News0 min ago
Oscar Pistorious
72 Answers
Bail granted
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by BlueToffee. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
“He Has killed another human being. “
Oh well, that’s done away with the tiresome inconvenience of a trial then, Mick !!
I must say the South African version of a bail hearing leaves me a little perplexed. In the UK only three issues need to be addressed. Is the defendant likely to (a) abscond, (b) commit further offences or (c interfere with the course of justice (in particular, attempt to influence witnesses). The issue of guilt or innocence is not a factor. In SA it seems the entire case for the prosecution is considered and the likleyhood of the defendant’s guilt assessed. It’s a strange system. In the UK such a hearing would last, perhaps, half an hour (even for the most serious cases in the Crown Court. This pantomime has lasted four days.
Oh well, that’s done away with the tiresome inconvenience of a trial then, Mick !!
I must say the South African version of a bail hearing leaves me a little perplexed. In the UK only three issues need to be addressed. Is the defendant likely to (a) abscond, (b) commit further offences or (c interfere with the course of justice (in particular, attempt to influence witnesses). The issue of guilt or innocence is not a factor. In SA it seems the entire case for the prosecution is considered and the likleyhood of the defendant’s guilt assessed. It’s a strange system. In the UK such a hearing would last, perhaps, half an hour (even for the most serious cases in the Crown Court. This pantomime has lasted four days.
An ordinary bloke can disappear unnoticed. A man whose face is known all over South Africa, perhaps the world, who is followed by the media and paparazzi all the time, and who has two artificial legs, has certain distinguishing features which make disappearance all but impossible.
The main concern would be that he will commit suicide or that somebody will try to kill him.
The main concern would be that he will commit suicide or that somebody will try to kill him.
Of course it's only a legal convention, not a fact, em, but it's a good principle to hold when considering a bail application, em. That's why I don't understand why all the evidence was considered at this hearing. I assume SA operates on similar principles to the UK so the man is (legally) innocent until convicted. The strength or otherwise of the evidence against him should not be a matter for a bail hearing but for the trial.
-- answer removed --
He's had to surrender his passport, but he's too high profile to scarper. i don't think this 'he thought she was an intruder' will wash - as they live in a gated community, neighbours state they'd been shouting all day, and besides the gun, there was a cricket bat found with her blood on it, and steroids 'roid rage they're calling it
MT, because if for some reason he did get into a blind panic, and who hasn't in the dead of night when every creak of the door, window makes you jumpy, he could well be telling the truth, if you say he is guilty, then you need incontrovertible proof. None of us were there, and it's up to the legal teams to work out what happened. If he got bail it might be because as others have pointed out he must be one of the most instantly recognisable people on the planet, and if for any reason he does a bunk, he won't get far..
The whole thing read like an 'old style' committal for trial, to see whether there was evidence sufficient for the defendant to be tried. These consisted of all the witnesses being called and cross-examined, their evidence being written down and the result being signed by them as true and accurate. We no longer have such a procedure.
As NJ says, what any of this has to do with granting bail is not clear. Here it's open to the advocate to argue that the defendant is not likely to abscond because the crime alleged will never attract a penalty of any such gravity that he would be minded to run away; not much of an argument when it's a choice between murder and manslaughter; but this case was an argument only about whether the crime disclosed was in one category of homicide or another. Only if South African law explicitly and absolutely forbids bail in murders in the grade 6 category is the proceeding justified.
As NJ says, what any of this has to do with granting bail is not clear. Here it's open to the advocate to argue that the defendant is not likely to abscond because the crime alleged will never attract a penalty of any such gravity that he would be minded to run away; not much of an argument when it's a choice between murder and manslaughter; but this case was an argument only about whether the crime disclosed was in one category of homicide or another. Only if South African law explicitly and absolutely forbids bail in murders in the grade 6 category is the proceeding justified.
