pistorius

sx_turbo said:
the guy should have been convicted of murder, given a life sentence, and stripped of all his medals and completley removed from anything to do with sports.

utterly disgraceful, reevas family must be so upset and frustrated.
Click to expand...

Why? Where is the link between the crime he has been found guilty of and his achievements in sport? Supposing Mansell, Hill, Vettel etc got a DR10 on their license? Would it be justified to strip them of a world title completely unrelated?

Personally I think the sentence is light.. however the SA judicial process is very different to that in the UK and therefore comparisons cannot be easily made.
 
squintykid said:
Not sure if I was the Steenkamps I'd class 5 years, most of which under house arrest as justice.
Click to expand...

If i were the steenkamps i'd be poping round the back of his house with a scoped rifle ... revenge being a dish best served with a big f*** off spoon
 
andy700 said:
Exactly, particularly as Pistorius was using illegal, hollow point ammunition which would cause horrific injuries at that range.
Click to expand...

surely hollow points would have splashed on the door instead of blasting straight through it - the point of hollow point and frangie being to dump all the eergy on the first thing it hits to avoid over penetration.
 
big soft moose said:
If i were the steenkamps i'd be poping round the back of his house with a scoped rifle ... revenge being a dish best served with a big f*** off spoon
Click to expand...

You could but I believe it is currently unoccupied!
 
Lynton said:
now I am not an expert on the prison system, never having been a resident or worked in one, however I imagine a rich white afrikanner in a heavily black dominated south african prison may present a few erm... "challenges" over the next few months, unless he is kept in the hospital wing....
Click to expand...

I suspect he'll be in a special prison for rich white afrikanners - rather like the cat c ones ove hee that keep stockbrokers away from gangbangers
 
Lynton said:
You could but I believe it is currently unoccupied!
Click to expand...

I meant when he gets out to house arrest - given that its also best served cold, the ten month wait will give ample time to lay hands on a high calibre rifle and some flash tips ;)
 
big soft moose said:
surely hollow points would have splashed on the door instead of blasting straight through it - the point of hollow point and frangie being to dump all the eergy on the first thing it hits to avoid over penetration.
Click to expand...

I think you may find the average internal door to be far softer than people! Hence straight through it! Doubt was solid oak!
big soft moose said:
I meant when he gets out to house arrest - given that its also best served cold, the ten month wait will give ample time to lay hands on a high calibre rifle and some flash tips ;)
Click to expand...

Not disagreeing with your thinking...
 
Reality TV South African style - IMHO a shameful judgement from a disgraceful Judge

she needs to go back to night school

Maybe Oscar will finance her from the film and book royalties
 
Last edited:
course end of the day it depends on whether you believe his version of events , if you do then it was basically an accident and 5 years is quite harsh for being a f*****g idiot , but pales into insignificance with having to live with the knowledge that you shot and killed the love of your life. I mean can you imagine ? - i'd probably top myself rather than live with that.

if you believe that his version of events is a tissue of lies , then he'd have got away with premediated murder, and 5 years is a complete joke, and some red blooded african justice might e the order of the day .. such as four 9mm slugs fired through his bathroom door while he was on the toilet. ;)
 
big soft moose said:
surely hollow points would have splashed on the door instead of blasting straight through it - the point of hollow point and frangie being to dump all the eergy on the first thing it hits to avoid over penetration.
Click to expand...

They would certainly have started to deform, which would make the entry wounds even worse, and the exit wounds (if indeed they did exit) absolutely horrific. As someone said earlier, an interior door would not have posed an obstacle at such close range.
It was proved that he did use illegal ammunition.

This contains information from the court case.

http://www.ibtimes.com/what-are-exp...orius-shoot-reeva-steenkamp-cause-more-damage

It confirms what I have said, that the bullets would have started to deform on hitting the door. He was using illegal ammunition, which consequently gave Reeva no chance of survival.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
althiugh to be honest four hard point rounds at close range would make a hell of a mess as well so the ammunition type used is probably not that important. The only thing that really matters is did he know who he was shooting at if he did he doesnt have a leg to stand on (pun intended)
 
BillN_33 said:
Reality TV South African style - IMHO a shameful judgement from a disgraceful Judge

she needs to go back to night school

Maybe Oscar will finance her from the film and book royalties
Click to expand...

presume you also take issue with the two assessors Janet Henzen-du Toit and Themba Mazibuko.

All their decisions were unanimous.

We may not agree with the decisions by British standards, but if there was no disagreement between them then it would stand to reason that they applied South African laws and statutes correctly.
 
Lynton said:
Why? Where is the link between the crime he has been found guilty of and his achievements in sport? Supposing Mansell, Hill, Vettel etc got a DR10 on their license? Would it be justified to strip them of a world title completely unrelated?

Personally I think the sentence is light.. however the SA judicial process is very different to that in the UK and therefore comparisons cannot be easily made.
Click to expand...

because he was supposed to be a role model, by continuing to let him have is sport portfolio, its almost advertising to say that its perfectly ok to shoot and kill people, regardless of whether it was an intruder or not, he had illegal ammo, and there wasnt really a clear motive, he cant even say it was self defence, because he didnt know who was behind the door, and he didnt know whether that person was armed or not.

if someone was robbing my house, and i had a gun, i'd be demanding to see who they were before i shot, i'm sure most people would (in my opinion, before i get moaned at for talking on behalf of the rest of the world again) , just incase for this very reason.
 
sx_turbo said:
because he was supposed to be a role model, by continuing to let him have is sport portfolio, its almost advertising to say that its perfectly ok to shoot and kill people, regardless of whether it was an intruder or not, he had illegal ammo, and there wasnt really a clear motive, he cant even say it was self defence, because he didnt know who was behind the door, and he didnt know whether that person was armed or not.

if someone was robbing my house, and i had a gun, i'd be demanding to see who they were before i shot, i'm sure most people would (in my opinion, before i get moaned at for talking on behalf of the rest of the world again) , just incase for this very reason.
Click to expand...

and if they were armed, in demanding they come out they could get an idea of where you are and shoot you through the door

Countries (such as the USA) where guns are more prevalent can't be compared to how people would react in the UK.

it's all fine saying you'd do this or that, but when there's an infinitely higher risk of them also being armed who knows what you'd really do
 
Uneducated_Rick said:
IIRC he illegally owned that ammunition but I don't think that is what was loaded in his gun (in fact I don't think it even fit his gun, his defence was he was 'storing it for someone else' corroborated by him being unable to use it)
Click to expand...

....If he had possession of illegal ammunition, isn't that an offence he should have been additionally charged with? Just as he was charged (and found guilty) regarding the gun in restaurant incident.

I don't care how successful an athlete Pistorius is (or was), he seems like someone with very serious issues who is potentially a danger to the public.

I'm sure that his jail inmates will find a way to get to him - It will doubtless provide them with an enjoyable challenge.
 
Lynton said:
You could but I believe it is currently unoccupied!
Click to expand...

i believe the judge said that he had sold the house ,,,,
and as for the expanding ammunition ,thats a bit of a blue kipper ,,,,,,normal standard 9mm will do the same job ,,,,,,how dead can anyone be ,,,,,,dead or really really dead ?
i listened to most of the evidence and if i had been on a jury i wouldnt have found him guilty of murder , the state didnt really have any evidence to prove that he intended to kill her .
 
big soft moose said:
course end of the day it depends on whether you believe his version of events , if you do then it was basically an accident and 5 years is quite harsh for being a f*****g idiot , but pales into insignificance with having to live with the knowledge that you shot and killed the love of your life. I mean can you imagine ? - i'd probably top myself rather than live with that.

if you believe that his version of events is a tissue of lies , then he'd have got away with premediated murder, and 5 years is a complete joke, and some red blooded african justice might e the order of the day .. such as four 9mm slugs fired through his bathroom door while he was on the toilet. ;)
Click to expand...

this sums it up for me ,,,,,,,,(,im not sure i believe his version )
 
Regarding the South African court system, aren't we all about to be entertained by the case of the dark skinned guy (Indian? Pakistani?) who is being charged with the fatal shooting of his (rather beautiful) wife on their honeymoon? I forget his name but he's from Bristol.

Someone better start a new thread if not done already.
 
RedRobin said:
Regarding the South African court system, aren't we all about to be entertained by the case of the dark skinned guy (Indian? Pakistani?) who is being charged with the fatal shooting of his (rather beautiful) wife on their honeymoon? I forget his name but he's from Bristol.

Someone better start a new thread if not done already.
Click to expand...

Shrien Dewani, and he's British.
 
donut said:
i believe the judge said that he had sold the house ,,,,
and as for the expanding ammunition ,thats a bit of a blue kipper ,,,,,,normal standard 9mm will do the same job ,,,,,,how dead can anyone be ,,,,,,dead or really really dead ?
i listened to most of the evidence and if i had been on a jury i wouldnt have found him guilty of murder , the state didnt really have any evidence to prove that he intended to kill her .
Click to expand...

If you use standard hard point ammunition at that range, then yes it will have a devastating effect, unless you are of course the judge in this case, who said that it could not be proven that Pistorius intended to kill his victim when he fired four shots throght the door.
The fact remains though, that standard ammunition would have gone straight through Reeva without deforming, therefore leaving very small entry and exit wounds.
I am not going to go into the all too obvious details about what happens when four already deformed bullets hit, and the subsequent effect on soft tissue, bone and organs.
One you may survive, but the other you stand no chance.
 
One you may survive, but the other you stand no chance
Click to expand...

But its not about the ammo used, chances of surviving or anything else, it's what the intent was that sealed his fate, it doesn't really matter what the weapon used was, the ammo or anything else. Had it not been his girlfriend he would still quite possibly ended up being charged and convicted.
The Judge, for whatever reason, but one would hope it was the evidence decided his guilt, based on what she concluded was his intention. She gave, apparently, I didn't watch it a very comprehensive explanation of that conclusion, and the reasons why she dismissed the other possible charges. I think you'll find that at no point did she refer to the ammunition, as it really doesn't matter to her verdict.

We may not agree with the decisions by British standards, but if there was no disagreement between them then it would stand to reason that they applied South African laws and statutes correctly.
Click to expand...

The basis of SA law is English Common Law, as it is in many other Countries, not just Commonwealth, the US for example. The wording for murder is much the same, and the alternatives more than loosely resemble similar offences in the UK. There are local differences that creep in since they became independent, but in many ways its very close to what would happen here.

The only major difference would be that in the UK, claiming someone locked in the bathroom was a threat really would not wash. If they are locked in a bathroom, and you are preventing them from escaping, they are no threat at all, and shooting them (ignoring the firearms offences for now) would be murder.

The argument of self defence in SA might hold, and seems to have held more water, simply because of armed bruglarys might be more prevalent there.
 
Last edited:
big soft moose said:
course end of the day it depends on whether you believe his version of events , if you do then it was basically an accident and 5 years is quite harsh for being a f*****g idiot
Click to expand...


Even if i believed he thought it was an intruder (which i don't) i'd still consider his actions an attempt to kill & a significantly excessive use of force.
 
Sadly ( :) Bernie is right, it is the intention that is important.

As for using excessive force, there can (and often are) situations where the only force available has to be used whether or not it seems, later, to be excessive to someone who wasn't faced with the situation = for example you might have to ram a vehicle with a loader tractor, and kill the occupant with its spike, and would have used a Smart Car if you had happened to be sitting in one at the time...

As for what hollow nosed bullets would have done when hitting a door, nobody knows. Hollow point is a type, not a specific design. I have .243 hollow point bullets and 017 rimfire bullets that literally explode on contact, I also have .22 rimfire ones that just expand a little bit. 9mm is pretty low powered anyway, they may or may not expand much. Incidentally, (some) armed British police officers use hollow point bullets. What is relevant here is that they (and I) possess them legally, he didn't and was convicted of that offense too.
 
Garry Edwards said:
What is relevant here is that they (and I) possess them legally, he didn't and was convicted of that offense too.
Click to expand...

Actually Garry, the other offense for which he was convicted was for unlawfully firing a gun in a restraunt. Not to do with posessing it, or the ammunition....simply firing it.
 
Simmotino said:
Well at least tonight he *will* wake up to a burglar using his toilet! :D
Click to expand...
so wrong, but I need a new keyboard.. Double espresso all over it!
 
andy700 said:
They would certainly have started to deform, which would make the entry wounds even worse, and the exit wounds (if indeed they did exit) absolutely horrific. As someone said earlier, an interior door would not have posed an obstacle at such close range.
It was proved that he did use illegal ammunition.

This contains information from the court case.

http://www.ibtimes.com/what-are-exp...orius-shoot-reeva-steenkamp-cause-more-damage

It confirms what I have said, that the bullets would have started to deform on hitting the door. He was using illegal ammunition, which consequently gave Reeva no chance of survival.
Click to expand...

Please read the article again. Hollow points are not illegal in SA

South African law, however, prohibits the use of expanding bullets by police and military in the country, but it is still available to citizen consumers. Private firearm owners can purchase hollow-point bullets at most gun shops, according to Gulf News.
Click to expand...
 
andy700 said:
It just shows how ridiculous the Pistorius verdict was.
Part of the article stated:

"the prosecuters argued successfully that Chauke should be convicted for the murder of the accomplice who was killed by rangers, South Africa's SABC News said on its website. The judge rejected Chauke's argument that he was forced into the poaching excursion by his accomplices."

So, in this case the poacher is being prosecuted for murder, for the death of his accomplice who was shot dead by park rangers - unbelievable!!!
Click to expand...

Fantastic, SA has a major problem on their hands with rhino poaching. SA have ramped up anti poaching and are making an example of offenders. ( well those that are not shot on the spot)
 
sx_turbo said:
because he was supposed to be a role model, by continuing to let him have is sport portfolio, its almost advertising to say that its perfectly ok to shoot and kill people, regardless of whether it was an intruder or not, he had illegal ammo, and there wasnt really a clear motive, he cant even say it was self defence, because he didnt know who was behind the door, and he didnt know whether that person was armed or not.

if someone was robbing my house, and i had a gun, i'd be demanding to see who they were before i shot, i'm sure most people would (in my opinion, before i get moaned at for talking on behalf of the rest of the world again) , just incase for this very reason.
Click to expand...

Please, go and live in SA for 20 years and let's see if you have the same views when you return.

And again, the hollow point ammo is NOT illegal in SA.
 
indeed - in the UK holding a burgular at gunpoint is a realistic option (assuming you have a gun of course) , in a country where the burgular is probably armed too saying "I say what perchance are you doing on my premises" just gives away the advantage.

If I was confrontng a burgular in SA I'd probably shoot first and ask questions later too

What i wouldnt do though is wake up in the middle of the night , here a noise in the bathroom , totally fail to notice my girlfreind was no longer in bed with me and unload half a clip through the bathroom door because it might be a burgular. (and I have trouble believing this is what pistorious did either)

the alternate option of couple have a row, girl shuts herself in the bathroom and irationally angry boyfriend fires four in a fit of rage then makes up a load of [PLEASE DON'T TRY TO BYPASS THE SWEAR FILTER] about burgulars in order not to get done for murder , still seems like it might be the more reasonable explanation
 
big soft moose said:
the alternate option of couple have a row, girl shuts herself in the bathroom and irationally angry boyfriend fires four in a fit of rage then makes up a load of [PLEASE DON'T TRY TO BYPASS THE SWEAR FILTER] about burgulars in order not to get done for murder , still seems like it might be the more reasonable explanation
Click to expand...
This is how I believe things played out...the only bit I would take any exception to would be the spelling of burglar :)
 
Cartus said:
This is how I believe things played out...the only bit I would take any exception to would be the spelling of burglar :)
Click to expand...

odd , not picked up by my speiling chunker - maybe theres two ways of spelling it or summat
 
Cartus said:
This is how I believe things played out...
Click to expand...

he would have been more believable if he'd claimed he couldnt remember what happened..... because he was legless at the time :coat:
 
ecoleman said:
Fantastic, SA has a major problem on their hands with rhino poaching. SA have ramped up anti poaching and are making an example of offenders. ( well those that are not shot on the spot)
Click to expand...


You just don't get it do you?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top