The Nicholas Ninow Rape Case and Trial

skimread said:
If you plead guilty you don't have a trial. It's pointless. How does it gets swept under the rug if you plead guilty?

This is the huge mistake you are making. You see it as whites on trial. You see it as a benefit to all black people. It should be a legal process. The legal process says you have a trial in you plead not guilty. He plead guilty. Will the little black girl benefit or her parents benefit by their being a trial when he plead guilty?
Click to expand...
yes they would.
20 year sentence (out in 10 for good behavior) vs life in prison (out in 25 years- disgusting still)
 
hungrymamba said:
Why are you defending a rapist. The state needs to squeeze the judge for the longest possible jail term, why are you making it about race? There have been cases previously where people plead guilty, but the state proceeds with the trial because they do not believe the guy pleaded to all alleged offences, they want to prove additional criminal charges, maybe those that he did not admit to. Why are you so hell-bent on defending this monster?
Click to expand...
The only charge he didn't plead guilty to is the assaulting other people. Even if he is found guilty of it then it will run concurrently and it is much less a sentence than the rape of the little girl.

You can't claim I am defending a rapist when he pleaded guilty. You clearly see this as a case where you want all the juicy details in the press. What sicko are you wanting to have a process that has no point?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Swa
skimread said:
The only charge he didn't plead guilty to is the assaulting other people. Even if he is found guilty of it then it will run concurrently and it is much less a sentence than the rape of the little girl.

You can't claim I am defending a rapist when he pleaded guilty. You clearly see this as a case where you want all the juicy details in the press. What sicko are you wanting to have a process that has no point?
Click to expand...

You are defending him. For some reason you want him spared the disgust of public glare. He deserves everything coming to him.
 
doubletrouble said:
yes they would.
20 year sentence (out in 10 for good behavior) vs life in prison (out in 25 years- disgusting still)
Click to expand...
See he pleads guilty meaning he gets the full sentence of his crime yet you say it is disgusting. That is the laws of YOUR country. You can't say because this is emotional and in the press this case needs a worse sentence than other child rapes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Swa
hungrymamba said:
Why are you defending a rapist. The state needs to squeeze the judge for the longest possible jail term, why are you making it about race? There have been cases previously where people plead guilty, but the state proceeds with the trial because they do not believe the guy pleaded to all alleged offences, they want to prove additional criminal charges, maybe those that he did not admit to. Why are you so hell-bent on defending this monster?
Click to expand...
I think this is likely some rent-seeking on behalf of the NPA

Why bother prosecuting more difficult crimes (like politicians firing assault rifles in public) when you can go after someone who has confessed to the crimes he has committed?
 
skimread said:
See he pleads guilty meaning he gets the full sentence of his crime yet you say it is disgusting. That is the laws of YOUR country. You can't say because this is emotional and in the press this case needs a worse sentence than other child rapes.
Click to expand...
I think doubletrouble was implying that 25 years is still disgustingly short for the crime. Not that him getting 25 years is a disgustingly long sentence.

A prick like this should rot in jail forever.
 
konfab said:
I think this is likely some rent-seeking on behalf of the NPA

Why bother prosecuting more difficult crimes (like politicians firing assault rifles in public) when you can go after someone who has confessed to the crimes he has committed?
Click to expand...

The stupidity in this thread keeps getting worst, I am out!
 
konfab said:
I think doubletrouble was implying that 25 years is still disgustingly short for the crime. Not that him getting 25 years is a disgustingly long sentence.

A prick like this should rot in jail forever.
Click to expand...
I agree he deserves to rot in jail for life. The law should be changed to make child rape a life sentence without parole then. But unfortunately our law isn't that. Then change the law. Don't have protests or show disgust when a child rapists gets the max sentence.

What I don't understand is so many people want so much more out of the case. If a child rapists is going to get the max sentence according to the law then why be disappointing with it? Why politicize it? Why call it white privilege this or that.
 
skimread said:
View attachment 710519

He pleads guilty with such graphic detail the reporters can't even report on it. Even the fact that he did it twice.

But the state says he hasn't adequately provided details of his crimes. Why is there a need for the state to call the waitress as if to ID him when he pleads guilty?

We need the f'r sentenced because he plead guilty. Not weeks of a trial with irrelevant details because the state want to look like a hero to black people as if he plead not guilty.

Our courts have such incredible backlogs. Where is the justice for all those victims of murder and rape. Our justice system is a joke.
Click to expand...
skimread said:
If you plead guilty you don't have a trial. It's pointless. How does it gets swept under the rug if you plead guilty?

This is the huge mistake you are making. You see it as whites on trial. You see it as a benefit to all black people. It should be a legal process. The legal process says you have a trial in you plead not guilty. He plead guilty. Will the little black girl benefit or her parents benefit by their being a trial when he plead guilty?
Click to expand...
skimread said:
I agree he deserves to rot in jail for life. The law should be changed to make child rape a life sentence without parole then. But unfortunately our law isn't that. Then change the law. Don't have protests or show disgust when a child rapists gets the max sentence.

What I don't understand is so many people want so much more out of the case. If a child rapists is going to get the max sentence according to the law then why be disappointing with it? Why politicize it? Why call it white privilege this or that.
Click to expand...

Geez white Julius, please stand back from the race card.
 
hungrymamba said:
Oh, Boy! How many whites have been on trial for heinous crimes lately... A lot, so voetsek with your racist agenda. Justice isn't about meting out harsh sentences, it is about getting to the truth as told by victims and offenders alike. Victims and other witnesses deserve a shot at telling their story.
Click to expand...
You have to see the context. The BLF releases a press release saying that based on this rape that ALL white are rapists. A freaking press release stating whites are rapists.

Julius Malema shouted in parliament to any white person that questions him. You are Nicholas Ninow. You are rapist.

This case is ALL about race. Just look at social media. It is disgusting



Craig said:
Geez white Julius, please stand back from the race card.
Click to expand...
You have no idea what politicians have been using this event for. it is disgusting. Call me names I don't care but I will not forget how the politicians have abused the case and what racist hate speech they got away with because no one challenged them on those statements. Nicholas Ninow is their golden goose and they will milk him until the cows come home.
 
skimread said:
Again from your answer you want a public trial for the PUBLICs benefit. That is not how the law works. This is not reality TV for the public's benefit
Click to expand...

I think it's been pointed out that the state might disagree with his claimed spontaneity of the events that led up to the rape.

Thus they are fully entitled to continue with the trial.

It's not the first time this has happened.
 
hungrymamba said:
Oh, Boy! How many whites have been on trial for heinous crimes lately... A lot, so voetsek with your racist agenda. Justice isn't about meting out harsh sentences, it is about getting to the truth as told by victims and offenders alike. Victims and other witnesses deserve a shot at telling their story.
Click to expand...

They must move on to those victims of other perpetrators, so those perpetrators can go to jail. Not waste the overburdened courts time when the guy has plead guilty.
 
skimread said:
I agree he deserves to rot in jail for life. The law should be changed to make child rape a life sentence without parole then. But unfortunately our law isn't that. Then change the law. Don't have protests or show disgust when a child rapists gets the max sentence.

What I don't understand is so many people want so much more out of the case. If a child rapists is going to get the max sentence according to the law then why be disappointing with it? Why politicize it? Why call it white privilege this or that.
Click to expand...
I never called it white privilege. You and Black Mamba is making this about race.

I am saying that if he pleads guilty, it will be seen as a mitigating circumstance and therefore he may not get the maximum sentence. The state therefore wants to proceed with the case to show how horrific his crime was, how he still was not 100% honest with the courts (he in fact did follow the girl and it was premeditated) and therefore he deserves the maximum sentence
 
skimread said:
he should rot in jail. The law should be changed to make child rape a life sentence without parole then. But unfortunately our law isn't that. Then change the law. Don't have protests when a child rapists gets the max sentence.

What I don't understand is so many people want so much more out of the case. If a child rapists is going to get the max sentence according to the law then why be disappointing with it? Why politicize it?
Click to expand...
The problem isn't the law. Child rape is a life sentence.

The problem is the parole board, which simply doesn't do its job in determining who is a threat to society and who isn't.

They parole 35 year old rapists after 9 years.
Swart said the suspect had been out of jail on parole after a 2010 rape conviction.

The man will also face a third charge of absconding after allegedly violating his parole conditions, which led to a criminal case being opened in May.
Click to expand...
https://www.heraldlive.co.za/news/2019-06-17-rapist-out-on-parole-rearrested-for-rape-and-burglary/

But go into colossal amounts of efforts to keep 70 year old political murderers with cancer in prison.
 
Craig said:
Geez white Julius, please stand back from the race card.
Click to expand...
Splinter said:
I think it's been pointed out that the state might disagree with his claimed spontaneity of the events that led up to the rape.

Thus they are fully entitled to continue with the trial.

It's not the first time this has happened.
Click to expand...
The state didn't even verify with the victims after he plead guilty if they wanted to have a trial. They just said let's do this. It should be up to the VICTIMS not the PUBLIC if they want to be dragged through a trial if he already plead guilty and his sentence will be the same.
 
skimread said:
The state didn't even verify with the victims after he plead guilty if they wanted to have a trial. They just said let's do this. It should be up to the VICTIMS not the PUBLIC or state to decide IF his sentence will be the same.
Click to expand...

Well done, a post without referring to skin colour. I'm impressed boytjie. :thumbsup:
 
skimread said:
The state didn't even verify with the victims after he plead guilty if they wanted to have a trial. They just said let's do this. It should be up to the VICTIMS not the PUBLIC if they want to be dragged through a trial if he already plead guilty and his sentence will be the same.
Click to expand...

Incorrect sir. It's up to the prosecution to decide.
 
doubletrouble said:
I am saying that if he pleads guilty, it will be seen as a mitigating circumstance and therefore he may not get the maximum sentence. The state therefore wants to proceed with the case to show how horrific his crime was, how he still was not 100% honest with the courts (he in fact did follow the girl and it was premeditated) and therefore he deserves the maximum sentence
Click to expand...
No black twitter is saying it's mitigating circumstances. It's up to him to prove any mitigating circumstances or his lawyer to bring in witnesses to claim that drugs caused him to rape. He is not doing that. They are not calling any witnesses. He just plead guilty. His sentence will be the same if he plead innocent.

Pleading guilty is not a mitigating circumstance. That is a rumour started on social media.
If the evidence is overwhelming as was this case then it is irrelevant to the sentencing if he plead guilty or not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X