The Czech Republic defeated Latvia 4-2 in the mens ice hockey tournament at the Sochi Games on Friday to restore their hopes of earning top spot in their group
ahead of the quarter-finals.
Cheap NFL Jerseys Wholesale . Jakub Voraceks go-ahead goal near the midway mark of the second period, when he reached his
stick out with one hand to redirect a shot from Zbynek Michalek into the Latvia
net, held up as the game winner. The win was the first of the three-game
preliminary round for a Czech team looking to return to the Olympic podium for
the first time since winning the bronze medal at the 2006 Games. Both teams
conclude Group C play on Saturday with the Czechs facing Switzerland and Latvia
playing Sweden.
Cheap NFL Jerseys China . The former MVP point guard tore the meniscus in his right knee at Portland in November and was
ruled out for the remainder of the season by the Bulls.
Wholesale NFL Jerseys . - Brent Burns kept waiting to see a replay of his shot that struck Martin Brodeur in the back of the neck and left the New Jersey
Devils goalie flat on his back on the ice.Oscar Pistorius was sentenced by Judge
Thokozile Masipa to five years in prison for killing Reeva Steenkamp. Judge
Masipa indicating that she wanted a sentence that was fair and just both to
society and the accused. Judge Masipa also sentenced Pistorius to three years in
prison for unlawfully firing a gun in a restaurant in a separate incident weeks
before he killed Steenkamp. However, the Court ordered that sentence to be
suspended for five years on the condition that Pistorius is not found guilty of
another firearm offence during that time. Both sentences will run concurrently.
A concurrent jail sentence means that Pistorius will serve all the sentences at
the same time. This is in contrast to a consecutive jail sentence, where
Pistorius would have had to serve one sentence first before starting the next
one. Concurrent jail sentences are generally the norm. Culpable Homicide
Pistorius was found guilty of culpable homicide, which means Judge Masipa
concluded he acted negligently when he killed Steenkamp. So by passing on the
more severe charge of murder, Judge Masipa was saying she believed the shooting
was an accident. Under South African law, the legislation does not provide for
specific prison time for culpable homicide. Rather, the sentencing is
discretionary (varies from fines to prison time), although its not unusual to
see prison time in South Africa of 5-10 years for this type of crime. The
sentence of five years is on the lighter side but still in keeping with South
African precedent. Early Release for Pistorius Judge Masipa relied on Section
276(1)(i) of the Criminal Procedure Act, which provides for imprisonment from
which such a person may be placed under correctional supervision in the
discretion of the Commissioner or a parole board. The key term in that section
is correctional supervision. Correctional supervision is a community-based
sentence which is served by the offender in the community under the control and
supervision of correctional officials, subject to conditions which have been set
by the court or the Commissioner of Correctional Services, in order to protect
the community and to prevent relapse into crime. Effectively, its house arrest
with additional conditions, such as community service, lectures and meetings. By
invoking Section 276(1)(i), Judge Masipa set the stage for a possible early
release. There are reports, however, that Pistorius will be out of jail within
ten months and serve the remainder of his sentence under house arrest (or
correctional supervision). While this is possible, it is by no means automatic.
The more likely scenario is that he serves a third of his sentence in prison (or
20 months). Thereafter, assuming he has behaved, his release will be a
negotiated with Correctional Services. Possible Appeal It is open to the
prosecution and its lead lawyer Gerrie Nel to appeal Judge Masipas ruling of
culpable homicide. Judge Masipa found Pistorius not guilty of murder. In order
to make out this charge, the prosecution had to establish that Pistorius
intended to kill someone – Steenkamp or the intruder. Thats right – its still
murder if it could be shown that Pistorius intended to kill anyone that night.
Perhaps it could be argued that the requisite intent to kill Steenkamp was not
established. A tough argument to make given the ttotality of the evidence but
still an argument that could made with a certain level of credibility.
Wholesale Jerseys. . The reasoning would go something like this: Pistorius did not know it was Steenkamp in the bathroom so he therefore could not form the
necessary intent to kill her. However, the Judge committed an error of law when
she concluded that Pistorius did not commit murder. Specifically, Pistorius
should have been found guilty of murder because he foresaw killing someone and
then did so. This legal concept of intent, which holds people responsible for
the foreseeable consequences of their actions, is called dolus eventualis. By
his own account, after he heard the intruder, Pistorius grabbed his gun, removed
the safety, charged down the narrow hallway to the bathroom, and without any
words of warning, fired four shots through a locked door into a very small
toilet cubicle. Every decision from grabbing the gun to firing the shots with
deadly hollow point black tallon bullets was conscious and intentional. He did
not fire just once clumsily or accidentally, or yell out to the intruder. He
deliberately and intentionally fired four shots in quick succession with great
precision through the toilet door. The evidence strongly supports the conclusion
that Pistorius believed that there was a person behind the door, foresaw that
his gunshots would kill that person and nevertheless persisted. And thats
murder. How did Judge Masipa come to a different conclusion? Well it seems that
she concluded Pistorius did not intend to kill anyone because Steenkamp was
asleep in his bed. Theres an obvious disconnect in that logic, and it seems as
though Judge Masipa was focused exclusively on whether Pistorius believed
Steenkamp was still in his bed. This constitutes a misapplication of the law,
which opens the door for an appeal by the prosecution. Will the Prosecution
Appeal? The prosecution will consider a number of factors in deciding whether it
files an appeal. Nel was asking for ten years and got five. A conviction of
murder would have meant 15 years in prison. So from that standpoint, he will
consider the prison time light. The suitability of the sentence from a societal
standpoint will also be considered. What type of message is being sent? Is the
judicial culture in South Africa indulgent and soft on crime? Are criminals
being told that they will be treated with leniency? Does such a modest sentence
for such a horrible crime serve as a deterrent? The Steenkamp family considers
the matter closed. A lawyer for the family said the sentence was welcome and
they felt it was right. That may have an impact on whether Nel elects to appeal,
although this will not be a determining factor. The State (in the form of the
South Africas National Prosecuting Authority) has said it has the appetite to
appeal the culpable homicide verdict with the hope of securing a murder
conviction. Still its unclear at this point if we will see an appeal. The
prosecution will study the matter and make its decision by appeal deadline,
which is in 14 days. Will Pistorius Appeal? No. This is a very good result for
Pistorius. His story was filled with a number of improbabilities that made his
intruder story very difficult to believe. Indeed, the prosecution might tell you
Pistorius got away with murder.
Cheap NFL Jerseys Cheap NFL Jerseys China Cheap Jerseys From China Cheap NFL Jerseys Authentic Wholesale Jerseys China Cheap NFL Jerseys China NFL Cheap Jerseys Cheap Jersey ' ' '
