Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 
Send Topic Print
Blade Runner out of Jail? (Read 3606 times)
philperth2010
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 21097
Perth
Gender: male
Re: Blade Runner out of Jail?
Reply #45 - Dec 4th, 2015 at 8:39am
 
What intruder would hide in the toilet with the light on???

Huh Huh Huh
Back to top
 

If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them.
Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992)
 
IP Logged
 
gizmo_2655
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male
Re: Blade Runner out of Jail?
Reply #46 - Dec 4th, 2015 at 8:47am
 
cods wrote on Dec 4th, 2015 at 8:32am:
gizmo_2655 wrote on Dec 4th, 2015 at 6:22am:
Setanta wrote on Dec 3rd, 2015 at 11:57pm:
gizmo_2655 wrote on Dec 3rd, 2015 at 11:47pm:
According to his statement, he went (with his pistol) to check on a noise. When it appeared there was one or more intruders in the toilet, he then yelled at his girlfriend to stay where she was, and then told the 'intruder/s to come out or he'd shoot'.

A perfectly viable series of events. There'd be no reason to wake up the other person until you knew whether the noise was a potential danger, or a tree branch tapping on the window (for example) or something equally harmless.


You're not trying to pull my leg are you? Is that what you would do?

You don't know where your loved one is but you tell her to stay there. You also tell her, I presume, that you are arming yourself to check it out. You get no response and rather than wake her and give her directions, get confirmation, you head to the dunny with your firearm.

Really?

Edit: I hope you are not a "more firearms" proponent. Great responsibility...


Perhaps you should read what I actually wrote???
You have the sequence backwards.....he'd ALREADY left the bedroom with the gun well before he thought it necessary to wake her up.

That's a fairly standard sort of behaviour, to be honest. If I hear odd noises at night, I don't immediately awaken everyone else in the house before I go to investigate. After all, most of the time it's likely to be nothing.



sorry gizmo but we are not talking Australia we are talking Pretoria SA...where they lived in a secured guarded house.....but where crime was high on the list......[guns handy]

do you or would you... grab a GUN in the dark to check out a noise???????.... I dont think so...

but by all accounts its the first thing you do in  Pretoria....


he was ANGRY... 4 shots tells me he didnt want anyone to leave that room alive....he had plenty of time  to ring for help....

had he been on the inside of the door shooting out I could maybe give him a glimmer of doubt....



Here in Australia??...no I wouldn't grab a gun, I use a a 4 battery, 40cm long 3 kilo maglite.

But in South Africa I probably would grab a gun. Better to be holding it, and not need it, than to need it and have it still in the draw/safe etc.

And 4 shots through the door doesn't mean he was angry, more likely frightened. And this is a guy with no lower legs remember, so he'd be at a disadvantage in terms of speed of movement against someone with 2 complete legs.
Shooting multiple times is what pistol self-defense trainers tell you to do.
Back to top
 

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat
 
IP Logged
 
cods
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 88048
Re: Blade Runner out of Jail?
Reply #47 - Dec 4th, 2015 at 9:01am
 
gizmo_2655 wrote on Dec 4th, 2015 at 8:47am:
cods wrote on Dec 4th, 2015 at 8:32am:
gizmo_2655 wrote on Dec 4th, 2015 at 6:22am:
Setanta wrote on Dec 3rd, 2015 at 11:57pm:
gizmo_2655 wrote on Dec 3rd, 2015 at 11:47pm:
According to his statement, he went (with his pistol) to check on a noise. When it appeared there was one or more intruders in the toilet, he then yelled at his girlfriend to stay where she was, and then told the 'intruder/s to come out or he'd shoot'.

A perfectly viable series of events. There'd be no reason to wake up the other person until you knew whether the noise was a potential danger, or a tree branch tapping on the window (for example) or something equally harmless.


You're not trying to pull my leg are you? Is that what you would do?

You don't know where your loved one is but you tell her to stay there. You also tell her, I presume, that you are arming yourself to check it out. You get no response and rather than wake her and give her directions, get confirmation, you head to the dunny with your firearm.

Really?

Edit: I hope you are not a "more firearms" proponent. Great responsibility...


Perhaps you should read what I actually wrote???
You have the sequence backwards.....he'd ALREADY left the bedroom with the gun well before he thought it necessary to wake her up.

That's a fairly standard sort of behaviour, to be honest. If I hear odd noises at night, I don't immediately awaken everyone else in the house before I go to investigate. After all, most of the time it's likely to be nothing.



sorry gizmo but we are not talking Australia we are talking Pretoria SA...where they lived in a secured guarded house.....but where crime was high on the list......[guns handy]

do you or would you... grab a GUN in the dark to check out a noise???????.... I dont think so...

but by all accounts its the first thing you do in  Pretoria....


he was ANGRY... 4 shots tells me he didnt want anyone to leave that room alive....he had plenty of time  to ring for help....

had he been on the inside of the door shooting out I could maybe give him a glimmer of doubt....



Here in Australia??...no I wouldn't grab a gun, I use a a 4 battery, 40cm long 3 kilo maglite.

But in South Africa I probably would grab a gun. Better to be holding it, and not need it, than to need it and have it still in the draw/safe etc.

And 4 shots through the door doesn't mean he was angry, more likely frightened. And this is a guy with no lower legs remember, so he'd be at a disadvantage in terms of speed of movement against someone with 2 complete legs.
Shooting multiple times is what pistol self-defense trainers tell you to do.



rubbish this is a bloke who fired a gun under the table in a restaurant...and so up himself he was afraid of no one...dont believe it mate just dont..he and Reeva were arguing... she was starting to see the real Oscar and didnt like him..if she told him she was leaving its the worst thing she could do...

as for the legs... did you see his re enactment video... omg he was amazing....believe me in that situation he was as good as anyone with both legs..
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
cods
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 88048
Re: Blade Runner out of Jail?
Reply #48 - Dec 4th, 2015 at 9:04am
 
philperth2010 wrote on Dec 4th, 2015 at 8:39am:
What intruder would hide in the toilet with the light on???

Huh Huh Huh



why would he be in the bedroom?????....

why pick on Oscar who was a well known gun freak Roll Eyes Roll Eyes

nothing really adds up....and I am so glad justice seems to be happening over there..Reeva deserves that much.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
gizmo_2655
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male
Re: Blade Runner out of Jail?
Reply #49 - Dec 4th, 2015 at 9:05am
 
cods wrote on Dec 4th, 2015 at 9:01am:
gizmo_2655 wrote on Dec 4th, 2015 at 8:47am:
cods wrote on Dec 4th, 2015 at 8:32am:
gizmo_2655 wrote on Dec 4th, 2015 at 6:22am:
Setanta wrote on Dec 3rd, 2015 at 11:57pm:
gizmo_2655 wrote on Dec 3rd, 2015 at 11:47pm:
According to his statement, he went (with his pistol) to check on a noise. When it appeared there was one or more intruders in the toilet, he then yelled at his girlfriend to stay where she was, and then told the 'intruder/s to come out or he'd shoot'.

A perfectly viable series of events. There'd be no reason to wake up the other person until you knew whether the noise was a potential danger, or a tree branch tapping on the window (for example) or something equally harmless.


You're not trying to pull my leg are you? Is that what you would do?

You don't know where your loved one is but you tell her to stay there. You also tell her, I presume, that you are arming yourself to check it out. You get no response and rather than wake her and give her directions, get confirmation, you head to the dunny with your firearm.

Really?

Edit: I hope you are not a "more firearms" proponent. Great responsibility...


Perhaps you should read what I actually wrote???
You have the sequence backwards.....he'd ALREADY left the bedroom with the gun well before he thought it necessary to wake her up.

That's a fairly standard sort of behaviour, to be honest. If I hear odd noises at night, I don't immediately awaken everyone else in the house before I go to investigate. After all, most of the time it's likely to be nothing.



sorry gizmo but we are not talking Australia we are talking Pretoria SA...where they lived in a secured guarded house.....but where crime was high on the list......[guns handy]

do you or would you... grab a GUN in the dark to check out a noise???????.... I dont think so...

but by all accounts its the first thing you do in  Pretoria....


he was ANGRY... 4 shots tells me he didnt want anyone to leave that room alive....he had plenty of time  to ring for help....

had he been on the inside of the door shooting out I could maybe give him a glimmer of doubt....



Here in Australia??...no I wouldn't grab a gun, I use a a 4 battery, 40cm long 3 kilo maglite.

But in South Africa I probably would grab a gun. Better to be holding it, and not need it, than to need it and have it still in the draw/safe etc.

And 4 shots through the door doesn't mean he was angry, more likely frightened. And this is a guy with no lower legs remember, so he'd be at a disadvantage in terms of speed of movement against someone with 2 complete legs.
Shooting multiple times is what pistol self-defense trainers tell you to do.



rubbish this is a bloke who fired a gun under the table in a restaurant...and so up himself he was afraid of no one...dont believe it mate just dont..he and Reeva were arguing... she was starting to see the real Oscar and didnt like him..if she told him she was leaving its the worst thing she could do...

as for the legs... did you see his re enactment video... omg he was amazing....believe me in that situation he was as good as anyone with both legs..


Well, every time I've had an argument or a break up with a girl, she's either gone to her parents or her BFFs straight after the fight, not gone to bed beside me for several hours..
Back to top
 

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat
 
IP Logged
 
cods
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 88048
Re: Blade Runner out of Jail?
Reply #50 - Dec 4th, 2015 at 9:15am
 
gizmo_2655 wrote on Dec 4th, 2015 at 9:05am:
cods wrote on Dec 4th, 2015 at 9:01am:
gizmo_2655 wrote on Dec 4th, 2015 at 8:47am:
cods wrote on Dec 4th, 2015 at 8:32am:
gizmo_2655 wrote on Dec 4th, 2015 at 6:22am:
Setanta wrote on Dec 3rd, 2015 at 11:57pm:
gizmo_2655 wrote on Dec 3rd, 2015 at 11:47pm:
According to his statement, he went (with his pistol) to check on a noise. When it appeared there was one or more intruders in the toilet, he then yelled at his girlfriend to stay where she was, and then told the 'intruder/s to come out or he'd shoot'.

A perfectly viable series of events. There'd be no reason to wake up the other person until you knew whether the noise was a potential danger, or a tree branch tapping on the window (for example) or something equally harmless.


You're not trying to pull my leg are you? Is that what you would do?

You don't know where your loved one is but you tell her to stay there. You also tell her, I presume, that you are arming yourself to check it out. You get no response and rather than wake her and give her directions, get confirmation, you head to the dunny with your firearm.

Really?

Edit: I hope you are not a "more firearms" proponent. Great responsibility...


Perhaps you should read what I actually wrote???
You have the sequence backwards.....he'd ALREADY left the bedroom with the gun well before he thought it necessary to wake her up.

That's a fairly standard sort of behaviour, to be honest. If I hear odd noises at night, I don't immediately awaken everyone else in the house before I go to investigate. After all, most of the time it's likely to be nothing.



sorry gizmo but we are not talking Australia we are talking Pretoria SA...where they lived in a secured guarded house.....but where crime was high on the list......[guns handy]

do you or would you... grab a GUN in the dark to check out a noise???????.... I dont think so...

but by all accounts its the first thing you do in  Pretoria....


he was ANGRY... 4 shots tells me he didnt want anyone to leave that room alive....he had plenty of time  to ring for help....

had he been on the inside of the door shooting out I could maybe give him a glimmer of doubt....



Here in Australia??...no I wouldn't grab a gun, I use a a 4 battery, 40cm long 3 kilo maglite.

But in South Africa I probably would grab a gun. Better to be holding it, and not need it, than to need it and have it still in the draw/safe etc.

And 4 shots through the door doesn't mean he was angry, more likely frightened. And this is a guy with no lower legs remember, so he'd be at a disadvantage in terms of speed of movement against someone with 2 complete legs.
Shooting multiple times is what pistol self-defense trainers tell you to do.



rubbish this is a bloke who fired a gun under the table in a restaurant...and so up himself he was afraid of no one...dont believe it mate just dont..he and Reeva were arguing... she was starting to see the real Oscar and didnt like him..if she told him she was leaving its the worst thing she could do...

as for the legs... did you see his re enactment video... omg he was amazing....believe me in that situation he was as good as anyone with both legs..


Well, every time I've had an argument or a break up with a girl, she's either gone to her parents or her BFFs straight after the fight, not gone to bed beside me for several hours..



I didnt say they had broken up.... but I believe thats what she was thinking about.....they had only been together 3 months...
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Aussie
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 39701
Gender: male
Re: Blade Runner out of Jail?
Reply #51 - Dec 4th, 2015 at 9:30am
 
gizmo_2655 wrote on Dec 3rd, 2015 at 11:17pm:
Aussie wrote on Dec 3rd, 2015 at 10:15pm:
gizmo_2655 wrote on Dec 3rd, 2015 at 10:05pm:
Alinta wrote on Dec 3rd, 2015 at 7:25pm:


Not surprised either, but very disappointed. The prosecution case never even got close to proving murder. Manslaughter was the correct verdict IMO.


Pig's arse.  If you reckon someone is behind a door and you shoot through the door.....what is your intent other than to put a bullet into anyone behind the door?




And the definition of murder requires intent to kill a particular victim, doesn't it??
Shooting at person A and unintentionally killing person B is manslaughter, not murder.


Queensland:

Quote:
CRIMINAL CODE - SECT 302
302 Definition of murder

(1) Except as hereinafter set forth, a person who unlawfully kills another under any of the following circumstances, that is to say—

    (a) if the offender intends to cause the death of the person killed or that of some other person or if the offender intends to do to the person killed or to some other person some grievous bodily harm;

    (b) if death is caused by means of an act done in the prosecution of an unlawful purpose, which act is of such a nature as to be likely to endanger human life;

    (c) if the offender intends to do grievous bodily harm to some person for the purpose of facilitating the commission of a crime which is such that the offender may be arrested without warrant, or for the purpose of facilitating the flight of an offender who has committed or attempted to commit any such crime;

    (d) if death is caused by administering any stupefying or overpowering thing for either of the purposes mentioned in paragraph (c);

    (e) if death is caused by wilfully stopping the breath of any person for either of such purposes;

is guilty of murder.

(2) Under subsection (1)(a) it is immaterial that the offender did not intend to hurt the particular person who is killed.

(3) Under subsection (1)(b) it is immaterial that the offender did not intend to hurt any person.

(4) Under subsection (1)(c) to (e) it is immaterial that the offender did not intend to cause death or did not know that death was likely to result.

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Alinta
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 1470
Melbourne
Gender: female
Re: Blade Runner out of Jail?
Reply #52 - Dec 4th, 2015 at 9:37am
 
There may be a handful of posters here who are interested .......

http://www.timeslive.co.za/local/2015/12/03/Pistorius-guilty-of-murder---read-th...
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
cods
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 88048
Re: Blade Runner out of Jail?
Reply #53 - Dec 4th, 2015 at 9:41am
 
Aussie wrote on Dec 4th, 2015 at 9:30am:
gizmo_2655 wrote on Dec 3rd, 2015 at 11:17pm:
Aussie wrote on Dec 3rd, 2015 at 10:15pm:
gizmo_2655 wrote on Dec 3rd, 2015 at 10:05pm:
Alinta wrote on Dec 3rd, 2015 at 7:25pm:


Not surprised either, but very disappointed. The prosecution case never even got close to proving murder. Manslaughter was the correct verdict IMO.


Pig's arse.  If you reckon someone is behind a door and you shoot through the door.....what is your intent other than to put a bullet into anyone behind the door?




And the definition of murder requires intent to kill a particular victim, doesn't it??
Shooting at person A and unintentionally killing person B is manslaughter, not murder.


Queensland:

Quote:
CRIMINAL CODE - SECT 302
302 Definition of murder

(1) Except as hereinafter set forth, a person who unlawfully kills another under any of the following circumstances, that is to say—

    (a) if the offender intends to cause the death of the person killed or that of some other person or if the offender intends to do to the person killed or to some other person some grievous bodily harm;

    (b) if death is caused by means of an act done in the prosecution of an unlawful purpose, which act is of such a nature as to be likely to endanger human life;

    (c) if the offender intends to do grievous bodily harm to some person for the purpose of facilitating the commission of a crime which is such that the offender may be arrested without warrant, or for the purpose of facilitating the flight of an offender who has committed or attempted to commit any such crime;

    (d) if death is caused by administering any stupefying or overpowering thing for either of the purposes mentioned in paragraph (c);

    (e) if death is caused by wilfully stopping the breath of any person for either of such purposes;

is guilty of murder.

(2) Under subsection (1)(a) it is immaterial that the offender did not intend to hurt the particular person who is killed.

(3) Under subsection (1)(b) it is immaterial that the offender did not intend to hurt any person.

(4) Under subsection (1)(c) to (e) it is immaterial that the offender did not intend to cause death or did not know that death was likely to result.





what clause does PROVOCATION get taken into account???...  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Aussie
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 39701
Gender: male
Re: Blade Runner out of Jail?
Reply #54 - Dec 4th, 2015 at 9:56am
 
Quote:
what clause does PROVOCATION get taken into account???...


Irrelevant to a murder charge.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
gizmo_2655
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male
Re: Blade Runner out of Jail?
Reply #55 - Dec 4th, 2015 at 10:39am
 
cods wrote on Dec 4th, 2015 at 9:41am:
Aussie wrote on Dec 4th, 2015 at 9:30am:
gizmo_2655 wrote on Dec 3rd, 2015 at 11:17pm:
Aussie wrote on Dec 3rd, 2015 at 10:15pm:
gizmo_2655 wrote on Dec 3rd, 2015 at 10:05pm:
Alinta wrote on Dec 3rd, 2015 at 7:25pm:


Not surprised either, but very disappointed. The prosecution case never even got close to proving murder. Manslaughter was the correct verdict IMO.


Pig's arse.  If you reckon someone is behind a door and you shoot through the door.....what is your intent other than to put a bullet into anyone behind the door?




And the definition of murder requires intent to kill a particular victim, doesn't it??
Shooting at person A and unintentionally killing person B is manslaughter, not murder.


Queensland:

Quote:
CRIMINAL CODE - SECT 302
302 Definition of murder

(1) Except as hereinafter set forth, a person who unlawfully kills another under any of the following circumstances, that is to say—

    (a) if the offender intends to cause the death of the person killed or that of some other person or if the offender intends to do to the person killed or to some other person some grievous bodily harm;

    (b) if death is caused by means of an act done in the prosecution of an unlawful purpose, which act is of such a nature as to be likely to endanger human life;

    (c) if the offender intends to do grievous bodily harm to some person for the purpose of facilitating the commission of a crime which is such that the offender may be arrested without warrant, or for the purpose of facilitating the flight of an offender who has committed or attempted to commit any such crime;

    (d) if death is caused by administering any stupefying or overpowering thing for either of the purposes mentioned in paragraph (c);

    (e) if death is caused by wilfully stopping the breath of any person for either of such purposes;

is guilty of murder.

(2) Under subsection (1)(a) it is immaterial that the offender did not intend to hurt the particular person who is killed.

(3) Under subsection (1)(b) it is immaterial that the offender did not intend to hurt any person.

(4) Under subsection (1)(c) to (e) it is immaterial that the offender did not intend to cause death or did not know that death was likely to result.




what clause does PROVOCATION get taken into account???...  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes


Under South African law..killing to defend  yourself, another person or your property or another persons property is self defense..
So shooting for self-defense and accidentally killing a person is not murder.
Back to top
 

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat
 
IP Logged
 
gizmo_2655
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male
Re: Blade Runner out of Jail?
Reply #56 - Dec 4th, 2015 at 10:40am
 

Aussie wrote on Dec 4th, 2015 at 9:30am:
gizmo_2655 wrote on Dec 3rd, 2015 at 11:17pm:
Aussie wrote on Dec 3rd, 2015 at 10:15pm:
gizmo_2655 wrote on Dec 3rd, 2015 at 10:05pm:
Alinta wrote on Dec 3rd, 2015 at 7:25pm:


Not surprised either, but very disappointed. The prosecution case never even got close to proving murder. Manslaughter was the correct verdict IMO.


Pig's arse.  If you reckon someone is behind a door and you shoot through the door.....what is your intent other than to put a bullet into anyone behind the door?




And the definition of murder requires intent to kill a particular victim, doesn't it??
Shooting at person A and unintentionally killing person B is manslaughter, not murder.


Queensland:

Quote:
CRIMINAL CODE - SECT 302
302 Definition of murder

(1) Except as hereinafter set forth, a person who unlawfully kills another under any of the following circumstances, that is to say—

    (a) if the offender intends to cause the death of the person killed or that of some other person or if the offender intends to do to the person killed or to some other person some grievous bodily harm;

    (b) if death is caused by means of an act done in the prosecution of an unlawful purpose, which act is of such a nature as to be likely to endanger human life;

    (c) if the offender intends to do grievous bodily harm to some person for the purpose of facilitating the commission of a crime which is such that the offender may be arrested without warrant, or for the purpose of facilitating the flight of an offender who has committed or attempted to commit any such crime;

    (d) if death is caused by administering any stupefying or overpowering thing for either of the purposes mentioned in paragraph (c);

    (e) if death is caused by wilfully stopping the breath of any person for either of such purposes;

is guilty of murder.

(2) Under subsection (1)(a) it is immaterial that the offender did not intend to hurt the particular person who is killed.

(3) Under subsection (1)(b) it is immaterial that the offender did not intend to hurt any person.

(4) Under subsection (1)(c) to (e) it is immaterial that the offender did not intend to cause death or did not know that death was likely to result.



Yes?? And since he didn't INTEND to kill Reeva (or anyone else, in truth) and was firing to scare/wound an intruder it is STILL not murder..
Back to top
 

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat
 
IP Logged
 
Marla
Gold Member
*****
Offline


A joint a day keeps the
MAGA away

Posts: 14661
Colorado
Gender: female
Re: Blade Runner out of Jail?
Reply #57 - Dec 4th, 2015 at 10:44am
 
15 years is a joke of a sentence. The poor little rich boy with the supermodel girlfriend that he so blatantly murdered in cold blood because she refused to open her legs for him is only getting 15 years. Granted, the prison system in South Africa may be brutal and hopefully has nothing but hard labor in store for the creep in which case he'll die there.
Back to top
 

I like takin' Tuinal. It keeps me edgy and mean. I'm a teenage schizoid I'm a teenage dope fiend
 
IP Logged
 
Aussie
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 39701
Gender: male
Re: Blade Runner out of Jail?
Reply #58 - Dec 4th, 2015 at 11:09am
 
gizmo_2655 wrote on Dec 4th, 2015 at 10:40am:
Aussie wrote on Dec 4th, 2015 at 9:30am:
gizmo_2655 wrote on Dec 3rd, 2015 at 11:17pm:
Aussie wrote on Dec 3rd, 2015 at 10:15pm:
gizmo_2655 wrote on Dec 3rd, 2015 at 10:05pm:
Alinta wrote on Dec 3rd, 2015 at 7:25pm:


Not surprised either, but very disappointed. The prosecution case never even got close to proving murder. Manslaughter was the correct verdict IMO.


Pig's arse.  If you reckon someone is behind a door and you shoot through the door.....what is your intent other than to put a bullet into anyone behind the door?




And the definition of murder requires intent to kill a particular victim, doesn't it??
Shooting at person A and unintentionally killing person B is manslaughter, not murder.


Queensland:

Quote:
CRIMINAL CODE - SECT 302
302 Definition of murder

(1) Except as hereinafter set forth, a person who unlawfully kills another under any of the following circumstances, that is to say—

    (a) if the offender intends to cause the death of the person killed or that of some other person or if the offender intends to do to the person killed or to some other person some grievous bodily harm;

    (b) if death is caused by means of an act done in the prosecution of an unlawful purpose, which act is of such a nature as to be likely to endanger human life;

    (c) if the offender intends to do grievous bodily harm to some person for the purpose of facilitating the commission of a crime which is such that the offender may be arrested without warrant, or for the purpose of facilitating the flight of an offender who has committed or attempted to commit any such crime;

    (d) if death is caused by administering any stupefying or overpowering thing for either of the purposes mentioned in paragraph (c);

    (e) if death is caused by wilfully stopping the breath of any person for either of such purposes;

is guilty of murder.

(2) Under subsection (1)(a) it is immaterial that the offender did not intend to hurt the particular person who is killed.

(3) Under subsection (1)(b) it is immaterial that the offender did not intend to hurt any person.

(4) Under subsection (1)(c) to (e) it is immaterial that the offender did not intend to cause death or did not know that death was likely to result.



Yes?? And since he didn't INTEND to kill Reeva (or anyone else, in truth) and was firing to scare/wound an intruder it is STILL not murder..


Tell that to the South African Appeal Court which disagrees with you, but, I guess you know more than it does on South African Law.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Alinta
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 1470
Melbourne
Gender: female
Re: Blade Runner out of Jail?
Reply #59 - Dec 4th, 2015 at 11:51am
 
gizmo_2655 wrote on Dec 4th, 2015 at 10:40am:
Aussie wrote on Dec 4th, 2015 at 9:30am:
gizmo_2655 wrote on Dec 3rd, 2015 at 11:17pm:
Aussie wrote on Dec 3rd, 2015 at 10:15pm:
gizmo_2655 wrote on Dec 3rd, 2015 at 10:05pm:
Alinta wrote on Dec 3rd, 2015 at 7:25pm:


Not surprised either, but very disappointed. The prosecution case never even got close to proving murder. Manslaughter was the correct verdict IMO.


Pig's arse.  If you reckon someone is behind a door and you shoot through the door.....what is your intent other than to put a bullet into anyone behind the door?




And the definition of murder requires intent to kill a particular victim, doesn't it??
Shooting at person A and unintentionally killing person B is manslaughter, not murder.


Queensland:

Quote:
CRIMINAL CODE - SECT 302
302 Definition of murder

(1) Except as hereinafter set forth, a person who unlawfully kills another under any of the following circumstances, that is to say—

    (a) if the offender intends to cause the death of the person killed or that of some other person or if the offender intends to do to the person killed or to some other person some grievous bodily harm;

    (b) if death is caused by means of an act done in the prosecution of an unlawful purpose, which act is of such a nature as to be likely to endanger human life;

    (c) if the offender intends to do grievous bodily harm to some person for the purpose of facilitating the commission of a crime which is such that the offender may be arrested without warrant, or for the purpose of facilitating the flight of an offender who has committed or attempted to commit any such crime;

    (d) if death is caused by administering any stupefying or overpowering thing for either of the purposes mentioned in paragraph (c);

    (e) if death is caused by wilfully stopping the breath of any person for either of such purposes;

is guilty of murder.

(2) Under subsection (1)(a) it is immaterial that the offender did not intend to hurt the particular person who is killed.

(3) Under subsection (1)(b) it is immaterial that the offender did not intend to hurt any person.

(4) Under subsection (1)(c) to (e) it is immaterial that the offender did not intend to cause death or did not know that death was likely to result.



Yes?? And since he didn't INTEND to kill Reeva (or anyone else, in truth) and was firing to scare/wound an intruder it is STILL not murder..


Did you read the transcript link I posted Gizmo? 

You'll find Dolus Eventualis intention covered by the Appeal Court there.

Alternatively just google Dolus Eventualis intention for basic information and you'll probably realise what you're missing in your reasoning.
Back to top
« Last Edit: Dec 4th, 2015 at 11:57am by Alinta »  
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 
Send Topic Print