Dein erstes Forum » is still a lot of track to cover and much evidence to

CAPE TOWN, South Africa - Equatorial Guinea had two months to prepare to host the African Cup of Nations, making the colorful and sometimes chaotic continental soccer tournament even more unpredictable than usual this year. Philadelphia 76ers Gear .Along with the regular questions ahead of an African Cup — Will Ivory Coasts star-studded squad finally break its title drought? — comes a bunch of others this time: What will the small stadiums in the eastern border towns of Mongomo and Ebebiyin be like? And will the new highway carved through the jungle to those remote towns be OK in time for kickoff this weekend?Equatorial Guinea took over as host at very short notice from Morocco, which didnt want to stage the championship because of fears over the Ebola outbreak in West Africa and fans travelling from that region.The replacement host is a small, curious oil-rich nation in Central Africa.Equatorial Guinea has stadiums in the Malabo, the capital, and Bata, the biggest city, left over from when it co-hosted the 2012 African Cup. But the two other venues out near the Gabonese border are unknown and untested in top-level football. Organizers had little time to bring those grounds, used to hosting a few hundred people in Equatorial Guineas domestic league, up to standard. Its unclear how far they have got.Even without this years hurried preparations, few tournaments bring soccer stars back down to earth like the African Cup, where every two years some of the worlds best players leave their highly-paid day jobs in the luxurious English, Spanish and Italian leagues for three weeks of adventure back in Africa.And few tournaments are as difficult to predict.Burkina Faso, with no previous impressive history at the tournament, made the final and nearly won in 2013. Zambia did win in 2012, beating Yaya Toure, Didier Drogba, Gervinho and Ivory Coasts other big names in the final.In 2015, Algeria, the top-ranked team in Africa and its best performer at last years World Cup, is the favourite. But that isnt really helpful at the African Cup, as Ivory Coast and Ghana know too well. For a long time Africas two most talented teams, Ivory Coast hasnt won the title in more than 20 years and Ghanas misery stretches to more than 30 years.We cant make predictions in this kind of competition, said Algeria coach Christian Gourcuff, a Frenchman. Certainly many have named us the favourites but we must invest a great deal. There is quality (in the team), but there are also conditions that we must get used to. We disregard the judgments of others.Algeria is in the toughest group, with Ghana, Senegal and South Africa. Theyll all be based in Mongomo for the group stage, where theyll likely come across each other often off the field in one of the towns two or three recognized hotels.Facing the unknown, Tunisia, probably like many teams, will be bringing its own cooks to prepare meals for the players in Ebebiyin, way up in the north-eastern corner of Equatorial Guinea. The Tunisians are also flying in all their food from home just in case, coach Georges Leekens said.Ivory Coast and Cameroon lead a list of contenders from West Africa, which also includes Ghana, Mali and Senegal. South Africa also qualified among the 16 teams.Ghana officials say theyve resolved a dispute over player payments, another issue that often plagues teams at the African Cup and which has been rumbling on for Ghana since last years World Cup. Bonuses have been cut to $5,000 per player for each match they play in, and a possible payout of $60,000 each if they win the title. In comparison, Spains players were each offered a $980,000 incentive to win the World Cup last year.It is not about the money, Ghana captain Asamoah Gyan said. We are just here to die for the nation because we are Ghanaians.Its not the richest tournament, but one thing the African Cup does produce is passion.For teams like Cape Verde, the tiny Atlantic Ocean island nation, and Republic of Congo, its the only chance they get to mix with the big stars. And for some fans, its the only chance they get to see their team have a chance at international glory.In Guinea, young supporters marched in the capital Conakry and erected barricades on the streets in protest after one of their favourite players, midfielder Sadio Diallo, was left out of the squad. Riot police were called in.The African Cup, with its haphazard organization and humble facilities, is still a big deal for many.___Associated Press writers Aomar Ouali in Algiers, Algeria, Bouazza ben Bouazza in Tunis, Tunisia, Francis Kokutse in Accra, Ghana, and Boubacar Diallo in Conakry, Guinea, contributed to this report.___Gerald Imray is on Twitter at www.twitter.com/GeraldImrayAP Clint Richardson Jersey . -- Down to 10 men and behind on the scoreboard, Toronto FC displayed its perseverance. Jerryd Bayless Jersey . In a matchup of teams battling head-to-head for the final playoff spot in Major League Soccers Western Conference, the Whitecaps run to the post-season took a hard hit when FC Dallas blew open a tie game with two goals in the final minutes for a 3-1 victory Saturday night. https://www.cheap76ers.com/196e-arnett-moultrie-jersey-76ers.html .3 million qualifying offer to outfielder Michael Cuddyer on Monday.The Oscar Pistorius murder trial is underway. On the first day of trial, Michelle Burger, a neighbour of Pistorius, took the stand and set the stage for the prosecutions case. She testified that she heard Reeva Steenkamp cry for help. "I was sitting in bed and I heard her screams," Burger testified. "She screamed terribly and she yelled for help. I heard the screams again. It was worse. It was more intense. Just after her screams, I heard four shots. Four gun-shots... You could hear it was blood curdling screams. You cant translate it into words. The anxiousness in her voice, and fear. It leaves you cold. She screamed terribly and she yelled for help." We know that Pistorius has admitted to killing Steenkamp. The issue being determined at trial is whether he killed her intentionally, or as Pistorius alleges, he killed her by accident. This is his version: "During the early hours of the morning I brought two fans in from the balcony. I had shortly before spoken to Reeva who was in bed beside me. Unbeknown to me, Reeva must have gone to the toilet in the bathroom at the time I brought in the fans, closed the sliding doors and drew the blinds and the curtains. I heard the bathroom window sliding open, I believed that an intruder or intruders had entered the bathroom through the bathroom window which was not fitted with burglar bars. I approached the bathroom armed with my firearm, so as to defend Reeva and I. At that time I believed Reeva was still in the bed. The discharging of my firearm was precipitated by a noise in the toilet which I, in my fearful state, knowing I was on my stumps, unable to run away or properly defend myself physically believed to be the intruder or intruders coming out of the toilet to attack Reeva and me." So lets address some of the more important parts of the trial. Understanding the Charges The key charge against Pistorius is premeditated murder. Premeditated murder requires an intent to murder plus planning the murder. Based upon what we know, expect the prosecution to have a tough time establishing premeditated murder. As support for the charge, the prosecution will argue that the act was planned (or premeditated) since he took the time to put on his prosthetic legs before walking to the bathroom and firing four deadly shots. However, that by itself wont likely be enough to establish the requisite planning element. Premeditation is reserved for more robust planning and generally doesnt capture an intent that materialized right before a crime was committed. For those that like precedents, in the case of State v. Raath, a South African Court ruled that a father forcing his son to remove a firearm from the safe to kill the sons mother was not sufficient to constitute premeditated murder. However, that doesnt mean Pistorius walks. Not even close. Even if the prosecution cant make out premeditated murder, it can still get Pistorius on the lesser charge of murder. In order establish murder, they only need to show that he intended to kill Steenkamp (no planning element needed). Should the prosecution fail on murder, there is another lesser charge that could come into play: culpable homicide. This charge means that Pistorius negligently killed Steenkamp (or that the killing was an accident). And this is what Pistorius is alleging - he killed Steenkamp by accident. He thought she was an intruder. Prison Time Premeditated murder would get Pistorius a compulsory life sentence, while murder would result in a compulsory sentence of 15 years. For culpable homicide, 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. No Jury System & Judge Masipa South Africa does not have a jury sysstem. Dorell Wright Jersey. Juries at times render unexpected or unusual decisions. They can also be swayed by public sentiment and emotion, while also potentially distracted by celebrity and irrelevant facts. A judge, however, is more likely to focus on the facts and make a ruling based upon those facts. The judge is charged with ensuring a just result and on that basis, will carefully review and consider all the facts of a case. Judge Thokozile Masipa is presiding over the trial. Masipa has a reputation for being tough on cases that involve crimes against women. In May 2013, Masipa ordered serial rapist Shepherd Moyo to serve a jail sentence of 252 year sentence. She hoped the sentence would serve as a "deterrent." Given her intolerance for violence against women, Judge Masipa is perhaps not the ideal judge for Pistorius. South Africa, by the way, has the highest reported rate globally of females murdered by shooting in a country not engaged in war. Thats another reason this case matters. The Case The trial has only just begun. More witnesses will testify and further evidence will be presented. So its tough to know how this will end for Pistorius. Still, there are a number of improbabilities with Pistorius version of the events. How did he not know Steenkamp was not in bed when he walked right by her? Wouldnt Steenkamp have yelled in the bathroom after the first shot was discharged? As well, witnesses have reported seeing the lights on, contradicting Pistorius account that it was pitch dark in his room. As well, Steenkamps wounds suggest she was not sitting on toilet on left hand side of bathroom but rather on right side of bathroom. This suggests she was hiding from Pistorius. Also key is whether Pistorius and Steenkamp argued that night. The prosecution has already produced witnesses who testified that they heard shouting and screaming. This helps the prosecutions argument that this was a quarrel that tragically escalated to murder. As well, the couples mobile phone records could provide helpful insight as to what happened that night. Steenkamp is said to have had her phone with her in the bathroom when she was shot. Was she contacting the authorities or friends for help as an enraged Pistorius charged toward her? It is unusual for someone to take their phone to the bathroom in the middle of the night (unless they feel threatened) and the prosecution will undoubtedly raise that. There is more. Pistorius told authorities he could not remember the password to his own cell phone. As a result, authorities took the phone to Apple headquarters to have it unlocked. This raises the possibility that Pistorius may have been hiding incriminating messages. Forensic evidence will also be presented, which can be quite effective in piecing together what really happened that night. For example, each drop of blood in the bathroom can help determine if Steenkamp was sitting, standing or moving at the time she was shot. Pistorius rage issues will also come into play. As for the defence, they will argue that the shooting was a tragic mistake - but a mistake nonetheless. They will also focus on contradictions and inconsistencies in statements made by witnesses to police and their answers in court. In fact they have started challenging witnesses, attacking not only their recollection of events, but also the plausibility of their claims that they could hear the couple argue from their homes. Pistorius claims lack believability and veracity. Ultimately, it would not be a surprise to see Pistorius convicted of murder and sentenced to 15 years in jail, particularly with a Judge like Masipa presiding over the trial. That being said, there is still a lot of track to cover and much evidence to consider. Still, Pistorius is facing an uphill battle. ' ' '