The Murder trial of Oscar Pistorius: The Judge's Verdict vs. Common Sense: Why is common sense not common? - Tapa blanda

Sinopsis

The Oscar Pistorius murder trial is one of the most significant criminal trials of the century. It threw up a most incredulous defense that caused many to be flabbergasted and confused by the not-guilty-of-murder verdict passed down by Judge Masipa. For them, it remains a mystery why such an improbable verdict was the outcome. Millions of astonished people were justified in asking the question: How is it possible for a man to be alone with his girlfriend in bed at 3 am, then fire four shots into his toilet and kill her without knowing it was her? Because of the perceived improbability of a not-guilty-of-murder verdict, many have voiced their opinion that such a verdict has to be because the judge was corrupt. The facts, however, do not support such a conclusion. Instead, what the author is suggesting is that the application of common sense is what was lacking in this case. Common sense is the highest level of knowledge we can aspire to, and when applied, it makes us the most effective we can be. Common sense is, essentially, the understanding and accurate interpretation of life, people, and the things that affect most or all of us, and then the use of this knowledge to live an effective and productive life. These qualities of common sense largely indicate why it is often said to be not common. This book aims to demonstrate how the application of common sense would have resulted in Oscar Pistorius been convicted of premeditated murder by Judge Masipa. It also aims to make a common sense case for a possible reason why Oscar Pistorius murdered Reeva Steenkamp.

"Sinopsis" puede pertenecer a otra edición de este libro.