@onset2009 What has the Oscar Pistorius case shown the world about the SA justice system and police.
That the police can lie to the media, telling them that they had been called out previously that evening when in fact that was not the case. The police leaked aspects of their investigation to the media without ever checking it's accuracy. This leaking to the media was viewed as acceptable as there was no jury and the Judge was above influence, highly experienced and would come to the right verdict. This argument was repeated every time a new 'story' emerged and in fact the media were simply allowed to print exactly what they wanted, the truth it seemed was an inconvenience best and most probably avoided. The police continually leaked photos. This resulted in a media frenzy inciting a mindless audience devoid of independent thought that Nel would later christen 'society' and claim his self made society demanded the harshest possible sentence.
A government minister gave interviews saying he should be sentenced to life imprisonment before the trial even began. What would be considered to be an act of political suicide and certainly highly inappropriate and prejudicial in many jurisdictions seemed to barely get a critical comment from her superiors.
The state called only witnesses that would promote their case. Therefore lead investigator Botha and Van Aard were never called, no reason was given but could an assumption be made that had their evidence may compromise the States case. The NPA and police all the while attempted to portray a defence claim that he thought she was an intruder as improbable. But elsewhere in the news almost on a weekly basis another unfortunate person was murdered by intruders. The police also seemed to view themselves as above the law, tying a person and dragging him behind a van causing injuries that later killed him. Shooting at a car injuring the occupant and later having him charged with attempted murder. The charges were later dropped and an out of court settlement was reached in favour of the victim and not to mention the lead investigator and the small issue of firing at a taxi or mini bus. The state presented the case calling witnesses that testified they heard a woman scream before and after the shots which was impossible given she had died by that point. The state having interviewed all witnesses and including those who later became defence witnesses would have realised their evidence in this respect was unreliable but this was a minor inconvenience or the state and I forgot all about the removed photos and the lost cord because the state had a case to win and win it would seem at any cost. The state insisted on having him committed for psychiatric evaluation hoping that it would somehow prove he was a narcissist with a propensity for violence, the evaluation proved the opposite but why have a 30 day evaluation when you can rely on a talk show psychologist with a love of anecdotal platitudes. The state all along sang the virtues of their Judicial system, how much better fairer it was that a jury system that is until the verdict was announced. It seems however that the prosecution never learnt to take no for an answer and since the verdict does not agree with what they want there is always an appeal. What was interesting to observe was the present of a self confessed murderer attending the trial, whose presence as a spectator instead of as a prisoner was curtesy of the same prosecutor who in that case must have thought murder is ok but that's a side line.
So now the verdict has been reached, sentence imposed but like many a petulant child the state now wants to throw their dummy out and not only go for an appeal but in case an appeal is not permitted under current legislation, then simply change the legalisation. As an non South African I can't help but think that my idea of what justice is and what I witnessed in this case are very different and the phrase being above the law very much comes to mind.

Reply · Report Post