South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
The high court in Pretoria on Tuesday dismissed Dros rapist Nicholas Ninow's application for leave to appeal against the conviction and life sentence imposed on him.
Ninow was convicted in September 2019 of raping a seven-year-old girl at a Dros restaurant in Silverton, Pretoria. The incident happened in September 2018.
He was sentenced him to life in prison for the rape and five years for drug possession and defeating the ends of justice. The sentences run concurrently.
![]()
Nicholas Ninow Twitter rant gets YFM staffer fired
YFM has confirmed that it has fired its senior content producer for her racial remarks on Twitter over convicted child rapist Nicholas Ninow.www.news24.com
YFM has confirmed that it has fired its senior content producer for her racial remarks on Twitter over convicted child rapist Nicholas Ninow.
On October 16, the radio station said, it was brought to its attention via YFM social media platforms that independent contractor and senior content producer Camagwini Mavovana had posted racially discriminatory commentary on her personal social media account relating to a matter of broad public interest.
The post in question stated: "Nicholas is representing his race well. Amnesia is something they're good at, especially when they have to take accountability. Let the dog rot in jail and call it a day."
There are hundreds of these post that Ninow is a representation of whites and their privilege. Good to see one person go fired because of it.
No fine and jail time?No R150k fine? Discount due to skin color privilege?
newsitn.com
Exactly what I was thinking. The last time I saw the father was about 3 years ago and him and his partner had a little baby. I shudder to think...It is quite bizarre that it was missed. Might be worth pinging a journo. Could actually paint a clearer picture.
People who abuse don't realise the knock on effects of their actions for one.
I can't find anything online in the media where this connection has been made between father and son. Both being arrested for sexual offenses that involve minors. Can't just be a coincidence. Something is broken there.
It is an area that I am not well informed on. I should probably educate myself. Well studied doesn't necessarily mean that solid conclusions have been made. It is a depressing but interesting subject.The cycle of abuse is studied. Most abusers are playing out abuse that they themselves have suffered.
In the clip, a tearful Chantal can be seen denying her son was a rapist but had instead "made a mistake".
I have also met her a couple of times. Not lekker.Well, no, and yes. He is a rapist, his "mistake" was rape.
Poor woman is deep in denial.
It is an area that I am not well informed on. I should probably educate myself. Well studied doesn't necessarily mean that solid conclusions have been made. It is a depressing but interesting subject.
I have also met her a couple of times. Not lekker.
I will check it out. Thanks.If you google "cycle of abuse" note that there are two definitions:
..if you focus on results that pertain to children you will find more of the second case which is what we are discussing.
- The abusive cycles in adult relationships
- The process whereby an abused child becomes and adult abuser
Except that if true, the family history of abuse should have been taken into account with sentencing, not?There was a lot of messiness that came out around the time that this thing broke. Rumours about her own drug abuse and neglect of the kids. Rumours of course, you can't help but wonder though given the circumstances.
EDIT: this is starting to sound like I am an apologist. I am not. I believe that pedophiles should submit to chemical castration and I am fully behind the sentence handed down to this POS.
Except that if true, the family history of abuse should have been taken into account with sentencing, not?
Whether we dislike the type of crime or not, we consider extenuating circumstances for other types of abuse, I for one believe the law should be equally applied to everyone regardless of one's distain for the offender.
Fair enough, if no people were harmed, place not trashed, i.o.w. the events and damage fits factsI am not a judge but extenuating circumstances ought to be: "Your honor I stole the bread to feed my starving family. I understand it was a crime and I wish to repay society for my wrongdoing."
Ah, really? Right there the sentence doubles with a 'nice try go have a long banana in jail'....not: "Your honor I was high af and decided to rape a child because 'damage.'" /draws circles in the air with finger around ear