Even though the Appeal Court overturned Oscar’s previous verdict, and in the eyes of the law he’s now a murderer, will Judge Masipa continue to show him mercy? Essentially all the court has done so far is change Oscar’s label.
Here’s something to keep in mind…
“Masipa’s findings are still her findings. Nothing has changed.” – Judge Greenland
What do you think the outcome of the sentencing hearing will be after time served and mitigation are applied? Take the poll, and then share your comments below. I’d like to know if you think justice will only be served once Oscar does the mandatory sentence (15 years) behind bars. Or, is there justice in the Dolus Eventualis conviction alone? Let’s discuss.
Follow Lisa on Twitter @lisawj13
#SHAKEDOWN 
i think that she will give him a lesser sentence than what he deserves, i see her as a stubborne woman and wont be told by anyone, although pissie is now a murderer will she still not out him away for 15 just because she can because she is more of a mother than a judge, my opinion
LikeLike
Tend to agree. If the past is anything to go by, it will be another disappointingly light sentence. Another five years, out after 1/6th? My concern is…Oscar seems to me [and his family] to be taking the next step, the sentencing phase in their stride. Which suggests to me that they already know he’s going to get off lightly.
LikeLike
I think she must go by the law then he will plead snd beg Nel will fight so i say st least 8 yrs
LikeLiked by 1 person
A couple of things have niggled the back of my mind. 1). During the appeal it turned out that the SCA cannot give the sentence as they were able to in the past due to a new Concourt ruling. However, Gerrie Nel was not aware of this until they told him after he suggested they needn’t worry about the sentence but should return the matter to the High Court as the State felt it was only fair if there was a new conviction that both sides should present new evidence. The Judges looked a bit surprised. 2). Why once the Concourt dismissed his appeal and he had exhausted all his legal remedies was he allowed to stay out on bail and in fact have the conditions modified to his advantage. 3 ) Judge Masipa should not handle the sentencing because I am sure she still thinks the same way despite SCA ruling (A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still).
From the start of this trial everything has gone Oscar’s way, he got bail under strict conditions and shortly after most of the bail restrictions were lifted. Even on the conviction of CH considering the high level of negligence involved ‘one lawyer likened it to driving blindfolded on the highway and expecting nothing to happen’, the conviction was far too light. This is not a case where everything happened in a split second, he had plenty of time to deliberate and there were other options. I think we are all likely to be very disappointed with the sentence. Money does buy justice.
In the interests of Justice, I hope I am wrong.
LikeLike
Judge Masipa should not handle the sentencing because I am sure she still thinks the same way despite SCA ruling (A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still).>>>agreed. We’re about to see just how good/bad a judge she really is.
LikeLike
Something is very, very wrong with this case. I don’t necessarily think it’s a systemic issue – although there are quite a few of those in SA – I mean very specifically this is a glaring issue in this particular case. Judge Ledwaba said in December that it wouldn’t be in the interests of justice to restrict Oscar to house arrest at his uncle’s home for 24 hours a day (which is what the state requested) and granted him the ability to leave the house between 7am and noon every day. In the interests of justice?? Whose justice? Apparently Oscar’s. Three months later, Oscar’s right to appeal was denied by the Con Court because, to put it simply, there was nothing to dispute. But they still didn’t revoke his bail… in fact, they allowed him the right to delay his sentencing hearing from April to June. Something is very, very wrong with this case.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m very afraid that you’re right juror 13. I too feel that something is ‘off’ here, specific to this case. Shame, man. After such bitter disappointment with the high courts decision, faith was restored with the SCA ruling, and I think many felt we were once again on a path to justice. Then these disturbing bail decisions came down. It appears that all is not what it seemed, after all. For whatever reason, I myself was a hold out on the C word, even when faced with Masipa’s inexplicable ruling. Fast forward to today, I don’t think there’s even a remote chance that this guy will be appropriately punished.
LikeLike
Vivian, thank you for recollecting for us here the exchange between Nel and the SCA justices regarding his request to them that sentencing revert to the high court, and especially your sharp recall of the fact that THEY informed HIM that they couldn’t have assisted him with sentencing anyway, due to the Concourts’ ruling. I do recall this now, but had forgotten the order of this exchange, and the whole thing is disconcerting. Especially now in light of these bail hearing decisions that have happened in the interim. What is going on here? I’ll just offer that I think you are right here to be concerned about this sentencing outcome. I’m most definitely concerned myself. Am bracing for disappointment, unfortunately.
LikeLike
Everything has gone Oscar’s way from Day 1. Strict bail conditions overturned very quickly. Light Sentence for CH considering degree of negligence, he had other options. Bail extended even after all his legal remedies exhausted once Concourt dismissed appeal.
Think we will all be disappointed with the sentence. Money does buy justice. Gerrie Nel will do his utmost but both Judges Masipa and Ledwaba did not want to ‘punish’ Oscar. NPA have said they will argue for 15 yrs but have indicated it is up to the Judge. In the interests of the Steenkamps’ and Civil Society I hope I am wrong, sadly this case has been predominantly about Oscar with Reeva, the victim, playing second fiddle.
LikeLike
I don’t think Judge Masipa should be allowed to handle the sentencing because she chose to ignore all of the ear witnesses who heard a woman’s petrified screams for help, the obvious signs of a domestic struggle at the crime scene, all of the incriminating character evidence which has been well documented revealing Oscar’s narcissism and rage and the blatantly obvious evidence of emotional abuse within the relationship which were revealed in the Whats App messages. It depresses me to think that he won’t get what he deserves. It will depresses me if justice isn’t done. Already Oscar has not being charged with premeditated murder but with manslaughter or culpable homicide which is an injustice in itself. Whilst I am no longer a fan of Donald Trump I think he speaks for the rest of the world when he says that, ‘no one has been more guilty since O.J’.
LikeLike
It’s a huge conflict of interest to allow the judge, whose verdict was just overturned, to preside over the new sentencing hearing. I’d venture to guess this happens very infrequently. Although, if anybody has information on how frequently, please chime in.
LikeLike
And further more Oscar gets 5 years but is out in 1. What is that?
LikeLike
And if she sentences him to 10? I wonder, can one appeal a sentence? Lisa remember Jodi Arias’ trial ended up being a sentencing trial on its own that went on longer than the original trial.
LikeLike
Oscar can’t appeal a sentence as far as I know (someone chime in if I’m wrong) but the state can actually appeal if Masipa gives a light sentence & they believe she erred.
LikeLike
Greenland might know.
LikeLike
Sadly, I think 8-10 years … Still far better then the 5 yr he served 7 months of. However, I do believe a few actual YEARS served in prison and OP will have some crazy angry episodes whilst incarcerated. Without being surrounded by his “enablers” perhaps he comes to terms?? …
LikeLike