Abstract
Those who cannot listen straight, remember straight or intervene dispassionately are unlikely to be any more objective when weighing conflicting testimony. Nor was this judge. Nor by inference were the two assessors who sit with a judge in any trial where the death sentence might be imposed. The judge ruled on points of law. The three of them decided by simple majority the facts of the case and whether extenuating circumstances existed sufficient to justify not imposing a sentence of death. Over the Sharpeville accused there was no dissent.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
The judge’s reasoning against Oupa is demolished by E. Cameron, ‘Inferential Reasoning and Extenuation in the Case of the Sharpeville Six’, (1988) 1 SACJ 243–60.
Copyright information
© 1998 Peter Parker and Joyce Mokhesi-Parker
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Parker, P., Mokhesi-Parker, J. (1998). The Nature of the Judgment. In: In the Shadow of Sharpeville. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-14617-8_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-14617-8_10
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-14619-2
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-14617-8
eBook Packages: Palgrave Social & Cultural Studies CollectionSocial Sciences (R0)