Oscar Pistorius weeps in the dock as he is cleared of both murder
charges over the shooting of his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp on
Valentine's Day Feb 14,2013
Oscar Pistorius with Reeva Steenkamp at the Feather Awards in Johannesburg, South Africa, in November 2012, three months before he killed her
Oscar Pistorius with Reeva Steenkamp at the Feather Awards in Johannesburg, South Africa, in November 2012, three months before he killed her
Judge Thokozile Masipa found him not guilty of murder and pre-meditated murder.
Pistorius had been accused of deliberately shooting the 30-year-old
model (right) during a furious row at his Pretoria home on Valentine's
Day last year. Judge Thokozile Masipa also absolved Pistorius, 27, of a
lesser murder charge that requires a different concept of intention -
known by the legal term 'dolus eventualis' - which holds you responsible
for the foreseeable consequences of your actions
Judge Thokozile Masipa didn't mince her words when she said the athlete, who has a good knowledge of guns, acted negligently by firing four shots into a confined space. She questioned why he did not phone for help or run to the balcony instead of confronting the apparent danger - questions that have plagued many.
Oscar Pistorius was cleared on Thursday of murdering girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp but faces a troubled night after the South African judge adjourned for the day before ruling on a charge of culpable homicide.
Culpable homicide - the South African equivalent of Britain's manslaughter - carries up to 15 years in prison but has no minimum sentence
Judge Thokozile Masipa didn't mince her words when she said the athlete, who has a good knowledge of guns, acted negligently by firing four shots into a confined space. She questioned why he did not phone for help or run to the balcony instead of confronting the apparent danger - questions that have plagued many.
Oscar Pistorius was cleared on Thursday of murdering girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp but faces a troubled night after the South African judge adjourned for the day before ruling on a charge of culpable homicide.
Culpable homicide - the South African equivalent of Britain's manslaughter - carries up to 15 years in prison but has no minimum sentence
| Verdict | What it means | Sentence |
|---|---|---|
|
Premeditated murder |
Intended and planned to unlawfully kill Reeva Steenkamp, or an intruder |
Mandatory life term - 25 years before parole |
|
Common-law murder |
Unlawfully intended to kill in the heat of the moment but
without "malice aforethought". Either: Shot door intending to kill, or
knew someone might be killed and still fired gun |
Minimum of 15 years up to 20 years, at judge's discretion |
|
Culpable homicide (manslaughter) |
No intention to kill. Takes into account disability, but actions negligent and not in keeping with a reasonable person |
Maximum of 15 years, possibly between seven and 10 years |
|
Discharging a firearm in public |
Two counts for allegedly firing a gun through a car sunroof and discharging a gun at a restaurant |
A fine or up to five years - for each charge |
|
Illegal possession of ammunition |
In possession of .38 bullets for which he has no licence |
A fine or up to 15 years |
THE PROSECUTION'S CASE...
Prosecutor
Gerrie Nel took 15 days to lay out his case against Pistorius back in
March, arguing he deliberately killed Miss Steenkamp by firing four
rounds from a 9mm pistol through a closed toilet door.
A key part of the prosecution's case was its assertion that Miss Steenkamp screamed during a late-night alleged fight with Pistorius before he killed her.
He called several neighbours who testified to hearing a woman's terrified screams before a volley of shots to counter Pistorius's assertions that he mistook Miss Steenkamp for a burglar.
Mr Nel atore into the athlete's personality to bolster his argument, painting him as an egotistical liar obsessed with guns, fast cars and beautiful women.
In his summing up last month, he cut through months of complex evidence and testimony by saying: 'His intention was to kill a human being.'
A key part of the prosecution's case was its assertion that Miss Steenkamp screamed during a late-night alleged fight with Pistorius before he killed her.
He called several neighbours who testified to hearing a woman's terrified screams before a volley of shots to counter Pistorius's assertions that he mistook Miss Steenkamp for a burglar.
Mr Nel atore into the athlete's personality to bolster his argument, painting him as an egotistical liar obsessed with guns, fast cars and beautiful women.
In his summing up last month, he cut through months of complex evidence and testimony by saying: 'His intention was to kill a human being.'
AND THE CASE OF THE DEFENCE
His
defence team said there are 'two Oscars' - a world-class athlete and a
highly vulnerable individual with a serious disability who acted out of
fear, not anger, when he fired the fatal shots.
Defence lawyer Barry Roux said psychological evidence had proven the track star had a heightened fight response as a result of his disability.
'You're standing at that door. You're vulnerable. You're anxious. You're trained as an athlete to react.
'Take all those factors into account,' Roux said, adding that Pistorius had felt exposed because he was standing on the stumps of his legs.
'He stands with his finger on the trigger, ready to fire when ready.
'In some instances a person will fire reflexively,' he added.
'That is your primal instinct.'
Defence lawyer Barry Roux said psychological evidence had proven the track star had a heightened fight response as a result of his disability.
'You're standing at that door. You're vulnerable. You're anxious. You're trained as an athlete to react.
'Take all those factors into account,' Roux said, adding that Pistorius had felt exposed because he was standing on the stumps of his legs.
'He stands with his finger on the trigger, ready to fire when ready.
'In some instances a person will fire reflexively,' he added.
'That is your primal instinct.'
No comments:
Post a Comment