Oscar Pistorius: seven key quotes from the murder trial

The Oscar Pistorius trial, which is expected to resume in Pretoria in just over a week, has had its fair share of dramatic moments. After all the tears and accusations, Judge Thokozile Masipa will soon have to decide the athlete's fate. The prosecution claims Pistorius intentionally killed his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp, while the Paralympian insists he mistook her for a dangerous intruder and "did not intend to kill Reeva or anyone else". With the courtroom drama soon due to resume, here are seven key quotes from the trial so far: 

Oscar Pistorius: "I didn't have time to think, I discharged my firearm."

The ultimate question for Judge Masipa is what Pistorius was thinking when he opened fire. According to the athlete, he was thinking nothing at all. This claim suggests that his line of defence has changed from putative self defence, where the accused uses what he believes to be reasonable means to defend himself against a genuinely held fear of attack, to an involuntary defence, where his mind does not control his behaviour.

Michelle Burger: "It was bloodcurdling screams."

Pistorius's neighbour Michelle Burger was among several witnesses who claimed they heard a woman scream around the time Steenkamp was killed.  The prosecution says this shows that Pistorius knew Steenkamp was behind the toilet door when he opened fire. However, the athlete insists that he was the one screaming, first at the "intruder" to get out of his house and then again when he realised he had killed Steenkamp.

Reeva Steenkamp: "I'm scared of you sometimes and how you snap at me."

The court spent many hours examining WhatsApp messages between Pistorius and Steenkamp. The vast majority portrayed a "normal" and "loving" relationship, but a handful of messages painted a less happy picture. Particularly difficult for the defence was a message from Steenkamp claiming that she was "scared" of Pistorius and upset about his "jealous tantrums". The prosecution claims the message adds weight to its theory that Steenkamp had fled to the toilet and locked herself in because she was scared after an argument with Pistorius.

Oscar Pistorius: "It's not as soft as brains but f*** it's a zombie stopper."

Pistorius was heard saying these words on video showing him firing at a watermelon at a shooting range with "zombie-stopper" bullets, expanding ammunition designed to cause maximum tissue damage. The video, first uncovered by Sky News, was presented unexpectedly by the prosecution as part of its attempt to portray Pistorius as a reckless gun-lover. Pistorius said he regretted saying the words and insisted he was referring to zombies and not humans

Prosecutor Gerrie Nel: "Your version is not only untruthful but it's so improbable that it cannot be reasonably, possibly true."

The prosecution has repeatedly branded Pistorius's account far-fetched. The most "improbable" part of his story, said Nel, is that Steenkamp never uttered a word from the toilet before she was shot. The athlete said he presumed she kept quiet because she was "terrified", but Nel said the "only reasonable explanation" was that Steenkamp was standing, facing the door, talking to him and that he shot her knowing who he was aiming at. 

Oscar Pistorius: "I wake up and I can smell blood"

The emotional state of Pistorius has attracted much attention throughout the trial. He has repeatedly cried, vomited and broken down, forcing the court to adjourn on several occasions. On the first day of giving evidence, he said he still has "terrible nightmares" about what happened. "I wake up and I can smell blood and I wake up to being terrified," he said. "I hear a noise and I wake up in a complete state of terror, to the point that I would rather not sleep."

Dr Meryl Vorster: "It is my opinion, m'lady, that Mr Pistorius has an anxiety disorder."

It was this statement from defence witness Dr Meryl Vorster that prompted the judge to send Pistorius for a 30-day mental health evaluation. The athlete is currently at Weskoppies Psychiatric Hospital, where a panel of experts are determining whether his state of mind played a part in the shooting on Valentine's Day last year. The results could mean a shorter prison sentence for Pistorius if he is convicted or it could mean he has fewer grounds for appeal.

Oscar Pistorius: how will psychiatric results affect his trial?

6 June

Oscar Pistorius could be committed to a mental institution against his will if experts decide that he was "mentally incapacitated" when he shot Reeva Steenkamp. The athlete is currently being assessed by three psychiatrists and one psychologist at Weskoppies Psychiatric Hospital to determine his mental state when he fired at his girlfriend on Valentine's Day last year.

Judge Thokozile Masipa sent him for the 30-day evaluation after defence witness Dr Meryl Vorster diagnosed him with "generalised anxiety disorder". The results could mean a shorter prison sentence for Pistorius if he is convicted or it could mean he has fewer grounds for appeal. Either way, the outcome is likely to have a big impact on how the trial will proceed. Here are the findings available to the experts who will report back to the court...

Pistorius was 'mentally incapacitated'

In theory, the expert panel could decide Pistorius was "mentally incapacitated" when he shot Steenkamp, meaning that he was unable to control his actions because of an underlying mental disorder. In this case, the trial would end and Pistorius would be committed to a mental institution against his will until he is found not to be a danger, reports CNN.

Pistorius had 'diminished capacity'

Professor Stephen Tucson, a criminal barrister in Johannesburg, tells the Daily Telegraph, that the experts are more likely to look at whether Pistorius has a disorder that "diminished" his capacity for criminal responsibility. In that case, the trial would resume, and the experts' finding would be taken into consideration during sentencing if he were found guilty. This would be the favoured option for the defence as it would mean Pistorius might be judged less harshly.  While murder and premeditated murder have mandatory jail terms, the sentencing for culpable homicide is discretionary, varying from fines to prison time of up to 15 years. For Pistorius to be convicted of the lesser charge of culpable homicide, Judge Masipa would have to believe that Pistorius did not plan or intend to commit murder but that he "negligently" killed Steenkamp.

Pistorius had no mental health problems

Alternatively, the experts might decide that Pistorius's mental health was not an issue at all and the court could therefore disregard the evidence of Dr Vorster. Prosecutor Gerrie Nel is likely to be rooting for this option, as it would mean Pistorius could not use his mental state as a defence or a mitigating factor in sentencing. Part of the reason Nel called for the evaluation in the first place was that he feared the defence could later use Pistorius's mental state to appeal against any conviction. A full state evaluation that gives him a clean bill of health would make this much more difficult.

Oscar Pistorius: what is he doing at Weskoppies hospital? 

3 June

As Oscar Pistorius undergoes a second week of assessment at Pretoria's Weskoppies Psychiatric Hospital, more details have emerged about his 30-day mental health evaluation. The Reeva Steenkamp murder trial was suspended last month after an expert witness for the defence diagnosed Pistorius with 'generalised anxiety disorder'. Judge Thokozile Masipa then sent the athlete to Weskoppies, where a panel of experts are determining whether his state of mind played a part in the shooting of Steenkamp on Valentine's Day last year. Four specialists will have to decide whether Pistorius was criminally responsible for the shooting and if he fired his gun despite knowing right from wrong.

What is Oscar Pistorius doing day to day?

Pistorius is being treated as an outpatient, which means he can return home each evening. He is expected to arrive at Weskoppies at 9am every day and stay until 4pm, or until he is excused.

It is likely to be an "emotionally taxing" few weeks, according to Carly Abramovitz, a clinical psychologist who has worked at the hospital. The first day is usually "relatively simple", she says, with the experts getting to know their patient and explaining how the process works. After that, the panel will conduct lengthy interviews to obtain Pistorius's full life history, his family background, and his criminal and psychiatric history. Other assessments include personality tests, neuropsychological tests, tests for malingering (the technical term for faking a mental illness) and general cognitive tests that evaluate each and every cognitive process from intelligence to memory. Abramovitz tells Eye Witness News that the panel is likely to make Pistorius recall the moment of the shooting so they can work out whether he was in a "particularly heightened state of anxiety". Abramovitz describes it as an "extremely rigorous process" with experts observing him during "every single minute of every procedure".

Ivan de Klerk, a forensic psychologist, told South Africa's Times newspaper that forensic psychologists do not adopt a warm bedside manner. "A counsellor is empathetic and subjective, but in a forensic observation a psychiatrist wants to get to the truth," he said. "There is no way it would be possible to fake a condition for 30 days." 

What is Weskoppies like?

Weskoppies is one of the biggest and oldest psychiatric institutions in South Africa. Located next to an industrial area in the west of Pretoria, it consists of many one-storey buildings in a "large, almost farm-like, setting", reports eNCA. It is "extremely quiet" and its patients and activities are not visible to visitors, says the news channel. "It is neither modern nor luxurious and has a bare, functional quality to it."

The hospital caters to a large variety of patients, with mental illnesses ranging from depression, anxiety disorders and bipolar disorders to schizophrenia. On the morning of Pistorius's first day, one female patient apparently asked reporters to film her message to Pistorius to "be strong". She told reporters: "I love him". However, there were apparently no takers and she "walked dejectedly back into the hospital", reported The Times.

Court-ordered cases make up just a portion of patients at Weskoppies. Former high-profile patients include 'Modimolle Monster' Johan Kotze who was convicted last year for murder, rape, kidnapping and assault, and 'Advocate Barbie' Cezanne Visser, who was sent to jail in 2010 for molesting children with her former lover. 

Who is evaluating Oscar Pistorius?

Four experts have been appointed, including three psychiatrists and one psychologist:

Dr Herman Pretorius is one of two Weskoppies psychiatrists appointed by the court. In a previous high-profile case he was tasked with assessing a prisoner who slit two nurses’ throats. Pretorius testified that the accused knew right from wrong when he attacked his victims. 

Dr Carla Kotze is the second Weskoppies psychiatrist appointed by the court. In 2012, she was asked to evaluate a man accused of decapitating his victim in a graveyard, stripping his face from his head and cutting off some of his limbs. Kotze declared that the accused could understand right from wrong and he was sentenced to a minimum of 20 years in prison.

Dr Leon Fine has been appointed on behalf of the defence. He is a psychiatrist with a speciality in anxiety syndromes and has “extensive experience” in giving evidence in court, according to South Africa's Daily Maverick magazine. 

Professor Jonathan Scholtz is head of psychology at Weskoppies and a professor at the University of Pretoria. He testified in the 'Advocate Barbie' case, diagnosing Cezanne Visser with battered woman syndrome. Visser was released on appeal just three years into her seven-year prison sentence.

When will the Oscar Pistorius trial resume?

The court is expected to resume on 30 June to hear the results of the evaluation.

Oscar Pistorius: what will psychiatric evaluation involve?

20 May

Oscar Pistorius will spend 30 days as an outpatient at Weskoppies Psychiatric Hospital in Pretoria, Judge Thokozile Masipa has announced.

The Paralympian, currently on trial for murder, will begin a mental health evaluation on Monday 26 May and must attend the hospital every weekday between 9am and 4pm.

The court will resume on 30 June to hear the results of the evaluation. A panel of four professionals, including one appointed by the defence and two by the court, will compile separate reports. These will help the judge decide whether Pistorius was criminally liable for his actions, and whether he "appreciated the wrongfulness of his conduct".

According to one psychologist who trained at Weskoppies, the panel will conduct lengthy interviews to obtain Pistorius's full life history, his family background, and his criminal and psychiatric history.

Other assessments include personality tests, neuropsychological tests, tests for malingering (the technical term for faking a mental illness) and general cognitive tests that evaluate each and every cognitive process from intelligence to memory.

The psychologist, who blogs under the name Carly Danielle, describes it as an "extremely rigorous process" with experts observing him during "every single minute of every procedure".

The judge's decision to evaluate Pistorius, who is on trial for the murder his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp, came after a psychiatrist giving evidence for the defence diagnosed the athlete with 'generalised anxiety disorder'.

Last week, South African lawyers suggested that allowing Pistorius to receive treatment as an outpatient could be perceived as "special treatment".

Mannie Witz, a criminal lawyer with the Bridge Group at the Johannesburg Bar, has said that, under South Africa's Criminal Procedure Act, Pistorius must be treated as an inpatient because he did not volunteer for the evaluation.

The waiting time for an inpatient place at psychiatric institutions in South Africa is reported to be several months long, with some people waiting up to two years. Pistorius will have to wait only six days and will be allowed to return home each day.

Oscar Pistorius: will athlete receive 'special treatment'?

19 May

South African courts look set to face allegations of "special treatment" if Oscar Pistorius is not placed in custody tomorrow.

Judge Thokozile Masipa is due to formally refer Pistorius for a 30-day mental health evaluation on Tuesday, after a psychiatrist giving evidence for the defence diagnosed the athlete with 'generalised anxiety disorder' last week.

The waiting time for an inpatient place at psychiatric institutions in South Africa is reported to be several months long, with some people waiting up to two years. Masipa has indicated that outpatient treatment would be preferable for Pistorius, who is on trial for the murder his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp.

This would mean he would face a shorter waiting period, remain on bail and, once the evaluation begins, return home each day.

But Mannie Witz, a criminal lawyer with the Bridge Group at the Johannesburg Bar, has said that under South Africa's Criminal Procedure Act Pistorius must be treated as an inpatient because he did not volunteer for the evaluation.

"He didn't ask to be referred, he opposed it," said Witz, who has been an advocate for more than 35 years and according to CNN once taught Judge Masipa. This means Pistorius would have to go immediately into custody, either in hospital or prison, once he is formally referred tomorrow.

"You can't give him any special treatment. He must be treated the same as every other person that is standing trial," Witz told South Africa's Channel 199, which has been set up especially to broadcast the Pistorius trial.

Describing the country's prisons and hospitals as "clogged", he questioned why Pistorius should go to the front of the queue just because of "who he is and because it is a high-profile trial".

Nokukhanya Jele, another advocate from the Bridge Group, pointed out that the Pistorius trial has been "special and unique for lots of reasons".

There have been fewer delays in the Pistorius trial compared to normal trials in South Africa, where many people experience "time-consuming, exhausting adjournments", she said. Jele added that some trials "take years" because the judge is not available and is not booked off to take care of one particular case.

Oscar Pistorius: what happens next at the murder trial?

16 May

ELEVEN weeks have passed since the Oscar Pistorius murder trial began, but it is still far from over. The Pretoria court has seen dramatic evidence presented by both sides, from ferocious cross-examinations to harrowing testimonies with the Paralympian frequently tearful and retching throughout. In a surprise move, Pistorius has been told he will undergo a 30-day psychiatric evaluation, causing a "significant delay" to the trial. The prosecution maintains that Pistorius deliberately shot his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp through his toilet door on 14 February 2013, while the defence insists he mistook her for a dangerous intruder. What happens next?

Psychiatric evaluation

After defence witness Dr Meryl Vorster told the court that Pistorius had 'generalised anxiety disorder', Judge Thokozile Masipa has said Pistorius must undergo a psychiatric evaluation. Masipa will formally issue her ruling on Tuesday, outlining who will carry out the evaluation, and where and when it will take place. A referral of this kind typically involves 30 days of observation and then another 30 days in which experts compile their reports, meaning that the minimum delay is likely to be two months.

However, the waiting time for an inpatient place at psychiatric institutions in South Africa is reported to be several months long. Judge Masipa has indicated that outpatient treatment would be preferable for Pistorius, which would reduce the delay. But one South African advocate, Mannie Witz, has told local media that this choice would be unavailable to the defence as Pistorius did not refer himself for an evaluation.

In theory, the expert panel of psychiatrists and psychologists could decide Pistorius was “mentally incapacitated” when he shot Steenkamp, which would mean the trial ends and he is committed to a mental institution. But Professor Stephen Tucson, a criminal barrister in Johannesburg, tells the Daily Telegraph, they are more likely to look at whether he has a disorder that diminished his capacity for criminal responsibility. A “diminished capacity” finding would mean Pistorius might be judged less harshly in sentencing. Alternatively, the experts might decide that Pistorius’s mental health is not an issue at all and the court could therefore disregard the evidence of Dr Meryl Vorster.

Final arguments

Once the defence has brought its final witnesses and closed its case, both sides will have the opportunity to present their arguments as to why Pistorius should or should not be convicted. According to ABC News, the trial could be postponed for as long as six weeks to give the lawyers time to prepare their final written arguments. These documents will explain in detail each side’s version of events on the night of the shooting and how the evidence presented in court supports their account. The documents will be given to the judge, her assessors and the opposing sides. Both the defence and prosecution will also put their arguments verbally to the court.

Judgement

The case will be adjourned, possibly for a few weeks, to give Judge Masipa and her assessors time to consider the final written documents and the evidence they have heard in court. South Africa abolished jury trials under apartheid in 1969, due to fears of racial prejudice by white jurors. A judgement will therefore be passed by Masipa, who could take a day or more in court giving her summary and analysis of the evidence.

Sentencing

If Pistorius is found guilty then the court must consider an appropriate sentence. Both sides are entitled to present arguments or evidence for a longer or shorter sentence. This is where a finding of “diminished capacity” could come into play. If convicted of premeditated murder, the athlete faces up to 25 years in prison.

Pistorius cannot dodge jail with murder acquittal alone

Appeal

If Pistorius is convicted, he could still appeal to the supreme court, where three to five judges would listen to his case, and even eventually to South Africa’s constitutional court.

Oscar Pistorius: why is the trial facing a 'significant' delay?

14 May

OSCAR PISTORIUS is to be sent for a 30-day psychiatric evaluation in a state-run mental health institution, potentially causing a "significant delay" to his murder trial.

Judge Thokozile Masipa today granted a request from the prosecution that the athlete should undergo a proper psychiatric enquiry. It comes after defence witness Dr Merryll Vorster diagnosed Pistorius with 'generalised anxiety disorder'.

Vorster did not think he suffered with a mental illness, but conceded that Pistorius's ability to act in accordance with his understanding of right and wrong was affected by the disorder.

She said that his increased fear of crime, physical vulnerability and anxiety disorder may have affected his "flight or fight" response on the night that he shot his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp.

Judge Masipa told the court this morning that evidence from Vorster, who only met with Pistorius twice, cannot replace a proper psychiatric enquiry. "A proper enquiry would ensure the accused receives a fair trial," she said.

The evaluation will need to determine whether or not Pistorius suffers from a "mental illness or mental defect" that makes him incapable of appreciating the "wrongfulness" of his act or of "acting in accordance with an appreciation of the wrongfulness of his act".

Not only will the observation take around 30 days, the waiting lists for inpatient treatment in Pretoria are reported to be several months long, which would cause a "significant delay" to the murder trial, says The Guardian.

Masipa has agreed with the defence that outpatient treatment would be preferable for Pistorius, as the aim of the referral is "not to punish the accused". This could reduce the delay, but experts are also expected to spend a further 30 days compiling their reports, meaning that the minimum delay is likely to be two months.

The Guardian notes that some believe Pistorius's defence has slipped up in calling Vorster as a witness and introducing the diagnosis of generalised anxiety disorder at such a late stage in the trial. Prosecutor Gerrie Nel yesterday accused the defence of changing its plea from putative self-defence to a psychiatric disorder.

The court will adjourn until Tuesday, when the full ruling on the referral will be given.

Oscar Pistorius 'lonely' and 'probably shouldn't own a gun'

13 May

OSCAR PISTORIUS was described as "lonely" today as he waits to find out if he will have to spend four weeks under observation in a psychiatric facility.

The athlete – on trial for killing his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp – has been diagnosed with 'general anxiety disorder' by forensic psychiatrist Dr Meryl Vorster, who has been giving evidence in court.

Vorster has said the disorder may have played a role "to a degree" in his actions on the night of the shooting on 14 February last year.

Pistorius had friends "to avoid feeling lonely", she told the court. "They were not friends he could confide in." His sexual relationships tended to be short, she said, adding that he coped socially, but this was "superficial".

People suffering from the disorder are not "dangerous", said Vorster, but they should "probably not have firearms". She added: "That makes that person at risk of being involved in violent activities."

Vorster said that she would not expect Pistorius to remember exactly what happened at the time of the shooting because of the anxiety disorder and the fear he felt. But she said that Pistorius was still able to know what he was doing.

Prosecutor Gerrie Nel has argued that Pistorius should go for a 30-day psychiatric evaluation and suggested that the defence team may be using the Vorster's testimony as a fall-back defence.

He questioned why Vorster had been called in at such a late stage to evaluate Pistorius, reports The Guardian. "We will argue that the accused was not the most impressive witness," he said. "Now we have a witness being called by the defence saying that a psychiatric disorder may play a role in his actions... there should be red lights going off."

The defence and prosecution have disagreed on whether or not the disorder can be classed as a mental illness under South African law. The defence says it is not and claims there is "no merit" in the prosecution's application to have Pistorius undergo further tests.

Judge Thokozile Masipa will announce her decision tomorrow.

Oscar Pistorius has anxiety disorder, says psychiatrist

12 May

OSCAR PISTORIUS has an anxiety disorder, according to a forensic psychiatrist, and may have to undergo a mental health assessment at a state hospital.

Dr Meryl Vorster has told the Pretoria court that the amputation of the athlete's lower legs as baby, his family's heightened fear of crime, his parents' divorce and his mother's death when he was 14 led to a generalised anxiety disorder.

The removal of his legs when he was unable to understand what was going on would have been perceived as a "traumatic assault", she said. His father was "an irresponsible and absent" parent, while his mother "abused alcohol intermittently" and slept with a gun under pillow. Her children were not "soothed" and developed anxiety, she said.

Vorster described Pistorius's emotional reactions as "genuine". The athlete has cried, retched and vomited during the trial, in which he is accused of murdering his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp on Valentine's Day last year.

"If one had to feign retching one would develop a hoarse voice, red in the face. He was pale and sweating," said Vorster. "This is difficult to feign."

The psychiatrist said that Pistorius's reaction to the "perceived threat" on the night of the shooting "should be considered in light of his physical disability and his anxiety disorder".

State prosecutor Gerrie Nel argued the defendant's mental health should be examined more fully at a state hospital – a move that could delay the trial for up to a month, reports Sky News.

However, the defence has said it would oppose the application, arguing that the diagnosis of generalised anxiety disorder did not mean Pistorius was incapable of distinguishing right from wrong.

Vorster also talked about the flight/fight response, saying Pistorius was more likely to respond to any threat with "fight" rather than "flight" because his capacity for flight is limited.

In a statement that may later prove difficult for the defence, Vorster agreed with the prosecution that by arming himself and approaching the danger Pistorius must have foreseen the possibility of shooting.

The defence team was due to wrap up its case on Tuesday, but is now likely to go on until the end of the week, as the prosecution has taken longer than planned to cross-examine witnesses.

Oscar Pistorius: Reeva's last moments disputed in court

9 May

A BALLISTICS expert testifying at the trial of Oscar Pistorius has cast doubt on the prosecution’s account of Reeva Steenkamp’s final moments.

Tom “Wollie” Wolmarans, a former police forensics expert and witness for the defence, faced an aggressive cross-examination from prosecutor Gerrie Nel today, reports The Guardian.

The state maintains that Pistorius shot his girlfriend Steenkamp following an argument, while the Paralympian says he mistook her for a dangerous intruder.

Today Wolmarans said he believes Steenkamp was standing close behind the toilet door when the first two bullets hit her hip and arm. He believes she was falling as she was hit by a subsequent bullet that caused her fatal head wound.

His version of events differs to that given by Captain Christiaan Mangena, a ballistics expert for the prosecution. Mangena said Steenkamp was standing in the toilet cubicle when she was hit in the right hip, but believed she fell to the floor and was then hit in the arm and head as she crossed her arms over her head to protect herself.

The prosecution’s account would suggest that Pistorius paused between the shots and may have heard Steenkamp scream before firing the final, fatal bullet – whereas Wolmarans claims the shots were fired in quick succession.

In a dramatic exchange, Nel asked Wolmarans if he had changed details of his report after discussing the case with Roger Dixon, another defence witness who testified before the Easter break. Wolmarans admitted that he and Dixon had gone for a beer together but said he would not have altered his own report on Dixon's advice because Dixon was not a ballistics expert. “I never lied to a court,” he told the judge.

Wolmarans, who at one point stepped inside the court’s reconstructed toilet cubicle to demonstrate Steenkamp’s position, said the state’s explanation for an injury on the victim’s back also “does not make sense”. The prosecution claims the injury was caused by a ricochet bullet, but Wolmarans says it would have occurred when she fell backwards onto a wooden magazine rack. 
 

Oscar Pistorius: 'heartbroken' athlete took up art therapy

8 May

OSCAR PISTORIUS took up art therapy after Reeva Steenkamp’s death left him “heartbroken”, a social worker has told the Pretoria court.

Yvette Van Schalkwyk, who was asked to give Pistorius emotional support and assess his mental state following the shooting, said that he had cried 80 per cent of the time.

“From the first second, I saw a man who was heartbroken about the loss, he cried, he was in mourning,” she said. “He suffered emotionally. He loved her.”

Van Schalkwyk was not originally on the defence witness list but came forward on Tuesday following claims that Pistorius had taken acting lessons and that his emotions in court were fake, reports The Times.

She said his first words to her were “I miss Reeva so much” and that he was also upset about the loss he had caused her parents.

Van Schalkwyk added that she visited Pistorius in his cells during his bail hearing and that he vomited twice and had collapsed crying.

Pistorius was not deemed suicidal and had participated in art therapy to deal with his trauma, said Van Schalkwyk.

In cross-examination, prosecutor Gerrie Nel tried to emphasise the point that Pistorius had not told Van Schalkwyk he was “sorry”, but the social worker said she was not expecting such a remark because that was not her “position or function”. She was not there to determine remorse, she said.

Earlier in the day, anaesthetist Professor Christina Lundgren cast doubt on the prosecution’s claim that Reeva had eaten two hours before she died. Lundgren said that gastric emptying was not an exact science and there were a number of factors that could have slowed her digestion, including yoga and sleeping.

The court also heard from forensic and ballistics expert Thomas Wolmarans, who told the court that he found a bullet fragment in the toilet bowl that police had missed in their examination of the crime scene. He also raised doubts about the trajectory of bullets reconstructed by the police, saying it was impossible to determine an accurate trajectory without knowing where the gun was fired from.
 

Oscar Pistorius denies ‘sinister’ remark to Reeva’s friend

7 May

OSCAR PISTORIUS has denied whispering "how can you sleep at night?" to a friend of Reeva Steenkamp during a break in his murder trial.

The friend, Kim Myers, claims the athlete made the “very sinister” comment as she sat in the public gallery.

Journalists sitting nearby say they saw Pistorius lean forwards towards Myers as he left the dock. She was seen to recoil and was approached by a police officer sitting with the prosecution team. The officer then spoke to prosecutor Gerrie Nel who confronted the Paralympian’s lawyers.

When questioned by reporters, Pistorius denied even speaking to Myers, claiming he had not spoken to her or her family for a year and a half.

Myers’s lawyer has raised the issue with the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) and is considering making a formal complaint of intimidation to police. He added that his client viewed the “unwelcome approach as extremely disturbing”.

Barend van Staden, a police officer who testified against Pistorius earlier in the trial, has claimed he overheard the comment and police have reportedly been scanning video footage of the trial in an attempt to find the moment that the alleged exchange took place

Steenkamp lived with the Myers family in the months before she was killed and referred to them as her “Jo’burg family”. Kim Myers, her sister Gina, mother Desi and father Cecil were all named as state witnesses but were not called to give evidence. Cecil Myers, who was among those to identify Steenkamp’s body, had previously told the media he had been concerned about the intensity of Pistorius’s relationship with Steenkamp.

Stephen Tuson, a legal expert at Wits University in Johannesburg, told the Telegraph that if Kim Myers had been called as a state witness, Pistorius’s alleged comment could have prompted the NPA to apply for his bail to be revoked.

The state claims Pistorius deliberately shot Steenkamp on 14 February last year, but the athlete insists he mistook her for a dangerous intruder.
 

Oscar Pistorius: neighbours heard man's 'high-pitched' cries

6 May

THREE of Oscar Pistorius’s nearest neighbours have said they heard the loud cries of a man, not the screams of a woman, on the night Reeva Steenkamp was shot.

The witnesses were called by the athlete’s defence to testify at his murder trial, where Pistorius is seeking to prove that he mistook his girlfriend for a dangerous intruder.

Previous neighbours testifying for the prosecution claimed they heard the screams of a woman, suggesting the athlete must have known Steenkamp was behind the toilet door when he opened fire.

Today, Pistorius's next-door neighbour Michael Nhlengethwa told the court that he had met Steenkamp only once when Pistorius introduced her as his “fiancée”.

Nhlengethwa said that on the night of the shooting his wife woke him up after hearing a “bang” and he could hear a man crying very loudly as if he was in danger, saying: “Please, please, no, please."

His wife Eontle Nhlengethwa later gave a demonstration of the high-pitched crying in court. Another neighbour Rika Motshuane said she also heard a man crying “very loud and very close”, and said “to me the crying was a cry of pain”.

However, in cross-examination, prosecutor Gerrie Nel sought to show the witnesses had woken up after Steenkamp had already screamed and had been shot.

Yesterday, the court heard from Silverwoods estate manager Johan Stander and his daughter Carice Viljoen, who were among the first people to arrive at the scene.

Stander insisted that he believed what happened was a "mistake" and that he had seen first-hand Pistorius's commitment to keeping Steenkamp alive. “He was crying, praying, asking God to help him. He was torn apart, broken, desperate, pleading," he told the court.

Meanwhile, the Daily Telegraph has revealed that Pistorius’s Malawian housekeeper Frank Chiziweni was sleeping in the domestic quarters next to Pistorius's kitchen on the ground floor of his home at the time of the shooting.

Chiziweni claims he slept through the entire incident and will not be called by either side to give evidence in the trial.

The court has adjourned until Thursday, as tomorrow is election day in South Africa, with the defence likely to wrap up its case by next Tuesday.
 

Oscar Pistorius cannot dodge jail with murder acquittal alone

5 May

OSCAR PISTORIUS could spend years in prison even if he is acquitted of murdering his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp. 

The prosecution claims the athlete deliberately shot Steenkamp through a toilet door following an argument on Valentine’s Day last year. With juries abolished in South Africa, Pistorius is trying to convince a judge that he mistook her for a dangerous intruder.

During the course of the trial, the athlete’s version has changed from “putative self-defence” to “involuntary action”. 

He was not able to use the basic self-defence principle because there was no actual threat to his life. Under South African law, “putative self-defence” means that the accused genuinely believed their life was threatened and used “reasonable means” to protect themselves.

Pistorius has tried to convince the court that his vulnerability led him to believe his life was in danger. He claimed he had previously been a victim of violent crime and told the court he was “extremely fearful, overcome with a sense of terror and vulnerability” in the moments before he shot the gun.

However, the athlete has also denied that he “consciously” pulled the trigger, insisting it was an “accident”. He told the court “I fired my firearm before I could think.”

Legal analysts have warned that switching his explanation from putative self-defence to involuntary action could create serious problems for his defence. Involuntary action is usually used in cases of sleepwalking, epileptic seizures or similar episodes, reports the Globe and Mail.

So what are the charges against Pistorius and how many years might the athlete face in prison?

Premeditated murder

Pistorious currently faces a possible mandatory life sentence for premeditated murder – up to 25 years unless there are extraordinary circumstances. However, the legal definition of “premeditated” is a grey area. Eric Macramalla, a legal analyst at TSN, says it is usually reserved for more “robust planning” and generally does not include “an intent that materialised right before a crime was committed”. He points to a case in South Africa, State v Raath, in which a father forced his son to remove a firearm from a safe to kill the son's mother. The court ruled that this was not sufficient to constitute premeditated murder.

Murder

If Judge Thokozile Masipa does not believe Pistorius planned to kill Steenkamp, she could still convict him for the lesser charge of murder, says Macramalla. This would mean Pistorius intended to kill Steenkamp, with no planning element needed, and would result in a compulsory sentence of 15 years.

Culpable homicide

Even if Pistorius is acquitted for murder, he could still face a conviction of culpable homicide, meaning he “negligently” killed Steenkamp, explains Macramalla. Sentencing is discretionary, varying from fines to prison time of up to 15 years. Jeffrey Scott Shapiro, legal analyst for the Washington Times, says the judge would need to assign a degree of negligence. “The higher the negligence, the longer the prison term,” he says.

Discharging firearms in public

Pistorius is also charged with two counts of discharging a firearm in public. He allegedly fired a gun at a restaurant on 11 January 2013 and again through a car sunroof on 30 November 2012. He could face five years in prison on each count.

Illegal possession of ammunition

This charge has only been touched on very briefly in court. Pistorius is charged with being in possession of ammunition for a firearm for which he does not have a licence. The prescribed sentence on this count is 15 years in prison.
 

Oscar Pistorius: six questions for Judge Masipa

1 May

AS the Oscar Pistorius trial takes a two-week break, Judge Thokozile Masipa is likely to reflect on what she had heard over the last seven weeks. The prosecution has called all of its witnesses and Pistorius has spent seven days in the witness stand. The defence still has more than a dozen witnesses to call before Judge Masipa will have to decide whether Pistorius deliberately murdered his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp on Valentine’s Day last year.

Here are five questions she will have to take into consideration:

Has Pistorius ‘tailored’ his testimony?

The prosecution has accused Pistorius of “tailoring” his evidence, although the athlete argued that these were genuine mistakes. For example, in his bail statement, Pistorius said he “went onto the balcony” to retrieve a fan but in court he said he did not go fully out onto the balcony. He initially said he “whispered” to Steenkamp to get down and call the police, but later denied whispering and said he spoke in a “low tone”. The judge will have to decide if these are reasonable mistakes to make or whether, as prosecutor Gerrie Nel argues, Pistorius was “thinking of something that never happened” and struggling to “keep up with an untruth”.

Is Pistorius’s version of events even possible?

The athlete struggled to explain why some parts of his testimony contradicted the state’s evidence. Pathologist Gert Saayman said Steenkamp had eaten about two hours before her death, around the time a neighbour heard an argument at the house. Pistorius, who claimed they were both asleep at that time, admitted: “I don't have an explanation for it.” The judge will have to decide if it is possible that Steenkamp got out of bed and went to the toilet without Pistorius hearing or seeing her go, while Nel says the most "improbable" part of the athlete’s story is that Steenkamp never uttered a word from the toilet before she was shot.

How reliable is the police evidence?

The prosecution has used police crime scene photographs to suggest that Pistorius’s story is a lie. If his duvet was on the bedroom floor, as it is in one photograph, the athlete would struggle to convince the court he thought Steenkamp was in bed. The prosecution claims he could not have later ran out onto the balcony for help as there is a fan in the way and that the curtains are open in his room, despite Pistorius claiming he had closed them before he heard a noise in the bathroom. However, the defence has proven that the police moved items around in the house that night and Pistorius insists that his bedroom was not how he left it.

Did Pistorius and Steenkamp argue before the shooting?

Police IT expert Captain Francois Moller told the court he examined thousands of text messages sent between Steenkamp and Pistorius, of which 90 per cent showed a "loving, normal" relationship. However, a small number portrayed Pistorius as a controlling and jealous boyfriend. In one message, sent a few weeks before her death, Steenkamp wrote: “I'm scared of you sometimes and how you snap at me and how you will react to me.” Nevertheless, in Steenkamp’s Valentine’s Day card to Pistorius, which he opened after her death, she declared her love for him for the first time. Neighbours say they heard a woman’s screams before the sound of gunshots, but Pistorius strenuously denies they had been arguing. Masipa will have to decide if it is possible that the witnesses mistook Pistorius’s terrified shouts and screams for that of a woman.

Is Pistorius's emotional state an act?

The Paralympian has wept, retched and held his head in his hands for much of the trial, causing the court to adjourn on more than one occasion. Asked by the prosecution why he was being so emotional, he said he was “traumatised” by the night when he lost the person that he cared about. Others have accused him of playing up his distress, and one journalist has accused him of having been coached by a professional actor. Jani Allen, a British-born journalist wrote an open letter to the athlete in which she said: "I have it from a reliable source that you are taking acting lessons for your days in court." She gave no specific details and a spokeswoman for the Pistorious family dismissed the claims as fictitious. Masipa will have to consider Nel’s accusation that the athlete was using his emotions to dodge difficult questions during the cross-examination, although the judge herself pointed out: “He has been emotional throughout.”

If Pistorius believed Steenkamp was an intruder, did he act reasonably?

Even if the judge believes that Pistorius thought Steenkamp was an intruder, he could still face a murder conviction. Pistorius insists that he fired the gun “without thinking” but the state’s ballistics evidence suggests there was a pause in between some of the shots. Pistorius initially told the court he had “aimed” at the bathroom door, but later said he did not. The judge will have to decide if Pistorius: planned to kill before firing the gun, which could amount to premeditated murder; intended to kill as he fired the shots, which could amount to murder; or whether he acted negligently, which could amount to culpable homicide.
 

More about Oscar Pistorius:

Oscar Pistorius: family denies athlete took acting lessons Oscar Pistorius trial: Reeva 'had no time to scream' Oscar Pistorius trial: Reeva injury 'like instant amputation' Oscar Pistorius trial: Reeva 'in rush to leave after argument'Oscar Pistorius murder trial: what has happened so far? Oscar Pistorius: police release photos of crime scene Oscar Pistorius: pathologist to testify ahead of athlete Pistorius: woman's 'terrified' screams heard 'loud and clear' Oscar Pistorius: has prosecutor found surprise new evidence? Pistorius used bullets that cause 'maximum wounding' Oscar Pistorius: police accused of 'disturbing' crime scene Oscar Pistorius paid £2,700 for six guns before Reeva’s death Oscar Pistorius: photos show athlete drenched in blood  

Follow the Pistorius trial with a Twitter list compiled by TheWeek.co.uk: 

Tweets from https://twitter.com/TheWeekUK/oscar-pistorius ·