I thought the case against Pistorius was strong until:

The accused in this case has not yet been convicted, but is awaiting trial for two charges of second-degree murder, after he shot and killed two teenagers who had broken into his home.

If such a charge can be brought in the US, why not in South Africa? Whether shooting four times at a suspect who has locked himself inside your toilet, as Oscar Pistorius reportedly thought he was doing, constitutes murder, manslaughter, or a justifiable act of self-defence, is a matter for the courts to decide.

Op has basically admitted to manslaughter. The prosecution is bungling and already stretching to make the case for premeditation of a killing in the middle of the night in a bathroom. Obviously OP is a little nuts but obviously it wasn't premeditated in any normal sense of the word. OP serves time for manslaughter. Not too hard to anticipate this outcome.

In the years to come, NASA will pour all of their funds into investigating how Pisto managed to cram so much stupidity in his posts without collapsing the fabric of space time. It will lead to new discoveries about the nature of our universe and for that we must thank him. Keep doing God's work, son.

It appears the so-called lawyers in here couldn't find a case of a homeowner being convicted of murder and their only avenue left is to hurl insults.

As a practicing attorney, I declare Pisto the clear winner of this debate. None of you saps were able to counter his dogged cop logic.

Now, I will show you how to defeat this man they call Pisto.

Read and learn children:

A charge of murder carries with it lesser included charges, including: first degree murder, second degree murder, manslaughter, and negligent homicide. The prosecutors realize that they won't be able to secure a murder conviction; however, by prosecuting Pistorius for murder, they have a better than reasonable chance of securing one of these lessor included charges. They are aiming for Shangri-La but expect to land in Shanghai. The murder charge and stern statements to the press are merely legal tactics. Cops have a hard time recognizing that what is work for them, is a game for us.

A quick search found this pisto...

http://www.news10.net/news/article/220698/2/Rio-Linda-homeowner-charged-in-ax-murder-found-guilty

I don't know who is more of a cry-baby - Pistorious, Pisto or a little baby...

A charge of murder carries with it lesser included charges, including: first degree murder, second degree murder, manslaughter, and negligent homicide.

Only in the US. I'm not familiar with the South African legal system, but I do know the French system very well, and the judge-led, non-adversarial nature of that court (similar in that respect to the South African system that has also dispensed with the jury) means that the charge can be amended during the proceedings.

I would suggest that they probably don't have to charge the highest count to get to where they really believe the charge should lay.

IF Pistorius is found innocent and or acquited, what do you think this will do for his running career? how do you think he will be looked at? does SA even have a civil court system? OJ was acquited in federal court but found guilty on every level of civil court.

J.D. Hack wrote:

Cops have a hard time recognizing that what is work for them, is a game for us.

Fun game.

J.D. Hack wrote:

As a practicing attorney, I declare Pisto the clear winner of this debate. None of you saps were able to counter his dogged cop logic.

Now, I will show you how to defeat this man they call Pisto.

Read and learn children:

A charge of murder carries with it lesser included charges, including: first degree murder, second degree murder, manslaughter, and negligent homicide. The prosecutors realize that they won't be able to secure a murder conviction; however, by prosecuting Pistorius for murder, they have a better than reasonable chance of securing one of these lessor included charges. They are aiming for Shangri-La but expect to land in Shanghai. The murder charge and stern statements to the press are merely legal tactics. Cops have a hard time recognizing that what is work for them, is a game for us.

This is what I and others alluded to several pages ago.

I have no idea how this will ultimately play out in the South African courts. I don't care what any incompetent cops have said or done. So all anyone with a three-digit IQ needs to know is this: there's a history of abuse and violence between the two. She was found dead in his house via four gunshot wounds. No one else was there. Therefore, he murdered her. End of. If you can even entertain the thought of this being some sort of "accident," I've got some land in Florida I'd love to sell you...

He's been granted bail

Hobbling free wrote:

He's been granted bail

some call this justice

It's hard to transpose the issues in this case to the UK for two reasons: (a) Gun ownership is rare and tightly controlled (b) The fear of deadly violent crime is lower.

That said, based on his defence case alone, in the UK he would definitely be charged with murder. That's because he didn't know who he was shooting at and had no way of gauging the threat they posed. He was clearly intent on causing serious harm, so it's murder.

So even if the prosecution could not disprove any of his case, he may well get convicted here, unless he could persuade a jury that he felt his life was under immediate threat, and that the force he used was proportionate in the circumstances. That's a stretch already.

The reality is that the neighbours' evidence causes him huge problems, as well as some inherent weaknesses in his defence case.

Of course the case is still at an early stage but it is very rare to hear so much of both sides' case at this point.

On what I have heard, in the UK he would be toast. Probably wouldn't have got bail either.

The person killed was not a burglar and was not inside the homeowner's residence. Plus, the killer was not convicted of first-degree murder.

Reading comprehension is is not as easy as pie for you.

A homeowner has never been convicted of murder for killing a burglar inside his/her home.

Hack would have proven me wrong on that if he could, but he chose to explain why the idiotic statement was made by the prosecutors.

Pisto wrote:

No, I do not. However, I was a cop, and I recognize idiot prosecutors and lawyers who think they know everything instantly.

Hmmm, I've found the exact same thing thing to be true for the cops I have known...

To in the UK, you are leaving about the biggest piece of the puzzle. What if it was Mo Farah who did the killing?

Earlier in the this thread I cited you case in Santa Clara in which a 1st degree murder conviction was obtained for killing a burglar, and a case in which a guy was convicted 1st degree murder for shooting a cop he mistook for a burglar.

The fact that the judges allow the cases to go to the jury on a 1st degree murder charge (with lesser included offense instructions) means that the law in those cases allows for a 1st degree murder conviction in those jurisdictions. Just up to the jury what they do or don't do.

To some extent juries are unique and to some extent predictable, no sense arguing what a specific jury would do until you know its composition. In SA, they go without jury, but the law there clearly allows the charge of 1st degree murder under the facts of Oscar's case, as the judge indicated in ruling on bail for him. Whether the judge would convict or not on that charge is another question.

I think a fair tea leave reading of the judge in OPs case ruling is that he is saying to the prosecution right now they better go back and bring a stronger, clearer, case at trial or this will simply be negligent homicide.

And Pisto, even though you want to dicker about whether someone has shown you a case, and I have shown you 1 where the burglar was killed and 1 where the cop mistaken as a burglar was killed, I will bet you anything that your opinion is of no comfort to OP as he sits at trial waiting for the judge to render his decision in June because probabilities aside, OP is charged with and is defending a premeditated murder charge and the court has the right to convict him. OP's fate is in the hands of 1 man the judge.

Pisto, your focus seems to be on a burglar, and I'll tell you one thing that the prosecution will introduce at trial (as any good one does in any murder trial) and that is going to be 2 sets of pictures: 1 set of pictures showing Reeva alive and then the 2nd set will be of her body decimated and riddled with bullet wounds. Experience tells lawyers that those pictures can turn a case around against even the nicest defendant. Right now you and most see this as OP's case, but a good prosecutor will make this Reeva's case. And contrary to all your rhetoric, she was not a burglar. Pictures of a dead burglar who got what some think they had coming to them are not the same as pictures of a dead young woman.

And I gotta tell you Pisto, OP put his story out there but if the ballistics come back and show he was lying about his prosthetics when shooting, or the neighbor who testifies about non-stop arguing is a nice little old lady who is credible, then OP is really gonna go down hard.

And if the prosecutor doesn't get a murder 1 conviction and only gets a negligent homicide conviction, then what does the prosecutor care? They will have done their job to the citizens of SA, and to Reeva and her family, to shine the brightest light on OP's tale to determine its truth.

My comments are not really meant to criticize you Pisto, you make a valid point about the challenge of convicting for death of a home invader, but that just is'nt the case here.

OP: "You're goddamn right I did!!!"""

He shot someone through a locked door. He could not see who the person was but he could have asked before shooting. Definitely premeditated murder.