reeva Steenkamp deliberately. But she's acting as a professional, a criminal court judge and can only rule based on the evidence she was presented. I also suspect Pistorius knew it was Steenkamp he was shooting at yet, I also agree with the judge: the evidence doesn't support it.
We go in circles somewhat, the autopsy shows an empty bladder, to the simple extent it proves she urinated shortly before being shot. A cubic centimetre a minute is the standard I believe, so a few hours of urine were missing for a girl seeking refuge. So she did urinate, which is inconsistent with a terrified state.
Secondly, if Masipa thought it was a slam dunk but lacked proof, we now have some sort of proof that she was not just entitled, but indeed obligated to sentence him to 15 years.
How open minded can we all be?

For her parents, they have a dichotomised solution.
1. Oscar was trying to protect their daughter.
2. Oscar shot her in hot blood.

Society owes them best endeavours to get this right, and it is signally failing with the prosecutorial system.
I liken it to the Ewan MacDonald case in New Zealand. The police destroyed several families by prosecuting him for the murder of his brother in law with a completely impossible case. He had alibis for Africa, and this is the same force that destroyed Mark Lundy and two other families, those of his brother and sister, by prosecuting him not once, but twice with impossible theories. One family believes the police, absolute nonsense, and the other the victim, Mark Lundy. This is very much work in progress, and I believe the absolute truth of the Pistorius story can be unearthed with the proper approach.

Last edited by Samson; 11th March 2016 at 10:03 PM.
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2016, 11:14 PM   #484
newyorkguy
Penultimate Amazing
 
newyorkguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: NY
Posts: 10,052
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
We go in circles somewhat, the autopsy shows an empty bladder, to the simple extent it proves she urinated shortly before being shot...
The discussion goes in circles because you continue to misrepresent the facts. The trial testimony was the empty bladder only meant she had urinated within one hour of being shot. We've already gone over this and I linked and quoted the testimony at the trial. It could just as easily be damaging evidence. If she had urinated within say twenty minutes of the shooting, what was she doing back in the toilet?

When it's pointed out the empty bladder does NOT mean she unrinated within moments of being shot you say Judge Masipa ridiculed the prosecution. When it is pointed out the Judge did no such thing and in fact only said there was "a reasonable possibility" Pistorius did not know he was shooting Reeva Steenkamp you go to the "no one is going to kill their trophy girlfriend." When it is demonstrated that this has happened many times, you say no celebrity like Pistorius would risk it all by killing his girlfriend. When it is pointed out that many celebrities have killed wives, lovers, girlfriends, you go back to the empty bladder 'evidence' and the merry-go-round starts again.

When it's pointed out the empty bladder does NOT mean [see above].
newyorkguy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2016, 11:41 PM   #485
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,274
Originally Posted by newyorkguy View Post
The discussion goes in circles because you continue to misrepresent the facts. The trial testimony was the empty bladder only meant she had urinated within one hour of being shot. We've already gone over this and I linked and quoted the testimony at the trial. It could just as easily be damaging evidence. If she had urinated within say twenty minutes of the shooting, what was she doing back in the toilet?

When it's pointed out the empty bladder does NOT mean she unrinated within moments of being shot you say Judge Masipa ridiculed the prosecution. When it is pointed out the Judge did no such thing and in fact only said there was "a reasonable possibility" Pistorius did not know he was shooting Reeva Steenkamp you go to the "no one is going to kill their trophy girlfriend." When it is demonstrated that this has happened many times, you say no celebrity like Pistorius would risk it all by killing his girlfriend. When it is pointed out that many celebrities have killed wives, lovers, girlfriends, you go back to the empty bladder 'evidence' and the merry-go-round starts again.

When it's pointed out the empty bladder does NOT mean [see above].
In that case we have either one or two visits to the toilet. Unfortunately in these systems pathologists are objective in name only. Once again we see retrofitting possibilities when the simplest explanation is she awoke at Oscar's disturbance, and slipped out to the toilet unnoticed while he messes with the fan.
But importantly, why not focus on the true narrative, and settle it. They are so fundamentally opposed in the context of the value Oscar may have to society, and the closure for Reeva's family, that is where the energy should be focussed. Not on what the cursed law says.
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th March 2016, 12:17 AM   #486
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 43,825
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
I think there are several very solid reasons to suspect that Pistorius must have known it was Steenkamp behind that door. I think that his whole story simply doesn't stack up in relation to normal human experiences. He would have had to have walked right round past the bed on his way to investigate the noise, so he could (and, IMO, would) have checked that Steenkamp was in bed, and whispered or said to her to stay there and to call the security staff, before heading off to the bathroom armed with a high-power handgun.

In addition, by definition (if Pistorius' account is to be believed) there HAS to have been sufficient opportunity for Steenkamp to have slipped silently out of bed and walked to the bathroom area without Pistorius seeing or hearing anything - even though he says he was only bringing the fan in over a matter of seconds.

And also, I find it very hard to believe that Pistorius was (per his version) standing in the bathroom yelling "Get the ... out of my house!" directly towards the closed toilet door, and yet Steenkamp wouldn't have made some sort of calling out to tell Pistorius that it was her behind the bathroom door (given that if Pistorius' account is to be believed, Steenkamp would likely be aware that Pistorius hadn't seen or heard her slipping away from the bedroom to go to the toilet).

And then we add in other evidence of Pistorius' personality and his treatment of girlfriends, and I conclude that by some distance the most plausible narrative is one where Pistorius and Steenkamp had an escalating argument in the bedroom area, Steenkamp started to dress to leave (perhaps in response to Pistorius yelling "Get the ... out of my house!" at HER), Pistorius physically threatened Steenkamp in the bedroom area, Steenkamp dropped her jeans (as they were found in the bedroom) and ran to the toilet, locking herself in, Pistorius followed her on his stumps, then Steenkamp said (through the door) that she had her phone and she was going to call family/friend/security/police, tell them the threatening situation, and request assistance. I think this would have pushed Pistorius over the edge in rage - the combination of Steenkamp's unequivocal decision to leave him and (maybe more powerful) the thought of having his image and reputation damaged by a public accusation of abuse and physical violence towards Steenkamp. I think he really did fire somewhat reflexively at the point, in a blind rage - and almost immediately realised what he'd done and was overcome with remorse and grief.

But as you point out (and as I have done too), the issue of Pistorius' presumed identification of the person behind the door is wholly moot in the context of the criminal charge and the conviction. And as you also say, it's impossible to prove one way or the other whether Pistorius genuinely thought he was firing at an intruder or Steenkamp. That will be cold comfort to Steenkamp's family though, I suppose. I am guessing that all of Steenkamp's family believe that Pistorius knew it was her behind the door (not that that makes any difference intellectually or legally of course).
This post perfectly sums up my, and I'm sure many others, opinions of this case.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th March 2016, 12:19 AM   #487
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 43,825
Samson, are you going to respond to LondonJohn's post?
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th March 2016, 12:50 AM   #488
MikeG
Now. Do it now.
 
MikeG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 24,804
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
I think there are several very solid reasons to suspect that Pistorius must have known it was Steenkamp behind that door.......
I've snipped your excellent post.

As I said, I think this is a balance of probabilities thing. There are sound arguments either way, and you have elucidated those on one side very well. The counter argument is not one that people unfamiliar with South Africa can really relate to. And it is this:

White South Africans, other than in some parts of the Western Cape, live in constant fear. When you pull up at traffic lights (robots, in SA), you leave a gap to the car in front and have all your doors locked and windows wound up, in the hope that this gives you a split second to avoid being robbed at gun point. This happens constantly. Most white people (and I mean, almost everyone) in SA live behind high walls with glass or razor wire embedded in the top, and have electric gates, sometimes 2 sets. They almost all either have their own private security patrols, or belong to a neighbourhood scheme. They pay armed guards to patrol 24 hours a day. But those security companies aren't beyond a bit of corruption, and have been linked to many violent crimes. Behind those walls, houses all have steel security bars over the windows and doors, and many have internal safe areas in which to retreat in the very real chance that armed robbers or kidnappers enter the house. Every single white South African knows of someone who has had been injured or killed by house breakers or car jackers.

This is a deeply broken society. The police are corrupt and incompetent, and the inhabitants of the slums alongside the affluent areas have nothing much to lose in this wave of criminality directed against their former oppressors. There are clearances of white farmers going on in South Africa at the moment at much the same rate as happened under Mugabe in Zimbabwe. A Justice Minister in a recent government said something along the lines of "what's with all this moaning about crime?" Many white people see the whole environment as one of settling old scores with official connivance. One of the results of all this is a mass exodus of white South Africans to the UK, Australia, New Zealand and so on.

Osacr Pretorius wasn't an outlier in terms of his attitude. He is actually typical, and, sad as it is to say it, he was understandably typical. South Africa is in deep trouble, and the whites of SA feel like they under siege. So, live with all that your entire life, and then hear a noise in your bathroom in the middle of the night..........
__________________
"The Conservatives want to keep wogs out and march boldly back to the 1950s when Britain still had an Empire and blacks, women, poofs and Irish knew their place." The Don That's what we've sunk to here.

Last edited by MikeG; 12th March 2016 at 01:02 AM.
MikeG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th March 2016, 06:51 AM   #489
whoanellie
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 444
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
Fallacious in modal logic, but not in probability theory. We should have a long list of successful men with dead girl friends to contemplate.
Rather than ask for a list of anecdotes, I think the burden is on you to show some statistical evidence that "success" however you define it is negatively correlated with domestic violence/murder. It's your argument, you need to provide the evidence to support it.
whoanellie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th March 2016, 07:07 AM   #490
icerat
Philosopher
 
icerat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: sweden
Posts: 5,532
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
I think there are several very solid reasons to suspect that Pistorius must have known it was Steenkamp behind that door. I think that his whole story simply doesn't stack up in relation to normal human experiences. He would have had to have walked right round past the bed on his way to investigate the noise, so he could (and, IMO, would) have checked that Steenkamp was in bed, and whispered or said to her to stay there and to call the security staff, before heading off to the bathroom armed with a high-power handgun.
(1) he wasn't "walking", which immediately emphasises his experience is not a "normal human experience"

(2) AFAIK the prosecution never challenged the idea it was too dark for him to see if she was there or not. I assumed this was tested, so why didn't they challenge it if it was wrong?

Quote:
In addition, by definition (if Pistorius' account is to be believed) there HAS to have been sufficient opportunity for Steenkamp to have slipped silently out of bed and walked to the bathroom area without Pistorius seeing or hearing anything - even though he says he was only bringing the fan in over a matter of seconds.
I don't know what Pistorius' exact testimony was, but personally what I find it hard to believe is that a guy with no legs can get out of a bed, out on a balcony, retrieve fans, and return to the room in "a matter of seconds". I would think all of that, even for an able-bodied person, would offer plenty of time for someone else to get up out of bed and walk a few metres. I'd be interested in his exact testimony, anyone have it?

Quote:
And also, I find it very hard to believe that Pistorius was (per his version) standing in the bathroom yelling "Get the ... out of my house!" directly towards the closed toilet door, and yet Steenkamp wouldn't have made some sort of calling out to tell Pistorius that it was her behind the bathroom door (given that if Pistorius' account is to be believed, Steenkamp would likely be aware that Pistorius hadn't seen or heard her slipping away from the bedroom to go to the toilet).
Personally I don't believe Steenkamp had either psychic powers or Daredevil-like hearing and could miraculously detect that Pistorius was yelling at her in the toilet. If I was locked in a toilet and someone started screaming there was an intruder, I'd keep quiet. At most I might make a movement to listen at the door or carefully open the door to see if I could work out what was going on.

All of which is entirely consistent with Pistorius' account.
__________________
Benford's law of controversy - Passion is inversely proportional to the amount of real information available
icerat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th March 2016, 12:22 PM   #491
newyorkguy
Penultimate Amazing
 
newyorkguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: NY
Posts: 10,052
It seems just as likely that Steenkamp would have realized he was shouting at whoever was in the water closet, meaning her, especially since Pistorius claimed at trial he was simultaneously calling out to her:
Quote:
He said he moved down the passage to the bathroom, he was “overcome with fear”. He shouted for the “intruder” to get out of his house and for Steenkamp to call for help. News link

The fact is there is a lot of domestic violence in South Africa. It's a tense place with a lot of crime and a difficult history. I understand why a police detective would be immediately biased towards the idea this was a domestic fight gone bad. Because in most of these kinds of cases that is by far the most common circumstance. Any experienced police detective would have been involved in cases where the shooter swore to heaven and earth it was all an accident until suddenly breaking down and confessing. Why would a cop expect this case was going to be different?

But I think most of us have moved past the point of wondering whether Pistorius knew he was shooting at Steenkamp, knew he was shooting her. Only two people really know; one is dead and the other may be giving a self-serving account. Pistorius has been convicted of recklessly placing someone's life at risk by using deadly force in a situation where it was not justifiable. That's as much justice as anyone is going to get.

Imagine for a moment if Pistorius did lose his temper, did suddenly and impulsively shoot at her, killing her. Then has to spend the next several years lying to everyone about it. Imagine what his interior life must be like. My hunch is, over the next few decades the way Pistorius lives his life will be a strong clue as to how 'accidental' the shooting was. Because if he killed her deliberately in a moment of murderous rage I doubt he will ever forgive himself.
newyorkguy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2016, 05:20 PM   #492
icerat
Philosopher
 
icerat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: sweden
Posts: 5,532
Originally Posted by newyorkguy View Post
Because if he killed her deliberately in a moment of murderous rage I doubt he will ever forgive himself.
How would that be any different if he killed her in the circumstances he claims?
__________________
Benford's law of controversy - Passion is inversely proportional to the amount of real information available
icerat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2016, 06:56 PM   #493
Desert Fox
Philosopher
 
Desert Fox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 6,147
Originally Posted by newyorkguy View Post
Imagine for a moment if Pistorius did lose his temper, did suddenly and impulsively shoot at her, killing her. Then has to spend the next several years lying to everyone about it. Imagine what his interior life must be like. My hunch is, over the next few decades the way Pistorius lives his life will be a strong clue as to how 'accidental' the shooting was. Because if he killed her deliberately in a moment of murderous rage I doubt he will ever forgive himself.
Studies have indicated that quite often such perpetrators will blame the victim.
__________________
"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt."
- - - -Bertrand Russell
Desert Fox is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2016, 09:07 PM   #494
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,274
Originally Posted by Desert Fox View Post
Studies have indicated that quite often such perpetrators will blame the victim.
Well we had one like that. Clayton Weatherstone. He stabbed his girlfriend 216 times then spent a day testifying she drove him to it. He is the worst specimen I recall in a New Zealand court.
But this is why I think it matters very much whether Oscar thought he was firing at an intruder behind the door.
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2016, 09:38 PM   #495
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 43,825
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
But this is why I think it matters very much whether Oscar thought he was firing at an intruder behind the door.
No, it doesn't. i think he knew Reeve was behind the door, but this doesn't matter either. What matters is he is a murderer beyond doubt and will have 20 years at least to reflect on this.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2016, 12:18 AM   #496
MikeG
Now. Do it now.
 
MikeG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 24,804
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
No, it doesn't. i think he knew Reeve was behind the door, but this doesn't matter either. What matters is he is a murderer beyond doubt and will have 20 years at least to reflect on this.
I'll have 5p with you that he doesn't get anywhere near that long. 12 years is my stab-in-the-dark.
__________________
"The Conservatives want to keep wogs out and march boldly back to the 1950s when Britain still had an Empire and blacks, women, poofs and Irish knew their place." The Don That's what we've sunk to here.
MikeG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2016, 12:32 AM   #497
The Atheist
The Grammar Tyrant
 
The Atheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 22,744
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
Well we had one like that. Clayton Weatherstone. He stabbed his girlfriend 216 times then spent a day testifying she drove him to it. He is the worst specimen I recall in a New Zealand court.
I wrote a piece on him a couple of years back, where I refer to him as the poster child for capital punishment. A more complete sociopath you would never find.
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.
The Atheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2016, 12:34 AM   #498
Malbec
Muse
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 960
Some of his best recordings are when he was simply accompanist -- in particular to Ella .
Malbec is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2016, 02:06 AM   #499
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,274
Originally Posted by The Atheist View Post
I wrote a piece on him a couple of years back, where I refer to him as the poster child for capital punishment. A more complete sociopath you would never find.
Damn I hate that.
We agree on something
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2016, 02:09 AM   #500
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,274
Originally Posted by MikeG View Post
I'll have 5p with you that he doesn't get anywhere near that long. 12 years is my stab-in-the-dark.
I think 15 years is statutory minimum. It will be intriguing to see how Masipa manages this. Maybe another arcane procedure will relieve her of the sentencing duty.
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2016, 04:06 AM   #501
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,274
Oscar will be sentenced soon. He is the fall guy for a rabid culture of rampant and uncontrolled gun availibilty, paranoia and terror.
No one should rejoice, all should pray.
A scared young man on stumps thought he was defending his girl friend.

He is no danger, society has this completely wrong.
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2016, 05:00 AM   #502
Desert Fox
Philosopher
 
Desert Fox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 6,147
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
Oscar will be sentenced soon. He is the fall guy for a rabid culture of rampant and uncontrolled gun availibilty, paranoia and terror.
No one should rejoice, all should pray.
A scared young man on stumps thought he was defending his girl friend.

He is no danger, society has this completely wrong.
I carry a concealed weapon almost every day. . . . . .I have never shot anybody in my bathroom.

I have actually only drawn it once even. Working security at a convenience store and carrying it openly. Escorting a guy off the property when he grabs a bottle. He drops it and ran. Problem solved.
__________________
"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt."
- - - -Bertrand Russell
Desert Fox is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2016, 05:29 AM   #503
Sideroxylon
Featherless biped
 
Sideroxylon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Aporia
Posts: 21,195
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
Oscar will be sentenced soon. He is the fall guy for a rabid culture of rampant and uncontrolled gun availibilty, paranoia and terror.
No one should rejoice, all should pray.
A scared young man on stumps thought he was defending his girl friend.

He is no danger, society has this completely wrong.
Poor frightened cripple man was a bit of a danger to his girl friend one night though.
__________________
'The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool.' - Richard Feynman
Sideroxylon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2016, 06:31 AM   #504
trustbutverify
Philosopher
 
trustbutverify's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 7,390
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
Oscar will be sentenced soon. He is the fall guy for a rabid culture of rampant and uncontrolled gun availibilty, paranoia and terror.
No one should rejoice, all should pray.
A scared young man on stumps thought he was defending his girl friend.

He is no danger, society has this completely wrong.
Nonsense. Celebrity worship at work, once again.
__________________
"The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated." -- Mahatma Gandhi

Wollen owns the stage
trustbutverify is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2016, 08:18 AM   #505
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,274
Originally Posted by Desert Fox View Post
I carry a concealed weapon almost every day. . . . . .I have never shot anybody in my bathroom.

I have actually only drawn it once even. Working security at a convenience store and carrying it openly. Escorting a guy off the property when he grabs a bottle. He drops it and ran. Problem solved.
I know you don't agree DF, but if it was mistaken identity by a cripple, jail is useless as a penalty.
Gun nuts are everywhere, which means they are not wicked, just dumb as fence posts. Remove the guns so everyone has hand to hand combat with which to settle matters.
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2016, 08:28 AM   #506
Drewbot
Philosopher
 
Drewbot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 7,033
Originally Posted by MikeG View Post
As I said, I think this is a balance of probabilities thing. There are sound arguments either way, and you have elucidated those on one side very well. The counter argument is not one that people unfamiliar with South Africa can really relate to. And it is this:

White South Africans, other than in some parts of the Western Cape, live in constant fear. When you pull up at traffic lights (robots, in SA), you leave a gap to the car in front and have all your doors locked and windows wound up, in the hope that this gives you a split second to avoid being robbed at gun point. This happens constantly. Most white people (and I mean, almost everyone) in SA live behind high walls with glass or razor wire embedded in the top, and have electric gates, sometimes 2 sets. They almost all either have their own private security patrols, or belong to a neighbourhood scheme. They pay armed guards to patrol 24 hours a day. But those security companies aren't beyond a bit of corruption, and have been linked to many violent crimes. Behind those walls, houses all have steel security bars over the windows and doors, and many have internal safe areas in which to retreat in the very real chance that armed robbers or kidnappers enter the house. Every single white South African knows of someone who has had been injured or killed by house breakers or car jackers.

This is a deeply broken society. The police are corrupt and incompetent, and the inhabitants of the slums alongside the affluent areas have nothing much to lose in this wave of criminality directed against their former oppressors. There are clearances of white farmers going on in South Africa at the moment at much the same rate as happened under Mugabe in Zimbabwe. A Justice Minister in a recent government said something along the lines of "what's with all this moaning about crime?" Many white people see the whole environment as one of settling old scores with official connivance. One of the results of all this is a mass exodus of white South Africans to the UK, Australia, New Zealand and so on.

Osacr Pretorius wasn't an outlier in terms of his attitude. He is actually typical, and, sad as it is to say it, he was understandably typical. South Africa is in deep trouble, and the whites of SA feel like they under siege. So, live with all that your entire life, and then hear a noise in your bathroom in the middle of the night..........
yes. paranoia in S. Africa is rampant.
All around them violent crimes, and examples of reprisals against whites.

This was my first thought, when I heard about this tragedy, I remembered my friend telling me about gates around their neighborhood, bars on their windows, guns in the house, fear that the security guards that he paid would be the ones doing the crime. Can a court be sympathetic to this? Every white knows the whites are extremely scared and jittery , shoot first, ask questions later mentality. If they don't their family will be dead.
__________________
"I dont call that evolution, I call that the survival of the fittest." - Bulletmaker
"I thought skeptics would usually point towards a hoax rather than a group being duped." - makaya325
Kit is not a skeptic. He is a former Bigfoot believer that changed his position to that of non believer.- Crowlogic
Drewbot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2016, 08:49 AM   #507
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 18,355
Originally Posted by Drewbot View Post
Every white knows the whites are extremely scared and jittery , shoot first, ask questions later mentality. If they don't their family will be dead.
And when they do their family is dead.
__________________
Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa

If I had a pet panda I would name it Snowflake.
Dr. Keith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2016, 08:51 AM   #508
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 18,355
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
Oscar will be sentenced soon. He is the fall guy for a rabid culture of rampant and uncontrolled gun availibilty, paranoia and terror.
No one should rejoice, all should pray.
A scared young man on stumps thought he was defending his girl friend.

He is no danger, society has this completely wrong.
You still can't accept that it would have been murder even if it was a break-in? Fascinating.
__________________
Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa

If I had a pet panda I would name it Snowflake.
Dr. Keith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2016, 09:01 AM   #509
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,274
Originally Posted by Desert Fox View Post
I carry a concealed weapon almost every day. . . . . .I have never shot anybody in my bathroom.

I have actually only drawn it once even. Working security at a convenience store and carrying it openly. Escorting a guy off the property when he grabs a bottle. He drops it and ran. Problem solved.
Originally Posted by Dr. Keith View Post
You still can't accept that it would have been murder even if it was a break-in? Fascinating.
You are discussing law, I am not. I have no respect for criminal law, it does not relate to justice as I understand it. Too many examples support my sad belief.
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2016, 09:03 AM   #510
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 18,355
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
You are discussing law, I am not. I have no respect for criminal law, it does not relate to justice as I understand it. Too many examples support my sad belief.
But this very predictable result is why the law is the way it is. If you allow people to shoot others willy nilly then innocent people die.
__________________
Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa

If I had a pet panda I would name it Snowflake.

Last edited by Dr. Keith; 18th April 2016 at 09:04 AM.
Dr. Keith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2016, 09:08 AM   #511
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,274
Originally Posted by Dr. Keith View Post
But this very predictable result is why the law is the way it is. If you allow people to shoot others willy nilly then innocent people die.
I live in a house without guns, a street where I know of no guns. It is 4 am and my porch door is open to thugs. That is the neighbourhood. Good luck must follow me so far, I guess we are lucky to live in these parts till the unexpected happens.....
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2016, 10:58 AM   #512
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 18,355
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
I live in a house without guns, a street where I know of no guns. It is 4 am and my porch door is open to thugs. That is the neighbourhood. Good luck must follow me so far, I guess we are lucky to live in these parts till the unexpected happens.....
I'm not trying to pick an old wound, but I don't see how that addresses my post at all. There is a very logical reason for having a law where shooting an unidentified person who does not present an immediate threat to the shooter or others is murder. This case is an example of why it is a good law, not an example of why it is a bad law.
__________________
Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa

If I had a pet panda I would name it Snowflake.
Dr. Keith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2016, 11:01 AM   #513
Desert Fox
Philosopher
 
Desert Fox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 6,147
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
I know you don't agree DF, but if it was mistaken identity by a cripple, jail is useless as a penalty.
Gun nuts are everywhere, which means they are not wicked, just dumb as fence posts. Remove the guns so everyone has hand to hand combat with which to settle matters.
Look, one thing that is certain is that Pistorius shot his girlfriend. All we are arguing is if it might be justified as self defense or if he meant to murder her. Generally proving self defense in most places is a higher burden where simple "I did not do it", the burden is suppose to be on the prosecution.
__________________
"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt."
- - - -Bertrand Russell
Desert Fox is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2016, 06:49 PM   #514
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,274
Originally Posted by Dr. Keith View Post
I'm not trying to pick an old wound, but I don't see how that addresses my post at all. There is a very logical reason for having a law where shooting an unidentified person who does not present an immediate threat to the shooter or others is murder. This case is an example of why it is a good law, not an example of why it is a bad law.
Place your bets. The same system can give him one year or fifteen. Crap system.
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th April 2016, 10:01 AM   #515
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 18,355
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
Place your bets. The same system can give him one year or fifteen. Crap system.
Again, I appreciate your reply not addressing what I have said. Thanks, it has been a productive conversation.
__________________
Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa

If I had a pet panda I would name it Snowflake.
Dr. Keith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th April 2016, 04:32 PM   #516
snoop_doxie
Graduate Poster
 
snoop_doxie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: In my reality tunnel
Posts: 1,484
icerat

Quote:
(1) he wasn't "walking", which immediately emphasises his experience is not a "normal human experience"
I just read this again today.

Wasn't he born that way?
I thought that his normal experience is as an amputee.
__________________
Formerly known as member wicked_ways
snoop_doxie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th April 2016, 11:09 PM   #517
icerat
Philosopher
 
icerat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: sweden
Posts: 5,532
Originally Posted by snoop_doxie View Post
icerat

I just read this again today.

Wasn't he born that way?
I thought that his normal experience is as an amputee.
yes, which is different from the "normal human experience" that London John was referencing. I think it's wrong to assume that even the physical experience of moving around a bed in pitch black is the same as for an able-bodied person, let alone the psychological experience of doing so in a tense state.
__________________
Benford's law of controversy - Passion is inversely proportional to the amount of real information available
icerat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th April 2016, 11:36 PM   #518
GlennB
Loggerheaded, earth-vexing fustilarian
 
GlennB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Arcadia, Greece
Posts: 24,821
Originally Posted by snoop_doxie View Post
icerat

I just read this again today.

Wasn't he born that way?
I thought that his normal experience is as an amputee.
He was born without the tibia bones in his lower legs, so has certainly never walked without prosthetics.
__________________
"Even a broken clock is right twice a day. 9/11 truth is a clock with no hands." - Beachnut
GlennB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th April 2016, 11:51 PM   #519
PartSkeptic
Illuminator
 
PartSkeptic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: South Africa
Posts: 3,100
My two cents.

I choose to live in South Africa despite being able to live in New Zealand or even in the USA.

Whites do not live in fear in my opinion. We grew up in a wild Continent, and for the most part accept that bad things (like death) happen. A lot of us have given up our guns, and do not carry all the time. But some people need to.

I followed the Pistorius trial on TV. Listened to the evidence. He contradicts himself. And the physical evidence, and circumstantial evidence point to an argument with his girlfriend who took locked herself in the toilet with her cell-phone, and Pistorius shot her in anger.

Ever since I first lived in South Africa (from 1976 before leaving for the USA and NZ) it was always illegal to shoot someone unless one was in fear for their life. Everyone knew that if you shot someone in the back outside your house you would drag them inside and claim that they had broken in, and hence your life was in danger. (In the bad old days, the police did it for you if you had not thought of it).

Pistorius knew that he had to use this defense from the time he shot and killed. That is the only reason he claimed self-defense based on mistaken identity immediately afterward.

The law is a good one, and has been improved upon. One has to identify the person or fire a warning shot. An intruder with a gun would not hide in the toilet. Typically home invasions with guns are usually gangs of four, and they catch you in your bed.

Yes, there are people who wake up in fear, and grab their fire-arm. One man shot his wife, and his remorse was so evident. Another man shot a warning shot into the roof, only to kill the intruder. He had to prove that he did not purposefully shoot knowing the intruder was on the roof.

Pistorius had a year to be "schooled" on how to act, and what to say, and yet his defense still had major flaws.
__________________
**Agnostic theist. God/Satan/Angels/Demons may not exist - but I choose to think the probability is that they do. By personal experience.**
PartSkeptic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2016, 01:51 AM   #520
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,274
Originally Posted by PartSkeptic View Post
My two cents.

I choose to live in South Africa despite being able to live in New Zealand or even in the USA.

Whites do not live in fear in my opinion. We grew up in a wild Continent, and for the most part accept that bad things (like death) happen. A lot of us have given up our guns, and do not carry all the time. But some people need to.

I followed the Pistorius trial on TV. Listened to the evidence. He contradicts himself. And the physical evidence, and circumstantial evidence point to an argument with his girlfriend who took locked herself in the toilet with her cell-phone, and Pistorius shot her in anger.

Ever since I first lived in South Africa (from 1976 before leaving for the USA and NZ) it was always illegal to shoot someone unless one was in fear for their life. Everyone knew that if you shot someone in the back outside your house you would drag them inside and claim that they had broken in, and hence your life was in danger. (In the bad old days, the police did it for you if you had not thought of it).

Pistorius knew that he had to use this defense from the time he shot and killed. That is the only reason he claimed self-defense based on mistaken identity immediately afterward.

The law is a good one, and has been improved upon. One has to identify the person or fire a warning shot. An intruder with a gun would not hide in the toilet. Typically home invasions with guns are usually gangs of four, and they catch you in your bed.

Yes, there are people who wake up in fear, and grab their fire-arm. One man shot his wife, and his remorse was so evident. Another man shot a warning shot into the roof, only to kill the intruder. He had to prove that he did not purposefully shoot knowing the intruder was on the roof.

Pistorius had a year to be "schooled" on how to act, and what to say, and yet his defense still had major flaws.
Oscar has been denied leave to appeal his conviction finally, and may face 15 years, though who knows what Masipa can do. I would have thought discretion for her is gone.

The situation remains most unsatisfactory. If he knew he was shooting Reeva the sentence looks fair to on the light side.
But if he thought he was shooting an intruder, all we have is a deterrent sentence and two lives destroyed for the price of a mistake.
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:40 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.