View previous topic | View next topic

Olympic 'blade runner' Oscar Pistorius shoots girlfriend

Page 11 of 14
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 10, 11, 12, 13, 14  Next

Spud McLaren
980866.  Mon Mar 11, 2013 6:26 pm Reply with quote

PDR wrote:
Many civilians who find themselves suddenly having to use a gun in self-defence will keep pulling the trigger until the magazine is empty - only a professional uses the minimum number of aimed shots.
Very true. Hollywood Navy Seals, please take note.

 
PDR
980876.  Mon Mar 11, 2013 6:33 pm Reply with quote

Well a hollywood Navy Seal will retrict his fire to only 230 round bursts from each 10 round magazine...

PDR

 
suze
980883.  Mon Mar 11, 2013 6:39 pm Reply with quote

Some countries do require a citizen with a criminal record to jump through extra hoops when he applies for a passport; notably, the USA does. But most don't; Australia, Canada, and the UK all take the line that a criminal record is no bar to the issue of a passport (unless the crime was passport-related e.g. attempting to travel on a forged passport).

As OE suggests, visas are another question entirely - people with convictions will find visas for some countries difficult or impossible to obtain.

For instance, Canada will in general not admit anyone who has ever had a conviction for drunk driving; this catches out rather a lot of Americans, since in some states of the union a first drunk driving offense does not lead to a ban from driving.

Conversely, the US isn't too bothered about Canadians who have driven drunk - but if they've ever been convicted of shoplifting ...


There is a group of countries for which South African nationals do not require a visa. Most of those are countries in southern Africa and South America, but Ireland, New Zealand, and South Korea also admit South Africans with no need for a visa.

Which does mean that a South African can in practice enter the UK without a visa, since the land border on the island of Ireland is de facto open. But he can't easily get to the British mainland without needing to show his papers.

But y'know, Mr Pistorius is fairly well known. You'd have to imagine that he'd be recognized.

 
PDR
980886.  Mon Mar 11, 2013 6:41 pm Reply with quote

Only if he tried to set foot in the UK...

PDR

 
Neotenic
980977.  Tue Mar 12, 2013 4:57 am Reply with quote

Quote:
I find it sad that consideration is being made to allow him to travel overseas because "he is not a flight risk".

I'm guessing that the vast majority of people who are charged with firearm murder of their partner in their own home are not given bail so quickly and easily, and fewer still could consider asking to be allowed to go abroad.


Hang on a second - Oscar's bail does not currently allow him to travel overseas. That is part of the appeal that has been put in by his defence team this week, and I don't think it has been granted yet.

Personally, I don't think they're going to get it, nor do they really want it. What they want is the 'no alcohol' condition lifted, and they have bolstered the request with as much as possible so they have plenty of ground to give.

 
CB27
981033.  Tue Mar 12, 2013 8:29 am Reply with quote

That's why I mentioned it as a consideration being made. I realise it's not the plainest way to put it, but I thought it made sense :)

 
Alfred E Neuman
981303.  Wed Mar 13, 2013 3:44 am Reply with quote

Neotenic wrote:
God only knows what he is going to do to earn a living now, especially in the unlikely event of him retaining his liberty.


I don't think he's skint yet - he just sold of a couple of his racehorses. If you think about it, that's a prudent thing to do - they cost a ton to keep, and as noted, his earning prospects have tapered off somewhat over the last month.

Even ignoring his own income, his family are fairly well off as far as I know, so even if he does clean out the coffers on legal fees, perhaps he can make up with his father and pop over there for the odd meal.

 
CB27
985133.  Thu Mar 28, 2013 5:06 pm Reply with quote

So much for the common agreement that it would be mad to allow him to travel abroad while waiting for the trial.

He's also been allowed to return to the house where his girlfriend was killed, right next to several witnesses in the case. This despite the fact he seems perfectly able to stay elsewhere.

And there will be no compulsary drug and alcohol testing.

I'm now waiting for his defence to appeal a further condition for Ms Steenkamp's family to apologise on her behalf for getting in the way of his shots.

He should definitely be seen as innocent until proven guilty of any charge of murder, but he still caused the death of another person, whether through intent, accident or negligence, and this seems to be ignored by the judge.

 
dr.bob
985251.  Fri Mar 29, 2013 6:23 am Reply with quote

What difference would compulsary drug and alcohol testing and forcing him to stay somewhere else make?

 
PDR
985267.  Fri Mar 29, 2013 8:06 am Reply with quote

CB27 wrote:
He's also been allowed to return to the house where his girlfriend was killed,


Why should he not, if all forensic investications are complete. It's his home, after all.

Quote:

...right next to several witnesses in the case.


"right next to" in this case being "a few hundred yards from" IIRC. It's not like they're living in adjacent flats. I'm sure any suggestion of witness intimidation will be handled harshly.

Quote:

This despite the fact he seems perfectly able to stay elsewhere.


But why should he?

Quote:

And there will be no compulsary drug and alcohol testing.


How would drug and/or alcohol consumption be in any way relegvant to his trial? I suspect there wioll be no mandatory testing for strawberry icecream or lemon air-freshener either...

Quote:

I'm now waiting for his defence to appeal a further condition for Ms Steenkamp's family to apologise on her behalf for getting in the way of his shots.


Good to see an open mind being maintained here...

Quote:

He should definitely be seen as innocent until proven guilty of any charge of murder, but he still caused the death of another person, whether through intent, accident or negligence, and this seems to be ignored by the judge.


If he had shot a burglar instead of his girlfriend and was on trila to determine whether it was a lawfull killing or not would you be asking for the same sort of constraints? It seems to me that the judge is actually the one being objective here.

PDR

 
suze
985273.  Fri Mar 29, 2013 8:38 am Reply with quote

As far as I can tell, the argument behind the alcohol testing was this. A person under suspicion of a serious crime such as murder would ordinarily be remanded in custody. Granting him bail is seen therefore as a privilege, so it was seen as appropriate to withdraw some of the privileges which normally go with not being in jail. Such as the right to drink alcohol if one chooses.

As for the drug testing, I suspect this was an attempt at cheap point scoring. Some substances which competitive athletes are not allowed to use were found at his home. Precisely why they were there we don't know at this stage, but there is inevitably some suspicion that he was using them illicitly - a thing which is hardly unknown among competitive runners.

 
CB27
985414.  Fri Mar 29, 2013 8:47 pm Reply with quote

PDR wrote:
CB27 wrote:
He's also been allowed to return to the house where his girlfriend was killed, right next to several witnesses in the case.

"right next to" in this case being "a few hundred yards from" IIRC. It's not like they're living in adjacent flats. I'm sure any suggestion of witness intimidation will be handled harshly.

And this is the problem. The defence tried to get someone to say that ONE witness was about 2000 feet away, this was revised later to 1000, all based on guesses submitted when questioned, not followed up with details. We don't know how many other witnesses there were, but we know there were more than one because of several conflicting stories,and we don't know how close or far they were.

What we DO know is that there are dozens of properties within just yards of his house, not hundreds of yards.

PDR wrote:
CB27 wrote:
And there will be no compulsary drug and alcohol testing.

How would drug and/or alcohol consumption be in any way relegvant to his trial? I suspect there wioll be no mandatory testing for strawberry icecream or lemon air-freshener either...

I'm not concerned at this moment whether he intentionally murdered his girlfriend, accidentally killed her or anything else. What I AM concerned about is that, in his own wrods and defence, he intentionally shot at someone seeking to harm them, and that he did kill someone, whether intentionally or not. He is therefore capable of killing someone under certain circumstances, and usually this is enough for me to think that such a person should not be under the influence of alcohol or drugs.

PDR wrote:
CB27 wrote:
He should definitely be seen as innocent until proven guilty of any charge of murder, but he still caused the death of another person, whether through intent, accident or negligence, and this seems to be ignored by the judge.

If he had shot a burglar instead of his girlfriend and was on trila to determine whether it was a lawfull killing or not would you be asking for the same sort of constraints? It seems to me that the judge is actually the one being objective here.

A quick read back to check if this is the case....

No. I'm certain that in more than one post I argued that he was still guilty of attempting to murder a burglar, and that this is serious enough on it's own, so I don't think I'm judging this any differently if he had killed a burglar or was someone not famous.

 
Zebra57
985417.  Fri Mar 29, 2013 8:52 pm Reply with quote

Are South Africa hoping that he will do a runner when on bail?

 
tetsabb
985441.  Fri Mar 29, 2013 11:06 pm Reply with quote

Neo wrote
Quote:
What they want is the 'no alcohol' condition lifted

So he can get legless?

 
PDR
985479.  Sat Mar 30, 2013 6:08 am Reply with quote

CB27 wrote:

What we DO know is that there are dozens of properties within just yards of his house, not hundreds of yards.


Ah, in that case I was misinformed, having based my view on an aerial photo of the house that seemed to show considerable distances to the nearest other dwellings. Can you give a link to something that shows (a) that there are houses very close to his and (b) that one or more of the potential witnesses lives in one of them?

Quote:

I'm not concerned at this moment whether he intentionally murdered his girlfriend, accidentally killed her or anything else. What I AM concerned about is that, in his own wrods and defence, he intentionally shot at someone seeking to harm them, and that he did kill someone, whether intentionally or not. He is therefore capable of killing someone under certain circumstances, and usually this is enough for me to think that such a person should not be under the influence of alcohol or drugs.


If he is acquitted would you expect the court to order that he be the subject of this kind of testing for the rest of his life? Is there any legal basis for such an order? At this time he is an innocent man, and any removals of freedoms from innocent people needs a legal basis. Can you show any case where innocent people have been the subject of this kind of requirement before?

CB27 wrote:

No. I'm certain that in more than one post I argued that he was still guilty of attempting to murder a burglar, and that this is serious enough on it's own, so I don't think I'm judging this any differently if he had killed a burglar or was someone not famous.


I guess this is where we differ. As far as I can see he's currently guilty of zip, because no court has convicted him of anything. He may had stated that he deliberately tried to kill a burglar, but whether that would have been murder or manslaughter, and whether he would be guilty of either, is something for courts rather than newspapers to determine (which as yet they haven't).

PDR

 

Page 11 of 14
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 10, 11, 12, 13, 14  Next

All times are GMT - 5 Hours


Display posts from previous:   

Search Search Forums

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group