Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

What warrant do you have for "in cold blood"?

"In hot blood" is most likely a better descriptor - I have little doubt it was an act of passion and rage. If you're going to ask me why I have little doubt, I'll answer, "same as O.J. Simpson" (which I believe was "in cold blood," or at least "in hot blood that had ample time to cool down").

Roids and Rods: not a good combo.

Posted

"In hot blood" is most likely a better descriptor - I have little doubt it was an act of passion and rage. If you're going to ask me why I have little doubt, I'll answer, "same as O.J. Simpson" (which I believe was "in cold blood," or at least "in hot blood that had ample time to cool down").

Roids and Rods: not a good combo.

Interesting, but unsatisfying. In the Simpson case, if Simpson committed the murders, which I too believe is overwhelmingly likely, given the details there could be no possible defense of "I thought they were intruders" or "I didn't intend to harm the victims". Simpson, of course, has always denied that he did it. Pistorius has never denied that he fired the fatal shots, but insists that he did not think that he was shooting at his girlfriend. Perhaps if I had heard all of the testimony in the trial I might come to a conclusion that there's little doubt that he intended to kill his girlfriend, but I can't reach that conclusion on what I know of the case. Perhaps he did, but perhaps he didn't. At best, he acted recklessly and can't be absolved of guilt, which he hasn't been.

But okay, now, what warrant do you have for "Roids"? Was evidence of steroid use by Pistorius produced at trial?

Posted

Again, I really offer no judgment on the guilt or innocence of Mr. Pistorius. It does seem odd and wrong, though, for a more-or-less common-law country to have no trial by jury, and for an appeals court to be empowered to replace the trial court's verdict with a conviction for a more serious crime without a retrial of the facts. Ah well, foreigners have foreign ways.

Posted

Again, I really offer no judgment on the guilt or innocence of Mr. Pistorius. It does seem odd and wrong, though, for a more-or-less common-law country to have no trial by jury, and for an appeals court to be empowered to replace the trial court's verdict with a conviction for a more serious crime without a retrial of the facts. Ah well, foreigners have foreign ways.

I agree - it's Double Jeopardy (or, in this case, Final Jeopardy (*)).

That said, I'm happy in an if-only-it-was-OJ-sort-of-way.

(*) That was funny.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...