Can anyone on here say if they heard a noise and thought there was an intruder in their house that their first thought would not be to check on their partner? Are they there, are they safe, do they want to go and find out who it is etc. we are meant to believe OP did not feel the need to do this. He may be physically disabled but as far as I am aware losing your legs does not impinge on your mental capabilities.
So then, after not checking on his partner he walks to the bathroom where he heard the noises and shoots 4 times into a small room, at head height, having had weapons training, but he does not intend/expect to kill someone?
He chose to own a gun, he chose to fire it. He knew that by firing through a door at head height he would likely kill the person inside. People need to take more responsibility for their actions and if they are unwilling to do so they need to be made to do so by the law.
Pistorious is being sentenced today. I'm expecting him to avoid jail :-(
why leave it a month before sentencing? now the furore has died down there seems likely to be a more lenient sentence
Why?
It's lost it's steam. They have all the evidence they need - that's how they have reached a verdict. So why not pass the appropriate sentence a month ago.
Is it because it would be too controversial at that time so let's let the anger subside a bit and then we can sweep it under the carpet a bit.
Hardly anyone would have batted an eye had he got 10 or 15 years when found guilty (culpapble homicide was it?). Now that the dust has settled I expect we'll end up with non-custodial or maybe suspended sentence - a bit of uproar and then the rest of the world gets on with it's life.
Pistorious is being sentenced today. I'm expecting him to avoid jail :-(
why leave it a month before sentencing? now the furore has died down there seems likely to be a more lenient sentence
Why?
It's lost it's steam. They have all the evidence they need - that's how they have reached a verdict. So why not pass the appropriate sentence a month ago.
Is it because it would be too controversial at that time so let's let the anger subside a bit and then we can sweep it under the carpet a bit.
Hardly anyone would have batted an eye had he got 10 or 15 years when found guilty (culpapble homicide was it?). Now that the dust has settled I expect we'll end up with non-custodial or maybe suspended sentence - a bit of uproar and then the rest of the world gets on with it's life.
Everybody except Ms Steenkamp's family that is.
I highly doubt the judge who passes the sentence would be getting caught up in the "furore" - that's for the media and the public, thankfully they don't determine the appropriate sentence.
The judge has just likened the case, to two other cases, where they got suspended jail sentences.
Not quite what happened, the defence brought those examples up during the trial and she was basically saying she didn't think they were a fair comparison to this one.
Was obvious it would be around 5 years when she was saying it had to show mercy to him as well as being in public's interest. Why he needs to be shown mercy I don't know.
Comments
Can anyone on here say if they heard a noise and thought there was an intruder in their house that their first thought would not be to check on their partner? Are they there, are they safe, do they want to go and find out who it is etc. we are meant to believe OP did not feel the need to do this. He may be physically disabled but as far as I am aware losing your legs does not impinge on your mental capabilities.
So then, after not checking on his partner he walks to the bathroom where he heard the noises and shoots 4 times into a small room, at head height, having had weapons training, but he does not intend/expect to kill someone?
He chose to own a gun, he chose to fire it. He knew that by firing through a door at head height he would likely kill the person inside. People need to take more responsibility for their actions and if they are unwilling to do so they need to be made to do so by the law.
Mental.
For my wife, who's just gone for a piss.
house arrest and community service recommended by a defence probation officer.
"The athlete's first witness was trauma counsellor Lore Hartzenberg, who strongly implied that a "broken" Pistorius had been punished enough".
who are these people?
Is it because it would be too controversial at that time so let's let the anger subside a bit and then we can sweep it under the carpet a bit.
Hardly anyone would have batted an eye had he got 10 or 15 years when found guilty (culpapble homicide was it?). Now that the dust has settled I expect we'll end up with non-custodial or maybe suspended sentence - a bit of uproar and then the rest of the world gets on with it's life.
Everybody except Ms Steenkamp's family that is.
That's like a guy kills his parents and the judge does not send him to prison because he's an orphan!
Disgusting sentence.
He killed her. He knew what he was doing and his legal team have played a blinder.