Roux moves on to the televising of the trial.
No other accused has ever had to endure this level of publicity, misinformation and character assassination.
It was not a decision that benefited Pistorius, he says, and opened him up to a trial by public opinion and a “media frenzy”.
The perception persists that the death of Steenkamp was gender-related, Roux tells the judge:
This case has nothing to do with gender violence.
The refusal by so many people to accept the facts of the case means Pistorius will never regain his status in society.
Roux points out that Pistorius’ original planned release from prison – approved by the parole board – was delayed after a government minister intervened. This has not happened to anyone else, he says. Why wait until that last minute to intervene? That decision could have been made weeks earlier.
He says Pistorius has also spent many months under “correctional supervision” (that is, house arrest at his uncle’s home).
Pistorius removes prostheses
Roux calls Pistorius forward. He tells the court this will be embarrassing for his client.
He asks a weeping Pistorius to remove his prostheses and stand on his stumps in front of the court. He does so slowly, then walks haltingly. He appears to be in pain and struggles to retain his balance. He holds on to a desk for support.
His doctor moves forward to support him as he stumbles.
Roux points to him, saying this is the man who was frightened by a noise at 3am. This is who is being sentenced.
Pistorius replaces his prostheses as Roux tells the court:
I don’t want to overplay vulnerability, that’s not what I want to do. I don’t want to overplay disability. But the time has come that we must just look with different eyes, at least with unbiased eyes.
It doesn’t mean because he’s vulnerable that he can do what he likes. That’s not what we say.
But when we’re entering the field of sentencing, look at that man’s conduct … Please let’s understand … who is this man that you must sentence?
“We don’t have to be psychologists” to see Pistorius is a broken man, Roux tells Masipa:
He desperately does not want to hide behind fame … He wants to be treated like someone unknown, someone who has done wrong and must be punished.
'No purpose served' by sending Pistorius to prison - defence
Roux turns to the sentence:
South Africa is a progressive constitutional country where punishment must have a rational purpose.
The sentence needs to be appropriate to the individual, he says. The court needs to look for opportunities for rehabilitation. An excessive punishment could have the opposite effect:
Punishment is not meant to break the defendant … The accused does not fall into the category of offender who should be removed from society.
There is no purpose served.
He says a prison sentence imposed at this point is merely a “veil for retribution”. The deterrent effect has already been achieved by Pistorius’ first stint in prison.
Roux says Pistorius should be sentenced to community service.
It is for the court to decide, he adds. But there is a reason why the trial court has discretion over sentencing.
The court should strike a balance between aggravating factors and the “many, many” mitigating factors.
The defence argument is over. Roux sits down. It’s over to Gerrie Nel for the state.
State begins closing argument
Gerrie Nel says that the argument that Pistorius thought the person behind the door was an intruder does not make it a less serious crime. Does it detract from the fact that he is a murderer?
He says he won’t deal with perceptions but with facts.
If you want to talk about a broken man, he says, let’s talk about Barry Steenkamp.
Nel acknowledges that the defence says Pistorius has accepted the court’s findings of murder. That is not the same as accepting what he did, the prosecutor says.
“Isn’t it time we now finally let the world see what this accused did with four black talon rounds through a door?” Nel asks.
He says Barry Steenkamp wanted everyone to see the photographs of Reeva. Nel says he will apply, as per the family’s request, for the crime scene images to be released.
Nel moves on to the vulnerabilities outlined by the defence.
Dr Scholtz testified to Pistorius’ anxiety and depression, Nel says – so why did Pistorius hoard his medicine in his cell?
Scholtz also said he should be hospitalised, Nel goes on. Yet no steps were taken to hospitalise him.
Nel takes on Roux’s argument that the original culpable homicide verdict was “on the border” of dolus eventualis and the murder verdict took it over; the defence implied this meant a large uplift in sentence wasn’t necessary.
Not so, says Nel, who argues that Pistorius’ culpability instead borders on dolus directus – that is, the intention to kill. He knew the toilet cubicle was small with no escape for the person inside. He fired not one but four shots. These are all aggravating circumstances.
Even if he thought it was an intruder, he armed himself with a firearm loaded with black talon ammunition. We know what those bullets do to a body, Nel adds. He says Pistorius has never given an “acceptable explanation” of why he fired four times.
Maybe he will tell ITV, Nel says. But he has not done so here in court.
He reminds Masipa that Pistorius was a poor witness. Without a credible reason why he fired, Nel says, it isn’t plausible to say he is remorseful:
The only plausible explanation is that the accused armed himself with the intention to shoot.
Pistorius should serve at least 15 years in prison – state
Nel says the court may not impose a sentence less than the minimum prescribed for murder, which is 15 years’ imprisonment.
The court does not start with a clean slate, he says.
There must be “truly convincing reasons for a different response”, he adds, reading from the regulations.
Undue sympathy is not an aspect that should be taken into consideration
Correctional supervision – essentially house arrest, which is what Pistorius has been under since leaving prison last October – “is not even close” to the punishment required here, Nel tells the judge.
The court has now adjourned for the lunch break.
guardian
0 Comments