Oscar Pistorius Sentenced to 6 More Years

Oscar Pistorius is back in jail today, sentenced to 6 years following last month's re-sentencing hearing which was the result of the state winning an appeal over the judge's decision to toss the murder charge.

The judge said there were mitigating factors and rejected a prosecution request for a 15 year sentence. He will be eligible for parole in 3 years.

One mitigating factor:

Mr. Pistorius, the judge said, had shown genuine remorse in trying, repeatedly and unsuccessfully, to apologize in person to the victim’s parents.

There were others, and the Judge recognized that a long term of imprisonment would not be in the best interests of justice. [More...]

Among other mitigating factors, the judge said she considered the circumstances of the shooting and Mr. Pistorius’s disability.

She also noted that Mr. Pistorius was a first-time offender who had shown himself to be a good candidate for rehabilitation. “I am of the view that a long-term imprisonment will not serve justice,” Judge Masipa said.

She also addressed the consequences he's faced already:

“He’s a fallen hero who has lost his career and is ruined financially. The worst is that having taken the life of a fellow human being in the manner that he did, he cannot be at peace.”

While I think any further imprisonment of Oscar Pistorius serves no purpose other than revenge, I agree with the legal expert in the article who said:

[the sentence] clearly reflected the judge’s belief that Mr. Pistorius was guilty of what amounts to an accidental murder, not one with intent.

I'm firmly convinced the judge was right the first time, when she found the state failed to prove Oscar intended to kill anyone. More on her first verdict here.

So Oscar already served his five year sentence, and now he gets another six, for the same event. That's 11 years all together for an accidental shooting. Too much time, especially given his vulnerability in prison and his deteriorated mental state.

< FBI Announces No Charges Against Hillary Over Use of Email Server | Donald Audtions Veep Choices: Just Say No to Newt >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    A victory for the "tough on crime" (none / 0) (#1)
    by McBain on Wed Jul 06, 2016 at 01:28:35 PM EST

    Everyone got all bent out of shape when the Stanford swimmer got a light sentence for sexual assault.  There was even a petition to remove the judge.  How come just as many people aren't outraged when a judge over sentences someone as it appears to have happened in this case?

    I understand these are two different judicial systems but I think many people, in just about every country, still have somewhat of a lynch mob, witch hunt mentality. They want their elected officials to throw the book at convicts.  

    you answered you own question (none / 0) (#2)
    by nyjets on Wed Jul 06, 2016 at 02:08:36 PM EST
    The case took place in South Africa. Odds are, most people in this country are not going to get that worked up over it. No Americans are involved.
    It is up to the people in South Africa to want to get riled up. And because this is part of their system, they may consider it just.
    And honestly, if they felt that original sentence was too light (and part of me feels that way myself) this is not the case to make the people of South Africa care all that much.

    Ya, looking at the facts of the shooting, (none / 0) (#3)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Jul 06, 2016 at 02:26:31 PM EST
    I believe he intended to kill.

    Anyway, according to this, the mean and median sentences in the US for murder are roughly 21 - 24 years.

    In the years ahead, I hope that ... (none / 0) (#4)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Jul 06, 2016 at 02:51:47 PM EST
    ... the Steenkamp family can eventually find solace and peace in the wake of such a devastating tragedy, and that Oscar Pistorius can finally come to terms with his crime and seek to make amends to the fullest extent possible for his transgressions.

    Feminists (none / 0) (#5)
    by RCBadger on Wed Jul 06, 2016 at 04:40:50 PM EST
    Many of the feminists I follow online see this as another OJ case where a popular athlete brutally  abuses a woman and then murders her in cold blood.  

    Frankly, I agreed with the original verdict.  He didn't intend to kill her specifically, but he did kill someone.  And the idea that you can just open fire the way he did makes no sense.

    From what I understand, the prosecutors may be appealing the sentence.  They thought 8 years or more would have been appropriate.

    I think you are right (none / 0) (#6)
    by nyjets on Wed Jul 06, 2016 at 06:10:26 PM EST
    This was not murder, but it was more than an accidental shooting.
    about 10 years is about right IMO

    He Got Off Easy (none / 0) (#7)
    by RickyJim on Thu Jul 07, 2016 at 09:01:38 AM EST
    I discussed this in detail in this forum during and right after the trial.  I was convinced from the evidence that it would be unreasonable to believe that he didn't know that Reeva was in the bathroom that he fired into.  He admitted he screamed at the "intruder" and he claims there was no answer before firing. And that is only one of the reasons that it could not have been an accident.