Former Port Elizabeth racehorse trainer Barry Steenkamp and his British-born wife June say they are relieved justice has finally been meted out to the man who killed their daughter. But their relief isn’t half that experienced by members of the South African legal fraternity which, in private, admitted to have been horrified at the original finding and sentence in the much publicised Oscar Pistorius murder trial. The Supreme Court of Appeal yesterday overturned the initial verdict, replacing it with a finding of murder which means the one-time Olympic athlete is set to spend at least the next decade and a half behind bars. The young democracy that is South Africa makes a lot of mistakes. But on the important issues, it somehow possesses a knack of muddling through to the right conclusion. Here is everything you need to see and read to fully understand South Africa’s the trial of the decade. The judge’s full verdict is at the bottom of the page. – Alec Hogg Â
By Zandi Shabalala
BLOEMFONTEIN, Dec 3 (Reuters) – South Africa’s “Blade Runner” Oscar Pistorius was found guilty on Thursday of murdering his girlfriend, in an appeal court ruling that could see him sent back to prison for at least 15 years.
The Supreme Court upgraded the 29-year-old Paralympian’s sentence on appeal to murder from “culpable homicide”, South Africa’s equivalent of manslaughter, for which he had received a five-year sentence.
Pistorius was released from prison and placed under house arrest on Oct. 19, having spent one day less than a year behind bars for shooting dead model Reeva Steenkamp on Valentine’s Day in 2013, in a case that attracted worldwide interest and continues to fascinate and divide South Africa.
Members of the ruling African National Congress party’s Women’s League welcomed the new ruling, dancing and singing outside the court. They have attended the court sessions since the trial began in solidarity with Steenkamp’s family and in support of women’s rights.
Pistorius had been meant to serve the rest of his sentence under house arrest on his uncle’s property in a wealthy suburb of the capital Pretoria.
A new sentence for the Paralympic champion will be handed down at a later date. Pistorius is expected to remain on parole until then, unless a court rules otherwise, officials said.
In their appeal, prosecutors argued that Pistorius should have been convicted of murder for firing four shots through a locked toilet door. They said he intended to kill Steenkamp and that she had fled to the toilet during a row.
“This case involves a human tragedy of Shakespearean proportions,” Judge Eric Leach said as he read out the ruling.
“A young man overcomes huge physical disabilities to reach Olympian heights as an athlete. In doing so he becomes an international celebrity, he meets a young woman of great natural beauty and a successful model, romance blossoms, and then, ironically on Valentine’s Day, all is destroyed when he takes her life.”
Leach added that “as a matter of common sense, at the time the fatal shots were fired the possibility of the death of a person behind the door was clearly an obvious result.”
Pistorius denies deliberately killing Steenkamp, saying he mistook her for an intruder at his home.
The case has prompted a fierce debate in a country beset by high levels of violent crime. Some rights groups had said the white track star got preferential treatment.
Anneliese Burgess, the Pistorius family’s spokeswoman, said the family would wait for lawyers advice on what to do next.
Some legal experts said Pistorius‘ lawyers could appeal the court’s ruling at the constitutional court, where they could argue that the heavy media coverage of his trial had infringed upon his right to a free trial. Others disagreed, saying Pistorius had received a fair trial and had been allowed to testify.
“It will be a long shot if they approach the constitutional court, but I wouldn’t be surprised if they do,” Johannesburg-based lawyer and legal analyst Ulrich Roux said.
ERROR OF JUDGEMENT
At the original trial last year, Judge Thokozile Masipa ruled that the state had failed to prove intent or “dolus eventualis”, a legal concept that centres on a person being held responsible for the foreseeable consequences of their actions.
Judge Leach said Judge Masipa had erred in the application of the concept, however.
Dolus eventualis refers to whether a person foresees the possibility that his or her action will cause death but carries on regardless. Some legal experts were worried that the verdict by Judge Masipa could have set a bad legal precedent in a country with one of the highest crime rates in the world.
Pistorius, whose lower legs were amputated when he was a baby but who went on to become a global sporting hero, was not at the court session in Bloemfontein, some 400 km (250 miles) southwest of Johannesburg.
Steenkamp’s mother June, who has said she does not want retribution, attended the court session. She shed tears as she left the court after the new judgement was handed down.
Barry Steenkamp, Reeva’s father, welcomed the new verdict.
“It’s a big relief. I feel it’s a fair decision that the judge gave,” Steenkamp said in a brief interview on local television station ANN7, before breaking down in tears.
With a hint of an apology to the judge who presided over the trial of Oscar Pistorius, South African Justice Eric Leach demolished her findings in the appeal court, producing yet another extraordinary twist in the case.
Supreme Court of Appeal judge Leach said Thokozile Masipa made multiple “errors in law” in her ruling last year that the Paralympic star could not have foreseen Reeva Steenkamp’s death when he shot four times through his locked toilet door on Valentine’s Day in 2013.
Reading the unanimous finding of the five-judge bench on Thursday, Leach’s voice was measured and calm, but the decision to throw out Masipa’s lesser “culpable homicide” verdict and replace it with murder was explosive.
“This case involves a human tragedy of Shakespearean proportions,” said Leach. “All is destroyed when he takes her life.”
Among Leach’s extensive criticisms of Masipa’s “fundamental” errors, he said that she “ignored” key evidence from a ballistics expert.
The legal reversal was a public humiliation for Masipa, a 68-year-old woman who grew up in Soweto, an impoverished township outside Johannesburg.
She became an overnight sensation when she heard the Pistorius case, with many South Africans proud that a black women from humble means would decide the fate of a rich white man.
Often described as an inspiration and a role model, Masipa was a living example of how far the country had come since Nelson Mandela was elected South Africa’s first democratic president in 1994.
Pioneering judge
Masipa became a lawyer late in life, and in 1998 became only the second black women in the country to be appointed to the bench.
She became known for her careful, steely, decisions. In one case, she sentenced a serial rapist dubbed the “Axeman” to over 250 years in prison.
Yet during the Pistorius trial, the soft-spoken Masipa rarely interjected as state prosecutor Gerrie Nel sparred with Pistorius defence lawyer Barry Roux.
Her harshest words appeared to be reserved for anyone in court whose mobile phones interrupted proceedings.
Her controversial decision to find Pistorius not guilty of murder but guilty of manslaughter in a September 2014 ruling brought attacks from many quarters.
But Leach added a conclusion his judgement on Thursday in an apparent attempt to protect her reputation.
“The trial judge conducted the hearing with a degree of dignity and patience that is a credit to the judiciary,” Leach said in the last paragraph of the ruling.
“The fact that the appeal has succeeded is not to be regarded as a slight.”
Legal analyst Kelly Phelps welcomed the gesture.
“I think the way he handled that today gave her respect, it’s extraordinary that he did that,” said Phelps, senior law lecturer at the University of Cape Town.
“She is singlehandedly the most experienced black female on the bench in the country at the moment.
“The full terrain of her career deserves more respect and dignity than one judgement that was unpopular.”
Masipa will soon likely have another session in the harsh glare of the spotlight that tracks the Pistoriuscase.
A lower court must hand Pistorius a new sentence — and the responsibility normally falls to the original trial judge.
“A judge being overruled by an appellate court is common,” said defence lawyer Martin Hood.
“But the process is not over and we need to see an appropriate sentence.
“We’re still presented with a pertinent opportunity to deal with violence against women.”
The 29-year-old Pistorius now faces a minimum of 15 years behind bars.
Barely a month ago, he had been released to to house arrest after serving just a year of a five-year jail term.
The country’s national prosecuting authority has not yet set a date for his re-sentencing.
© 1994-2015 Agence France-Presse
By Jenna Etheridge, News24
Bloemfontein – For Barry Steenkamp it is finally “over”, but for Oscar Pistorius, it is probably the beginning of many years behind bars.
It is now official: The once beloved Paralympian gold medalist is guilty of murder for firing four shots into a toilet cubicle, killing his model girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp behind a locked door.
The Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) on Thursday ruled in favour of the State, setting aside a 2014 culpable homicide conviction by a high court.
The unanimous judgment was clear – Pistorius gambled with the life of the person behind the toilet door by firing four shots with a heavy calibre firearm into a small space.
It referred the matter back to the trial court to deal with sentencing.
The SCA’s ruling comes almost three years after Pistorius shot Reeva dead, later stating he mistook her for an intruder. He fired four shots into the bathroom door of his Pretoria home on Valentine’s Day in 2013.
The two met in November 2012.
“Romance quickly blossomed and they became intimate. As so often happens with romantic relationships, especially in their youthful stages, theirs was attended by petty conflict and tensions… but despite these hiccups, the deceased at times slept over at the accused’s home,” Justice Eric Leach said on Thursday.
“She did so on the night of 13 February 2013. In the early hours of the following morning, screams, gunshots, loud noises and cries for help were heard emanating from the accused’s house.”
#OscarPistorius Three key issues that swayed the SCA: Oscar's firearm. Kind of ammunition. Size of toilet cubicle.
— Alex Eliseev (@alexeliseev) December 3, 2015
‘Well trained in the use of firearms’
The SCA described the case as a “human tragedy of Shakespearean proportions”.
After a grueling trial in the High Court in Pretoria, Judge Thokozile Masipa found Pistorius guilty of culpable homicide and not murder.
The SCA found that Masipa had made a number of errors in law. But it said that its ruling should not be seen “as an adverse comment upon her competence and ability”.
It ruled in favour of the Director of Public Prosecutions on two questions of law.
Firstly, it found the court incorrectly applied the principles of dolus eventualis (perpetrators foreseeing the risk of death occurring, but nevertheless proceeds with the act).
Leach, reading out the judgment to a packed courtroom, said Pistorius was “well trained in the use of firearms” and held his weapon “at the ready in order to shoot”.
See also: Animated Reenactment: Oscar Pistorious’ version of the night he Killed Reeva Steenkamp
Even though he had a physical disability and suffered from general anxiety disorder, the SCA did not accept the view that he may have fired without thinking of the consequences of his actions.
Leach said it was common sense that the possibility of death existed as a result of the shooting.
Pistorius never offered an acceptable explanation for firing the shots, he said.
“In these circumstances, I have no doubt that in firing the fatal shots the accused must have foreseen, and therefore did foresee, that whoever was behind the toilet door might die, but reconciled himself to that event occurring and gambled with that person’s life.”
‘Nowhere for the deceased to hide’
The SCA also found there was “an absence of the appreciation of material evidence”.
Leach said the evidence of the police’s ballistics expert, Chris Mangena, was of “particular importance”, but was “seemingly ignored” by the trial court.
Mangena’s testimony highlighted the nature of the deadly firearm, the bullets’ path and the tiny space of the toilet cubicle.
“There had effectively been nowhere for the deceased to hide,” said Leach.
After the verdict was handed down on Thursday, Reeva’s mother June sobbed as she left the court in Bloemfontein.
She hugged members of the ANC Women’s League in the street.
Mangaung women’s league members welcomed the verdict and implored South African men not to kill women.
Speaking from Reeva’s hometown of Port Elizabeth, her father Barry said they could now get on with their lives. He wished the same for the Pistorius family.
Read also:Â Steenkamp family not vengeful, but want Oscar jailed
“I’ve been watching since 07:00 this morning,” he said. “If you took note of what I’ve said right from the beginning, it’s not over yet, it’s not over yet… it’s over now.”
Pistorius’s family noted the verdict, but said they would not be commenting at this stage. Pistorius has 14 days to decide if he wants to appeal to the Constitutional Court.
The National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) welcomed the ruling.
“It affirms our contention that the trial court judge misdirected herself in her interpretation in the application of the law,” spokesperson Luvuyo Mfaku told News24.
Remains under correctional supervision
The former Paralympian is currently under correctional supervision at his uncle’s Pretoria home.
He was released from prison on October 19 after serving one-sixth of his five-year sentence, and recently reported to a nearby police station for community service as part of his sentence.
The High Court in Pretoria will now have to decide on an appropriate sentence after listening to arguments from both sides. No date had yet been announced for sentencing arguments. For now, he remains under correctional supervision.
Leach said the time Pistorius had served for the incorrect conviction would “obviously” be taken into account.
Marius du Toit, a defence lawyer and former prosecutor, told News24 that Pistorius would have to provide substantial and compelling reasons to deviate from the minimum 15-year jail term for murder.
He said it was possible that Pistorius would be able to provide a compelling reason.
“He was sentenced to five years [for the culpable homicide]. I think he is capable of maybe bringing it [the murder sentence] down to a 10 year sentence, suspended for five years.”
Du Toit said the law had prevailed in the SCA judgment, and it was good to have the SCA clarify the principles of dolus eventualis.
Legal analyst Pierre de Vos tweeted: “The SCA judgment is also just. One cannot justify anyone killing a person without any proof that he/she poses a real threat to you or others.”
News24
Source:Â http://www.news24.com/
The Full Oscar verdict
