Masipa did not err in her judgment - unlike her critics

Judge Thokozile Masipa handed out justice yesterday, not the vengeance demanded by some members of the public.

The Oscar Pretorius trial not only exposed us to the inner workings of the courts, but also revealed the public's prejudices on judicial matters.

While the public should be allowed to vent, we should not allow ourselves to be one-sided and continue to attack Masipa's credibility.

We are entitled to comment on aspects of the case, but it is concerning when those without legal qualifications cast doubt on Masipa's fitness to be a judge.

The judge based her verdict on the rule of law, not the whims of the public.

Our laws are designed to serve the public good, not the public's mood.

Pistorius received a sentence of five years in jail, and Masipa clearly explained the reasons for handing down such a sentence.

She said: "Society cannot always get what [it wants]. Courts don't exist to win popularity contests but to dispense justice."

Even if Masipa had sentenced Pretorius to10 or 20 years, there would be those who would be unsatisfied.

We fully agree with her findings that while "a custodial sentence would not send the right message to the community", it would also not be in our interest for a court to sentence Pistorius to a lengthier jail term.

Today is the athlete's first day in prison and, as a nation, we must not only move on and find closure, but respect our judges and their judgments. When that respect is not accorded, not only are judges attacked and called names, but the justice system is politicised.

We fully agree with Masipa that "it would be a sad day for the country if it appeared there was one law for the poor and another for the rich and famous".

While the parents of Reeva Steenkamp will always mourn her death, we hope the judgment will help them find closure.

We should always remember that there is a fine line between law and justice.