The hearing begins at 9am local SA time. I’ll be providing updates live on this page. You can also follow Nick on Twitter at @HiRezLife
Nel is walking Masipa through the points of the state’s argument. He calls the sentence “shockingly and inappropriately lenient.”
Nel tells Masipa that Oscar’s personal circumstances were “over-emphasized”
The camera primarily focuses on Nel but when it does pan to Masipa, she doesn’t look too pleased.
“The court misdirected itself in believing that the perception of an intruder entering home was a mitigating factor.”
Nel points out that Oscar formed his INTENTION to fire in the bedroom when he got his gun… not in the bathroom. This should have been taken into account as an aggravated factor.
“The court failed to take into account the findings of the SCA”
Nel says the court made credibility findings about Scholtz, therefore the court should have rejected that Oscar was in no condition to testify. He also questions her finding that Oscar was remorseful…
“There’s a chasm between regret and remorse.”
Knowing that the SCA found that the accused had never given a proper explanation for why he fired, the accused should have provided testimony during sentencing.
Right on schedule…. a cell phone goes off.
Nel politely uses the words “respectfully” and “utmost respect” repeatedly while he basically tells Masipa her sentencing judgement is shit.
Nel hammers home – the benchmark is 15 years – that’s the starting point of a sentence, not a clean slate. Go Nel!
“He decided in the bedroom to shoot at whoever – if there was somebody in the bathroom – whoever…” “That was the fact of his intention – to shoot whoever.”
The court failed to grade the degree of Dolus Eventualis. The court was bound by the inferences of the SCA. Likely and Obvious are degrees in Dolus Eventualis… SCA found it was obvious that Oscar’s foreseeability was he would kill a person. “Those are all very aggravating factors, My Lady.”
Nel talks about what bothers Mr. Steenkamp… he wondered what his daughter felt when she was being shot. Nel feels this wasn’t fully taken into account. He also emphasizes the cruelty of Black Talon. It should have been an aggravating factor. It didn’t get the attention in sentencing that it should have.
The court misdirected itself when the court ignored the SCAs finding that Oscar’s subjective intention was unaffected by his vulnerability.
Nel also points out that the physical demonstration of the accused in court was very different than a person walking down their hallway with a lethal firearm. In other words, the reenactment in court is not a true reenactment.
The public’s misperception [of why Oscar shot, the argument theory] is irrelevant and shouldn’t have been considered. Nel says, what is important to note about the public – society has an interest in a proper sentence being imposed based on the nature and gravity of the crime.
Nel wraps up by saying they can only appeal to the SCA, therefore they are applying for leave to appeal.
Roux starts by saying how shockingly inappropriate the state’s appeal arguments are. Points out the state waited 15 days, and let poor poor Oscar sit in jail waiting to see what they would do. Roux says the state is “prejudice.” Reminds Masipa how much Oscar cried in court. The state has not given a “fair appraisal of this matter.”
Roux says about Masipa’s judgement… “The judgement made me proud of judiciary.”
In case you want to revisit that nightmare, here is the document…
Masipa’s Sentencing Judgement for Oscar Pistorius 7.6.2016
“What is it that the state wants?” If it’s 8 years, they want 10 years? He ponders, should the respondent should sit and be subjected to uncertainty. “Enough is enough. It does not comfort you that justice is fair and reasonable.”
“My Lady, we live in the real world. If I wake up at 3 o’clock in the morning, and I believe there’s an intruder in my house, it’s dark and I have no legs to walk on…” He stops there… was waiting for him to say I’d shoot somebody too, but then he’d have to add in ‘4 times’ to be accurate and um, that kinda sounds bad.
Masipa still looks stern but slightly softer as Roux speaks. She listens intently and takes notes.
Roux says the court was fair in dealing with Kim Martin and Mr. Steenkamp.
Very few people in the courtroom today. Even Barry Bateman has given up on tweeting today. They’re at the South Gauteng Courthouse today, not the usual North Courthouse.
There must be a reasonable prospect that another court would interfere with the sentence. Roux trying to argue that there’s no basis for determining what the SCA would consider reasonable.
Karyn Maughan is going to town on her gum right now.
Roux says Masipa should dismiss the state’s application, with cost…
“It should be the end” “It’s been exhausted beyond the point of any conceivable exhaustion.”
And Roux’s done. Phewww… I love when he’s brief. So essentially his entire argument is based on emotion. That it’s unfair to make Oscar sit around and wonder when this ordeal will finally be over. Roux did not cite any legal cases.
Nel counters with a few last points saying they did not ignore evidence as Roux suggested, the evidence he referred to was rejected by the SCA.
Nel also emphasizes it is indeed strikingly inappropriate if the minimum sentence is 15 years and results in 6.
Masipa: “I’ll be back…” She takes a break to consider the arguments… and make sure that Arnold has the proper routing number. Haha… kidding 🙂 … Kinda.
Masipa dismisses the state’s bid to appeal Oscar’s sentence. Dismissed with costs.
Ulrich Roux Chimes In…
Listen to the hearing…