WebProNews

Tag: oscar pistorius murder case

  • Oscar Pistorius Sentenced To 5 Years, Though Defense Claims He’ll Only Do A Year. Justice Served?

    Oscar Pistorius’s fate was at last determined by Judge Thokozile Masipa on Tuesday.

    The Paralympian received a suspended three-year sentence for a firearms charge and he was sentenced to five years in prison for the culpable homicide charge.

    “A noncustodial sentence [for Oscar Pistorius] would send the wrong message to the community,” said Masipa. “A long sentence would also not be appropriate because it would lack mercy.”

    She also roundly rejected efforts by the defense to paint Pistorius as far too vulnerable for prison due to his disability.

    Said Masipa, “Yes, the accused is vulnerable, but he also has excellent coping skills. He really saw himself as disabled, [but he] worked hard, and became respected worldwide.”

    Victim Reeva Steenkamp’s parents told the press that they were happy with the sentence and simply relieved that the case was over at long last.

    Arnold Pistorius, Oscar’s uncle said, “We accept the judgment. Oscar will embrace the opportunity to pay back to society.”

    The uncle also pleaded with the press and public “accept the ruling of the court” and to grant himself and the rest of Pistorius’s family “some degree of dignity and privacy”.

    Oscar Pistorius reportedly showed little to no reaction as he learned his fate, except for wiping his eyes.

    The 27-year-old was led away as he will begin serving jail time immediately.

    Despite receiving what some would consider a lenient sentence, his defense is convinced that Oscar Pistorius will not do a full five years.

    They expect the athlete to serve as much as a year in prison before being released, with the expectation he’ll serve the rest of his sentence at home.

    The attorney for Reeva Steenkamp’s family echoed this sentiment, saying he expects Oscar to serve no more than two years for fatally shooting his girlfriend.

    Do you think that Oscar Pistorius’s sentence was fair or far too lenient?

  • Reeva Steenkamp Cousin’s Tearful Plea: Oscar Pistorius Must Pay For Girlfriend’s Death

    As the sentencing phase of the Oscar Pistorius case continues, Reeva Steenkamp relatives are taking the stand in an effort to argue that the athlete serve jail time for killing her.

    Kim Martin, cousin of the late Steenkamp, tearfully pleaded for Judge Masipa Thokozile to send Pistorius to prison.

    Said Martin, “Everybody has suffered here, and I really think we need to send a message to society that you can’t do this and get away with it.”

    While Oscar Pistorius and his emotional response to the case has been frequently discussed in the media, there has been concern expressed that Reeva Steenkamp, the deceased victim, has been forgotten.

    Also, fear that the man who shot her will be able to walk away with virtually no punishment due to his celebrity status.

    “My family are not people who are seeking revenge,” said Martin. “We just feel that to take someone’s life, to shoot somebody behind a door, that is unarmed, that is harmless, needs sufficient punishment.”

    She also shared that in addition to wanting justice for her deceased cousin that she is “very fearful” of Pistorius. His apology for Steenkamp’s death is one that Martin does not feel is remotely genuine.

    Reeva Steenkamp was killed by Oscar Pistorius in the early hours of Valentine’s Day in 2013. According to the 27-year-old, he accidentally killed his 29-year-old girlfriend after mistaking her for an intruder.

    Steenkamp died after he fired four shots through the bathroom door, hitting her multiple times.

    Led by Gerrie Nel, the prosecution fought to get Pistorius convicted of purposely killing Steenkamp.

    Masipa opted to convict Oscar of culpable homicide. This is the South African equivalent of a manslaughter charge.

    She felt that Reeva’s death was the result of negligence on the part of the former Olympic athlete.

    Proceedings are expected to wrap up within a couple of days with Masipa deciding Pistorius’s fate on Tuesday.

  • Oscar Pistorius: Will Paying Money To Steenkamp’s Family Help Him Avoid Jail?

    According to a testimony given on Tuesday, Oscar Pistorius has been paying money to the family of Reeva Steenkamp every month.

    It was also revealed that the 27-year-old fully intended to start up a trust fund once the trial is over.

    The surprising information came by way of Annette Vergeer, a probation officer.

    Annette was called to testify on behalf of the defense and said that the 27-year-old began to make the payments shortly after he fatally shot his 29-year-old girlfriend.

    The monthly amount paid to the Steenkamp family is said to be about $530.

    In addition to the claim, Vergeer suggested that Pistorius would not fair well in prison because of his physical disability and that he would be extremely vulnerable.

    She was the second law official called to the stand who testified that Oscar would not fare well in prison.

    Instead, the probation officer suggested that Pistorius receive a far more lenient punishment—three years of house arrest and community service.

    This is a stark contrast to the sentence being pushed for by the prosecution, which intends for him to get a 15-year-sentence. This punishment would represent the maximum time in jail possible under a culpable homicide (manslaughter) conviction.

    Despite Pistorius’s attempt to make amends to the family of his deceased girlfriend, his actions were met with some resistance.

    Vergeer revealed on the stand that Pistorius had sold his car for $34,000, with the intent to use the cash to pay restitution to Reeva’s parents.

    However, June and Barry Steenkamp firmly rejected the cash payment.

    Nel said it was because Reeva’s mother did not want to take what she felt was “blood money”.

    Steenkamp family lawyer Dup de Bruyn stated that the family is in the position to pay Oscar back the $9,500 he gave them. At present the money is used to pay monthly bills and expenses.

    The parents had wanted to announce the payments publicly, but Pistorius requested that they remain confidential.

    And so they were…until now.

    The payments are part of a defense strategy to demonstrate what a caring individual Oscar is, and why he doesn’t belong in jail. It is a tactic that prosecutor Gerrie Nel has already vocally condemned.

    Oscar Pistorius was previously convicted of culpable homicide in the fatal Valentines’ Day shooting of then girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp.

    Judge Thokozile Masipa is expected to hear arguments during a week long sentencing phase before making a final decision about Oscar Pistorius’s fate.

  • Reeva Steenkamp’s Family Expresses Disbelief over Oscar Pistorius Verdict

    The family of model Reeva Steenkamp is outraged that a South African judge did not find Oscar Pistorius guilty of murdering their daughter.

    “Justice was not served,” the family told NBC News on Friday.

    Pistorius was released on bail Friday after he was convicted of culpable homicide rather than murder. The double-amputee track star is scheduled to be sentenced next month.

    The 27-year-old has never denied shooting through the bathroom door of their house in South Africa on that fateful Valentine’s Day last year, killing his 29-year-old girlfriend, Steenkamp. He has always maintained that he believed there was an intruder in the house.

    “This verdict is not justice for Reeva,” June Steenkamp told NBC News. “”I just don’t feel like this is the right sentence … they believe his story, and I don’t believe that story … I just want the truth.”

    Reeva’s mother believes her daughter died a “horrible, painful, terrible” death and deserves far more than the verdict he received.

    “He shot through the door and I can’t believe that they believe it was an accident,” she said.

    The charge of culpable homicide, which is similar to negligent homicide in the United States, carries a minimum prison sentence of five years. However, Pistorius could be sentenced to house arrest and receive no jail time.

    The Steenkamps told NBC News that, at this point, they don’t care what happens to Pistorius during the sentencing phase of the trial.

    “I really don’t care what happens to Oscar,” June Steenkamp said. “It’s not going to change anything because my daughter is never coming back. He’s still living and breathing and she’s gone, you know, forever.”

    Pistorius’ uncle also spoke out after the verdict, saying the family was relieved that he was convicted of a lesser charge, but that there were “no victors.”

    “It won’t bring Reeva back, but our hearts still go out for her family and friends,” he said.

  • Oscar Pistorius Trial Nearing Conclusion: What Happens Next?

    The Oscar Pistorius murder trial has been packed with drama and shocking revelations from the very beginning.

    With the final witness called to testify for the defense, it’s expected that the trial is not far away from its highly anticipated conclusion.

    The defense will be calling yet another medical expert to testify, following the testimony on Wednesday by physician Wayne Derman. Derman’s turn on the stand was heavily criticized by chief prosecutor Gerrie Nel.

    Nel argued that Derman’s relationship and familiarity with Pistorius made it impossible for the man to offer an unbiased testimony. Derman had testified that Pistorius’s life-long disability made him highly anxious by nature.

    The physician said that despite his relationship with Pistorius he could provide information objectively.

    Defense attorney Barry Roux has said he should be able to wrap up defense testimony by Tuesday. It’s expected that a break will follow, after which the prosecution and defense will make their final arguments.

    The closing remarks may turn out to be the most crucial moment of the trial for both the prosecution and defense. It is the last opportunity for both sides to firmly state their cases to Judge Thokozile Masipa, who is solely responsible for determining the 27-year-old defendant’s fate.

    Pistorius is on trial for fatally shooting former girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp on Valentine’s Day 2013.

    Pistorius fired four shots through a bathroom door, allegedly because he believed an intruder had broken into his home and his life was in danger. Instead he’d killed Steenkamp, who he maintains that he somehow mistook for an intruder.

    The prosecution has presented a case that suggests that Pistorius killed Steenkamp following an argument in the early morning hours. Several witnesses claimed to have heard the screams of a woman between gunshots.

    The defense has countered that it was Pistorius himself that witnesses heard.

    Once both sides make the final arguments regarding their narrative as to what occurred that day, Masipa could find Pistorius not guilty or she may send him to jail.

    The athlete faces a maximum of 25 years in prison.

    Image via YouTube

  • Oscar Pistorius Had No Mental Disorder When He Shot Steenkamp

    A heavy blow was dealt to the defense in the Oscar Pistorius murder trial.

    According to the findings of a panel made up of one psychologist and three psychiatrists, the 27-year-old athlete likely wasn’t suffering from a mental disorder when he killed Steenkamp.

    This report was released today following a month-long evaluation at the Weskoppies Psychiatric Hospital in Pretoria, South Africa.

    Pistorius admitted to fatally shooting his 29-year-old girlfriend in the early hours of February 14th, 2013. However, he claims that it was a case of mistaken identity.

    Allegedly, Pistorius felt his life to be in danger as he believed an intruder had broken into his home. Steenkamp was killed, in his words, because he mistook her for the intruder in his panic.

    “At the time of the alleged offences,” writes the panel that examined the defendant, “the accused did not suffer from a mental disorder or mental defect that affected his ability to distinguish between the rightful or wrongful nature of his deeds.”

    In other words, even if Pistorius was anxious or upset he still possessed the mental capacity to make responsible decisions…or to knowingly commit to irresponsible decision-making.

    Both chief Prosecutor Gerrie Nel and Pistorius’s defense team accepted the findings of the panel of experts, though it’s uncertain how both sides will use this information going forward.

    If the defense was going to reframe the case around Pistorius’s fragile mental state, they are most definitely going to have to rethink that strategy.

    It’s possible they may choose to emphasize Pistorius’s disability and his increased vulnerability when he is without his prosthetics.

    The prosecution will likely use the finding to show that Pistorius was clearly in his right mind during the shooting and chose to act in an irresponsible manner.

    The case against the star athlete is winding down, and a decision will likely be handed down in the next few weeks.

    Image via YouTube

  • Oscar Pistorius: Could Psych Exam Clear Him Of Murder?

    A month has passed since Judge Thokozile Masipa ordered defendant Oscar Pistorius to undergo a mental health evaluation. The findings are expected to have a major impact on the outcome of the Reeva Steenkamp murder trial.

    The 27-year-old is on trial for fatally shooting Steenkamp, his 29-year-old girlfriend, in the early hours of February 14th, 2013.

    Pistorius claimed that he was not aware that it was Steenkamp he opened fire on and that he was certain his girlfriend was still in their bedroom. Pistorius’s defense is that the event was a terrible accident.

    However, prosecutors are working to prove that Steenkamp was deliberately murdered by Pistorius following an argument.

    According to witness testimony, a woman’s screams were heard amid gunfire, undermining the claim that Pistorius had no idea he had opened fire on his girlfriend.

    After a disastrous turn on the stand, Pistorius’s defense team has moved to emphasize their client’s mental health state in an effort both excuse his killing of Steenkamp and his behavior throughout the trial.

    This defense spurred Masipa to order Pistorius to undergo a 30 day mental health evaluation.

    Pistorius was evaluated at Weskoppies Psychiatric Hospital in Pretoria, South Africa.

    A panel made up of a psychologist and three psychiatrists assessed the athlete during that time period and are expected to share their findings when the trial resumes Monday.

    Pistorius’s defense claims that he suffers from an anxiety disorder. This disorder supposedly causes him to be extraordinarily paranoid about his safety and obsessed with protecting himself.

    Depending on what the panel has decided, Pistorius could find himself cleared of the murder charge. It could also seal his fate. There’s also a possibility that the findings have a direct impact on sentencing, should Pistorius be found guilty.

    If Pistorius is convicted of Steenkamp’s murder, he faces a maximum of 25 years in prison.

    Image via YouTube

  • Reeva Steenkamp Trial: Pistorius Begged Neighbors For Help

    The Reeva Steenkamp murder trial resumed on Monday following a two week recess.

    A lengthy testimony by defendant Oscar Pistorius preceded the break. His turn on the stand was perceived by some onlookers as utterly disastrous for the defense.

    The 27-year-old athlete claimed that in the early hours of February 14th, 2013, he shot what he thought was a dangerous intruder. Instead Pistorius learned that he accidentally killed his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp.

    The prosecution has countered that it was not an accidental killing, but an act of murder following a heated argument.

    The momentum was largely with the prosecution prior to the break. Chief prosecutor Gerrie Nel worked hard to both establish Pistorius as a paranoid and irresponsible gun owner and a man with a hair-trigger temper.

    The prosecution presented witnesses that suggested that Steenkamp’s screams could be heard as she was being murdered.

    Today, the defense presented witness testimony by neighbors who were asked to the scene immediately after Pistorius shot Steenkamp.

    Neighbor Johan Stander said that the athlete called him within minutes of shooting his girlfriend.

    Stander claimed that Pistorius begged him to come over and help him because he’d accidentally shot Steenkamp after mistaking her for an intruder.

    “‘I saw the truth there that morning. I saw it and I feel it,” said Stander. The neighbor believed that Pistorius accidentally killed Steenkamp based on his words and behavior that morning.

    Stander and his daughter Carice Viljoen saw his reaction to shooting Steenkamp, describing him as “broken” and “desperate” for his girlfriend not to die. Viljoen testified that Pistorius begged her to help get Steenkamp to the hospital.

    Nel suggested on cross-examination that Stander was merely trying to cover for his good friend.

    Stander and Viljoen were the fourth and fifth defense witnesses to be called to the stand. The court was adjourned following their testimonies because there were no other defense witnesses present.

    Image via YouTube

  • Oscar Pistorius Testimony Deemed A Fatal Error

    Even though millions were anticipating the testimony of Oscar Pistorius, the 27-year-old was in truth not obligated to take the stand.

    He could have simply sat and allowed his defense team to do their best to clear him of the charge premeditated murder.

    For all the comparisons made to the O.J. Simpson trial of the 1990s, it is here where the two media spectacles differ sharply.

    One athlete listened to the advice of his attorneys and avoided the stand like the plague. The other athlete decided it was the best way to demonstrate his sincerity.

    Many observers feel the decision by Simpson to not testify was a major contributing factor as to why he was eventually acquitted.

    After Pistorius’s tear-soaked display on the stand, some are already deeming it the nail in his defensive coffin.

    Pistorius’s every move was already the subject of numerous articles prior to his testimony.

    The athlete caused a stir every time he acted out. He often covered his ears and bowed his head. At one point the trial was briefly halted because Pistorius was violently ill.

    With such outbursts already the standard, it was not too surprising to see the athlete break down in sobs throughout his testimony.

    It could be seen as the extreme opposite of what occurs when killers sit in court accused of a vicious crime and show no emotion and no remorse. Perhaps therein lies the problem.

    Though Pistorius has never been accused of domestic violence, his excessive emotional display has alarmed some domestic violence experts. According to researchers, an exaggerated display of emotion following a violent event in an effort to garner sympathy and forgiveness is typical of controlling abusers.

    “If they were robots, nobody would date them or be with them,” said Cindy Southworth. Southworth, Vice President at the National Network to End Domestic Violence, spoke about the startling similarities between Pistorius’s emotional outbursts and the behaviors of domestic abusers.

    She said that though these persons can demonstrate a range of human emotions, “research shows they’re always in control.”

    The possibility that the athlete is merely engaging in calculated emotional manipulation is not lost on the prosecution.

    Pistorius’s behavior throughout this trial has led Chief Prosecutor Gerrie Nel to suggest that his outbursts were in fact staged.

    Nel also implied that the tears were meant to cover up the numerous inconsistencies in Pistorius’s testimony.

    When Pistorius finally left the stand it was clear to some South African lawyers that he’d perhaps done more harm than good.

    Martin Hood, a Johannesburg-based criminal lawyer, said that the former Olympian’s testimony “went downhill the moment he took the stand”.

    Hood pointed out that Pistorius emphasized that he went into a highly dangerous situation in a tactical manner. According to Hood this meant that “all of [Pistorius’s] decisions were conscious, intentional decisions.”

    The lawyer also said it didn’t reflect well on the athlete that he refused to accept responsibility for firing a loaded weapon in public.

    It’s possible that the very words spoken by Pistorius in court could end up being his undoing when the trial ends.

    Image via YouTube

  • Oscar Pistorius Trial: Cross-Examiniation Ends

    After five grueling days, the cross-examination of suspect Oscar Pistorius came to an end on Tuesday.

    Gerrie Nel, the chief prosecutor in the high profile case, said that he had no further questions for the 27-year-old former Olympian.

    Nel seems satisfied with his questioning and what he managed to convey to the court and judge.

    Pistorius was not obligated to take the stand, but he did so. It is possible that he hoped that a testimony about his version of events would somehow act to counter what had been presented by the prosecution during the first half of the trial.

    Pistorius had confessed to the fatal shooting of Steenkamp on February 13th, 2013. According to the athlete the entire thing had been a terrible accident rather than premeditated murder.

    Pistorius said that he thought there was an intruder in bathroom of their home and that his life was in danger. He said that he was terrified because he was without his prosthetic legs and unable to physically protect himself.

    It was fear that made him fire at a stranger, not anger that made him fire at his girlfriend.

    Pistorius said tearfully that he fired four times through the bathroom door. A short while later he realized it had been Steenkamp.

    Prosecutors painted a markedly different picture of that day’s tragic events through physical evidence and witness testimony. They argued that the athelete intentionally murdered Steenkamp after a vicious argument.

    Neighbors claimed that on the morning of the murder, a woman’s screams were heard. The screaming was soon silenced by gunfire.

    Eye witness testimonies and expert testimonies about the shooting and evidence were all used to draw one simple conclusion: Oscar Pistorius is a liar who killed his 29-year-old girlfriend intentionally.

    Nel would go at Pistorius during five days of cross-examination in an effort to drive this point home. He brought up the inconsistencies in Pistorius’s testimony.

    He also accused Pistorius of a selfish and insincere emotional display meant to foster sympathy for himself at the expense of the victim’s surviving family.

    Following his intense session on the stand, Pistorius’s defense team must work hard to explain why his testimony deviated from his original statements and flowed more closely with the prosecution’s evidence.

    Pistorius faces 25 years if Judge Thokozile Masipa determines that his actions were an act of premeditated murder.

    Image via YouTube

  • Oscar Pistorius: Changing His Story To Avoid Jail?

    Oscar Pistorius has been extremely emotional throughout his high profile murder trial. At one point the 27-year-old athlete vomited during expert testimony.

    Now himself on the stand, Pistorius is trying to convey his version of what occurred on February 14th, 2013.

    He claimed that after he discovered the body of 29-year-old Steenkamp, he “sat over [her] and cried”. Pistorius testified that he didn’t “know how long he was” there crying over his girlfriend. Shortly after saying this, he broke down on the stand.

    At the request of defense attorney Barry Roux, proceedings were ended a half hour early.

    Earlier, Pistorius had been asked to remove his prosthetic legs in front of the door through which bullets had been fired on the day of Steenkamp’s shooting. Pistorius had claimed that he was on his stumps and had carefully made his way through his house without the aid of prosthetics.

    During another portion of his testimony, Pistorius said that he went back to the bedroom for his gun. He also stated that he requested Steenkamp, “get down and phone the police”. This was an important detail that was not featured in previous statements by Pistorius, one that suggested a strong deviation from such behavior in the past.

    In fact there were a few intricate details that appeared in Pistorius’s testimony that were not previously addressed by him. For instance, the delay in approaching the bathroom and having heard a door slam.

    His testimony also suggested that it had been him shouting and screaming for help that morning. Neighbors claim that they heard a woman’s screams along with gunshots.

    It is curious that Pistorius’s testimony now more closely echoes the narrative set by defense attorneys as to the events of that day than his own original story.

    How is it that these various points were missing from the original statements and only addressed after a great deal of testimony for the prosecution? It is no doubt something that will be addressed in minute detail during careful cross-examination by the prosecution.

    It would be surprising if the prosecutors did not point out the discrepancies and raise the possibility that Pistorius is now lying in a desperate attempt to avoid jail.

    Image via YouTube

  • Oscar Pistorius Testifies: Claims He Can’t Sleep

    Many an onlooker has wondered how Oscar Pistorius, accused of murdering girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp, can sleep at night knowing what he did.

    The answer from the mouth of Pistorius is that he can’t, not soundly anyway.

    The 27-year-old is now testifying on his own behalf. His turn on the stand is what many have been eagerly awaiting.

    Much of what Pistorius has had to say thus far has been about how sorry he is and how much emotional trauma he has suffered.

    He tearfully claimed that he sometimes wakes up at night in a state of terror.

    Pistorius also tried to communicate his sorrow to the surviving family members of his 29-year-old girlfriend.

    “There hasn’t been a moment since this tragedy happened that I haven’t thought about your family,” said Pistorius. “I wake up every morning and you’re the first people I think of, the first people I pray for.”

    Of the events that day, the former Olympian claimed that he killed his girlfriend by accident, having mistaken her for an intruder.

    The prosecution has fought to establish cold-blooded intent. They have moved to emphasize both Pistorius’s bad temper and his excessive obsession with guns. The implication is that on that early morning of February 14th, 2013, Pistorius angrily shot and killed his girlfriend and is now lying to avoid jail time.

    Despite the picture painted by prosecutors, Pistorius has remained adamant that he mistook her for someone else and would never have shot his girlfriend outright.

    Unfortunately for the defendant, there is a mountain of contradicting evidence that he will likely answer to on cross-examination.

    There is eyewitness testimony placing a woman’s screams among the gunfire. How could Oscar Pistorius, at such a close proximity, not hear his girlfriend screaming as he fired? It has been claimed by his defense attorney that it was Pistorius himself that neighbors heard that morning.

    Pistorius may also have to answer to the questions raised by the testimony of ex-girlfriend Samantha Taylor. She testified that during such displays of paranoia, Pistorius would always wake her up without fail. Why didn’t Pistorius do the same for Steenkamp?

    There are many questions that await answers far more relevant to the case than Pistorius and his ability to sleep at night.

    Image via YouTube

  • Oscar Pistorius: Witness Heard Shots And Screams

    Yet another witness has come forward in the Oscar Pistorius case to declare that she distinctly remembers gunfire and a woman’s screams.

    Anette Stipp, a neighbor of Pistorius, testified that on the morning of Reeva Steenkamp’s murder she heard a gun shot, a woman’s screams, and then three more shots.

    Pistorius has maintained as part of his defense that he fired through his bathroom door at Steenkamp because he mistook her for an intruder. He says that her death was entirely accidental.

    The prosecution has not bought Pistorius’s version of events from the onset. Throughout the case, prosecutors have sought to demonstrate Pistorius’s obsession with guns, his reckless behavior around weapons, and his hair-trigger temper.

    The witness testimony of those called by prosecutors paints a picture of a man who knowingly gunned down his then girlfriend in cold blood, their words severely undermining any notion that Steenkamp’s death was unintentional.

    The angles aggressively taken by Pistorius’s attorneys to counter these efforts has been to suggest incompetence by law enforcement in how evidence was handled and to try and dictate to witnesses what they really heard on the morning of the murder.

    Kenny Oldwadge, one of Pistorius’s lawyers, had tried to get Stipp to admit that what she actually heard could have been Pistorius crying and not the screams of his girlfriend.

    The defense also tried to insist that what Stipp heard at the time of Steenkamp’s death was the sound of Pistorius’s cricket bat hitting the bathroom door rather than gunshots.

    “It was not crying,” Stipp countered, “It was screaming, high pitched screaming. It’s not just the pitch; [the] whole voice was definitely female.” She also maintained that she was sure she’d heard gunfire both before and after the screams of a woman.

    Pistorius’s defense has been trying to assert that he was the one screaming or crying that morning because he was afraid for his life.

    However Stipp and previous witness testimony mentioned hearing a woman’s screams and gunfire.

    The corroboration is damning, making it especially difficult for the defense to successfully paint the Olympic athlete as a terrified and helpless disabled man.

    The prosecution in the Oscar Pistorius case is set to rest. The trial is anticipated to continue for another week before Judge Thokozile Masipa makes her decision as to whether or not Pistorius will be headed to jail.

    Image via YouTube

  • Oscar Pistorius: Textbook Paranoid Gun Owner?

    The case against Oscar Pistorius continued today as his defense attorney tried his best to throw doubt on the professionalism of law enforcement and validity of the evidence against his client.

    Barry Roux’s cross-examination of police photographer Barend Van Staden went on for much of Tuesday. During the cross-examination, Roux tried to insist that the items photographed had been tampered with or moved around, making the re-construction of the murder scene questionable.

    This move to undermine the evidence is the only realistic counter-attack available to Roux whose client Pistorius has been held up as the standard of the textbook paranoid gun owner by the prosecution.

    It is an image that could actually validate Pistorius’s version of events and convince Judge Thokozile Masipa that the Olympic athlete genuinely believed his life to be in danger. It could also help him avoid a lengthy prison term.

    Pistorius’s behavior could also be taken as a sign that certain individuals should simply not be gun owners.

    Early testimony from two men who knew Pistorius recalled that after being handed a weapon, he irresponsibly fired it in public.

    It remains puzzling why Pistorius behaved in such a way.

    He was instructed that the weapon was loaded. Why would a person who is supposed to know much about guns take the risk of firing it? Accidents do happen, but then it was not the only incident.

    Ex-girlfriend Samantha Taylor testified that Pistorius had fired a bullet into the sunroof of the car he was driving after being pulled over by police. What if the bullet had ricocheted and hit someone in the car?

    Finally, some testimony referred to his inexplicable obsession with being followed or of someone getting into his home to harm him. He was even planning to stockpile weapons prior to the shooting of Reeva Steenkamp.

    Looking at Pistorius’s behavior leading up to the death of his girlfriend, whether or not it was intentional, it is hard to look at his behavior as a gun owner as remotely ethical. It seems that something like this, based on his behavior, may have been sadly inevitable.

    Perhaps the biggest lesson to be taken from the Pistorius trial is that South Africa should work harder on gun control laws. For instance, those seeking a permit should submit to a mental examination prior to being granted the ability to own guns.

    Do you think the Oscar Pistorius case is a sign that stricter gun laws are needed in South Africa? Comment below!

    Image via YouTube

  • Oscar Pistorius: Media, Internet Influencing Trial?

    The case against Oscar Pistorius is thought to be the most covered trial in recent history. It has been compared many times to the spectacle of the OJ Simpson trial of the 1990s. Given the emerging role of the internet in communicating global events, it may perhaps be even more covered and talked about.

    This could be causing a major problem for the Pistorius defense, which is now claiming that the heavy presence of the media and internet-shared facts about the trial is in fact interfering with the case.

    Defense attorney Barry Roux has repeatedly tried to discredit witness testimony over this fact. Roux has suggested that instead of using their own knowledge on the stand, witnesses were “linking” testimony based on what was shared via the media.

    Roux was especially critical of the testimony of Pistorius’ friend Darren Fresco.

    During the third day of trial testimony, boxer Kevin Lerena had testified that Pistorius fired a gun belonging to a friend under the table at a restaurant a month before killing girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp.

    Lerena explained the nature of the event in detail, stating that Fresco passed a gun to Pistorius, letting the athlete know the gun was loaded. Then, according to Lerena’s original testimony, Pistorius fired the gun. The bullet is alleged to have hit the floor near boxer’s foot, causing mild bleeding and a non-painful injury. Pistorius subsequently asked Fresco to take the blame for his having fired in a public place.

    Fresco himself testified roughly a week later, and his testimony strongly echoed that of Lerena. It also had details similar to the testimony of ex-girlfriend Samantha Taylor, according to events he himself was present for or apparently aware of.

    Roux attacked Fresco’s testimony, saying that he did not remember the events himself as they occurred. The Pistorius defense lawyer suggested that instead, Fresco was constructing his testimony to match statements that were now public knowledge thanks to media coverage and social media sites like Twitter.

    Fresco did admit that he’d heard aspects of the trial via the media.

    Said Fresco of the trial’s massive exposure, “It doesn’t matter what you do, where you go, it’s all over the news, it’s all over the radio.”

    Does Pistorius’s defense attorney have a point: Is the heavy media coverage making a fair trial impossible? Comment below!

    Image via YouTube

  • Oscar Pistorius: Why Didn’t He Wake Girlfriend?

    Oscar Pistorius: Why Didn’t He Wake Girlfriend?

    Before the trial even began, everyone knew Oscar Pistorius’s side of the story: He was a man in fear of his life.

    The athlete known as “Blade Runner” could not get way from the paranoid belief that his life was in danger, saying that he was convinced an intruder had somehow gotten into his home.

    The 27-year-old found himself headed to the bathroom with his gun and preparing for the worst. Pistorius fired multiple times through the bathroom door, hitting what he thought was a dangerous home invader.

    It was only after the fact that he realized there was no intruder, and the person he’d fatally shot was in fact his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp.

    The death of 29-year-old Steenkamp by this account was not an act of cold blooded murder, but instead a tragic and entirely unintended accident.

    While this may seem a plausible enough defense, the prosecution has produced an indirect challenge to this supposed series of events in the form of a testimony by Pistorius’s ex-girlfriend Samantha Taylor.

    Taylor testified on Friday that the two of them broke up after he cheated on her with the deceased Steenkamp.

    More importantly, Taylor testified that Pistorius would awaken her whenever he feared that someone was trying to break in.

    She shared one incident where Pistorius had supposedly heard someone banging against the bathroom window. Taylor testified that he had woken her up to ask if she heard the noise as well. She said that he took a gun to the bathroom to check things out.

    Whenever there was such a situation as far as Taylor knew, Pistorius would wake her up.

    This raises a very interesting question: Why did Pistorius deviate from this apparent pattern of behavior with Steenkamp?

    Pistorius claimed that he understood Steenkamp to be in bed sleeping, which is what led to him mistaking her for the intruder.

    With others testifying to hearing gunshots, screams, and physical evidence to come, one may be tempted to overlook this bit of testimony. This despite it being perhaps one of the more revealing aspects of the Oscar Pistorius trial thus far.

    Image via YouTube