The Reeva Steenkamp Killing: The Appeal

MickeyD

MickeyD

RIP
Joined
Oct 4, 2010
Messages
139,095
Reaction score
432
Location
Nelson Mandela Bay
STATE APPEALS OSCAR CONVICTION, SENTENCE

The State has filed its appeal against paralympian Oscar Pistorius's conviction and sentence, the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) said on Tuesday.

"Today, we announce that the NPA filed the application for leave to appeal both the conviction and sentence. The appeal on conviction is based on the question of law," spokesman Nathi Mncube said in a statement.

"The merits of the NPA's argument in this regard are contained in the papers that were filed with the registrar of the North Gauteng High Court today.

"This means that the matter is now officially sub judice and consequently the NPA will not be able to discuss the matter publicly until judgment is delivered by the court."

Pistorius was jailed for five years for the culpable homicide of his girlfriend, law graduate and model Reeva Steenkamp. He shot her dead through the locked toilet door in his Pretoria home on February 14 last year.

For discharging a firearm at Tasha's restaurant in Sandton, Johannesburg, in January 2013, he was sentenced to three years in jail, suspended for five years. The sentences would run concurrently, Judge Thokozile Masipa ruled in the High Court in Pretoria on October 21.

Mncube said prosecutors Gerrie Nel and Andrea Johnson had been studying the judgment, doing research, and consulting legal experts to establish if there were sufficient grounds to lodge appeals.

Following Pistorius's sentencing, Mncube said there was an "appetite" to appeal. The same day, NPA head Mxolisi Nxasana told Parliament he would discuss the sentence, and a possible appeal, with prosecutors.

Source : Sapa /fg/kd/jk/th
Date : 04 Nov 2014 12:12
 
HDS said:
Who will represent him I wonder?
Click to expand...

It's not a retrial remember that. It's a bench of Judges who will see if the Law has been applied correctly. There won't even be arguments from my understanding. They will decide if applied correctly, if not they will amend the sentence and he will appear in front of them for the amended sentence.
 
Pitbull said:
It's not a retrial remember that. It's a bench of Judges who will see if the Law has been applied correctly. There won't even be arguments from my understanding. They will decide if applied correctly, if not they will amend the sentence and he will appear in front of them for the amended sentence.
Click to expand...

Not even, it is the judge who presided the first trial determining an application for leave to appeal.
Once she has decided whether to grant leave or not - and to which court, the SCA or North Gauteng High Court full bench - and to what extent the State will probably petition the President of the SCA for leave which will be decided by two appellate judges.
 
Paul Hjul said:
Not even, it is the judge who presided the first trial determining an application for leave to appeal.
Once she has decided whether to grant leave or not - and to which court, the SCA or North Gauteng High Court full bench - and to what extent the State will probably petition the President of the SCA for leave which will be decided by two appellate judges.
Click to expand...

so SHE decides if she fsucked up?
 
Most importantly guys, does anybody have court papers, I would love to read their arguments?
 
akescpt said:
so SHE decides if she fsucked up?
Click to expand...

Luckily for us her word is not final, as NPA can apply for leave to appeal directly to the SCA if she refuses. She should spare herself further humiliation and just allow the leave.
 
How did she get there in the first place? What is her qualifications?
 
Wag said:
How did she get there in the first place? What is her qualifications?
Click to expand...

She is qualified and very experienced, she just made a mistake. Almost all judges have bad judgements in their closets.
 
Pitbull said:
That is still to be given leave to be put before an appellate court to be proven ;)
Click to expand...
FTFY

because here is the thing, the question of whether an appeal is to be heard must be determined before an appeal is heard
The early noise after the judgment was such as to conflate expressions that the State may seek to appeal with expressions that the State ought to appeal and that the judge was wrong. A lot of people would love a full out appeal to be proceeded with in the appellate courts because it could provide answers to an array of legally pertinent issues and something to write about. However courts of law administering justice are not there to serve as venues of entertainment or settlers of moot and academic arguments.

So as I've repeatedly pointed out there is a valid question as to the judges reasoning as to the basis for the subjective belief held by Pistorius - why he had to have envisaged Steenkamp's possible death - by such question is disposed of in one question from the appellate court: "what is alleged in the indictment?"
Prof Grant appears to advance the view that the correct legal test would be to ask whether Pistorius envisaged the possible death of anybody and proceeded nonetheless (eventualis) rather than the test applied by the court a quo and dozens of other courts of whether the accused actually foresaw the possible death of the person claimed to have been murdered under the States indictment. In my opinion his view is tantamount to adopting a position of transferred malice into our law which is erroneous but there is room for a debate, but it isn't well suited to a criminal court room. In my view on the correct indictment alleging that Pistorius intended to kill whoever was behind the door, motivated by fear. However the murder of an intruder case would lack the sensationalism that this case solicited and would put the brand SA under the spotlight and when a 5 year sentence was handed down there would still be an uproar.

Moreover the State has to fend off the fact that the Jub Jub appeal succeeded.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X