Yup. She ain't coming back so may as well be compensated financially.

Ten months for blowing away his girlfriend & I thought our sentencing was skinny.

So, he gets out of bed & doesn’t notice his girlfriend is not in it, then goes to the toilet & pops four through the door, but doesn’t hear anyone scream out when hit

.

His defence team and the wider media did a pretty good job at turning the tables and portraying him as the victim.
All them tears weren't for nowt thee knows.

Yes, but in yer average circus case the job has been to hoodwink or brainwash gullible or biased jurors. In this case, such tactics [ishould[/i have been a waste of time given that a judge wouldn't be fooled or swayed ...

I think the length of sentence, 5 years, is probably about right as they couldn't prove murder. But he should be in jail for a good portion of that. This house arrest stuff is just rubbish and proves that if you're rich you get treated differently to everybody else.

I'm far from an expert on law, but the whole situation of such an important case not being decided by a jury and by one person instead just doesn't feel right. And the amount of time it took to come to a verdict and then the sentence is ridiculous.

If you couldn't get enough of the case, then you'll be made up that the prosecution have put in an appeal against a) unduly lenient sentence and b) the murder acquittal www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-29895786 [url=http://www.pod702.co.za/Eyewitnessnews/docs/141104NPA.pdfThe Appeal documents[/url

If you couldn't get enough of the case, then you'll be made up that the prosecution have put in an appeal against a) unduly lenient sentence and b) the murder acquittal www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-29895786 [url=http://www.pod702.co.za/Eyewitnessnews/docs/141104NPA.pdfThe Appeal documents[/url

The circus rolls on.

The judge was under enormous pressure from the outset. And when I say "pressure" I mean the kind that gently puts a hand on your shoulder promising that [i"good things can happen to those who don't 'rock the boat'"[/i straight down to [i"do you want to see your family again?"[/i

Reading between the lines of the judgement (and knowing one or two things about the case) I'd say she did as much as she could to provide some form of justice to the families. But criticising her for not putting Oscar away for life is very brave - in the safety of your own homes. One wonders how brave these people might have been under similar conditions?

So far as I can tell, people are simply commenting on the given that this was a self-contained criminal trial under that country's system of due process. Therefore "bravery" don't enter into it.

You are the first I know of to suggest that the judge is corrupt, and instead of reaching an honest decision, acted otherwise than in due exercise of her judicial powers, and perverted justice by reaching a finding and a sentence for extraneous reasons, under duress.

I don't believe you.

To be honest I attach no significance to your belief. But I'll give you points for brazen self-flattery.

thought the consensus was that 5 years was more than is generally given (In SA) for what he was actually convicted of.
They won't get a murder conviction..

Ah, but your snooty response clearly shows that you do