Pistorius: recap of charges

PARALYMPIAN Oscar Pistorius was acquitted of murder and instead found guilty of culpable homicide following the death of Port Elizabeth model Reeva Steenkamp. Here is a recap of the charges and what the judge had to say:

Count 1:Premeditated murder: Not guilty.

Here Judge Thokozile Masipa said the state’s evidence was purely circumstantial. Various state witnesses who gave evidence on what they heard that fatal morning proved to be unreliable.

“The court cannot make inferences of why the accused would want to kill the deceased,” Masipa said. Pistorius denied the accusations.

“Notwithstanding that he was an unimpressive witness, he gave a version that is reasonably, possibly true. This is sufficient for an acquittal.”

Murder dolus eventualis: Not guilty.

Here Masipa said it could not be said that Pistorius foresaw that Steenkamp or anyone else for that matter might be killed when he fired the shots at the bathroom door.

Again, the state failed to prove this charge beyond a reasonable doubt.

Alternative count of culpable homicide: Guilty. Evidential material before the court proved the accused acted negligently when he fired the shots, knowing that there was someone behind the door.

Masipa found that a reasonable person in the position of the accused, with a similar disability, would have foreseen that someone could be killed and would have taken steps to avoid these consequences.

Count 2: Discharging a firearm in a public area: Not guilty.

This count refers to the incident where Pistorius allegedly fired his gun out of a friend’s car.

The state called two witnesses; Samantha Taylor and Darren Fresco. Masipa said they contradicted each other. In addition, caution needed to be applied when dealing with Taylor’s evidence as she was a scorned ex-girlfriend.

Masipa said their versions were so dissimilar, it was tempting to think they were talking about different incidents.

“Fresco was not impressive on this count. He proved to be dishonest.”

The onus was not on Pistorius to prove his innocence. The state failed to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Count 3: Discharging a firearm in a public area: Guilty.

This count refers to the accidental discharge of a friend’s firearm in Tashas restaurant in Johannesburg.

Pistorius said he did not realise the firearm was loaded. He wanted to make it safe when a shot accidentally went off. Masipa said whether it was an accident or not was irrelevant. He showed a reckless disregard for the safety of patrons in the restaurant.

Count 4: Unlawful possession of ammunition: Not guilty.

Pistorius admitted that he had the ammunition in his possession but denied contravening the firearms act.

Masipa said the state needed to prove he had the necessary mental intention to possess the ammunition before there could be a conviction.

“It is quite possible to possess [ammunition] innocently. In effect if a person picks up [ammunition] to return to the owner, it would be unreasonable to convict them.”

Pistorius alleged the ammunition belonged to his father, who refused to make a statement. Masipa said this however did not assist the state because they failed to introduce any evidence to the contrary. She ruled the state failed to prove all the elements of the charge.

Get your copy of Weekend Post tomorrow for more on the Oscar trial.

-