“I think today is a good day to tell you that I love you”(Steenkamp)- Oscar Pistorius trial 15 April: Pistorius’ last day on the stand

Today was the day, finally, that Nel rounded up his cross examination of Pistorius.  I have previously said that I couldn’t wait for this to be over, in part because it was getting tedious but also because I was keen to see what damage control Barry Roux was going to do in re-examination.  Well, Roux certainly kept this short and sweet.  Someone on my Twitter feed (apologies I can’t remember who) suggested that this was because Roux wanted to show Judge Masipa that Pistorius’ version was the absolute truth and that as his lawyer, Roux didn’t think it necessary to do damage control.  This does make sense, arguing further to counter what Nel had to say would appear like an attempt to “cover Pistorius’ tracks” if you will.  Instead, not doing this demonstrates a sense of confidence (whether real or faux) in Pistorius’ version of events.

To end his cross-examination, Nel focused on the moments after the shooting and when Pistorius found Steenkamp’s body.  Again, it was a predictable “your version is improbable” from Nel and even more predictable tears from Pistorius.  The placement on the magazine rack was discussed again, Nel insisting that it hadn’t been moved.  To be honest, this part of the discussion is quite complex to articulate in retrospect, so here’s a link to a live feed of the day: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-27031066.  Nel round edup his cross-examination to the tune of the improbabilities of Pistorius’ version and I will be honest at this stage I was fully prepared for a lengthy re-examination on Roux’s part.

Roux began by asking Pistorius what he meant by saying he shot her by “accident”.  Like I mentioned in yesterday’s recap (https://bitsbones.wordpress.com/2014/04/14/get-the-fk-out-of-my-house-oscar-pistorius-trial-14-april-pistorius-takes-the-stand/) I think what he means to say is that pulling the trigger was a knee jerk reaction to a noise he claims to have heard in the toilet cubicle.  Basically Pistorius claims he didn’t consciously pull the trigger.

Roux then got Pistorius to read out the Valentine’s Day card from Steenkamp, that he eventually opened on her birthday last year.  The image below is a photo of it, but quite pertinently the line “I think today is a good day to tell you that I love you” does imply a loving and happy relationship even on the night of her death.

The Valentine’s Day card and gift that Steenkamp was due to give to Pistorius (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-27041156)

And with that, Pistorius’ time on the witness stand came to an end. Another defence witness was examined today but like I have done with previous weeks, I will round this up with the rest of the week’s evidence over the weekend.

Overall, I think Pistorius hasn’t done his case many favours this past week. I can’t believe its been one day over a week since he first took the stand, it feels like we’ve been going for ages!  While I disagree with Nel that Pistorius’ version is impossible, I do think that the little chips Nel has made in the defence’s case could end up swaying the case against them.  I’m still at a loss of what version to believe, on the one hand, if Pistorius’ version is true then he was truly irrational, reckless and hasty with the way he acted.  As much as I have spent my life idolising him, even if his story is the truth he must do jail time, not for premeditated murder and not for the extended sentence the state are seeking but for at the very least involuntary manslaughter.  If we are to believe the state’s version of events, do I think its enough for a premeditated or first degree murder?  No, I really think above all else, there has been no indication of planning or forethought of this murder.  The state has painted Pistorius as selfish and cunning, so I do think if these are attributes of his, he would be fully aware of the consequences of his actions (ie. destroyed career, reputation etc.) and so can’t be something he would’ve planned.  Crime of passion is what I think that state would’ve been better off with from the get go, easier to argue and still a long prison sentence.

For me, I think I’m going to wait it out to hear the rest of the evidence to make my decision; at this stage it looks like we may be facing a two week postponement sometime this week so I may have to wait a while.  

“Reeva had already died when I was holding her”- Oscar Pistorius trial 9 April: Pistorius takes the stand

Today was an absolutely brutal day in court.  Not only because we heard harrowing details from Pistorius about how Steenkamp died in his arms but because Gerrie Nel started his cross exemination of Pistorius and lets just say that nothing was held back.

Briefly this morning, the events after Pistorius discovered Steenkamp was dead were discussed.  It sounded to me that after this event the early morning of the 14 February 2013 was a blur of police, paramedics and photographers for Pistorius.  On this point there wasn’t actually anything that came out that was unknown.  Pistorius was also asked to demonstrate how he held the cricket bat when he bashed down the door.  Referring to a comment from a previous witness about how the door was broken at an “unnatural angle”, he made the point (in a lawyer like manner in fact) that “unnatural” means nothing when you are trying to break down a door, and that this wasn’t “a game of golf”.  The defence then moved on to some of the state’s witnesses that they did not call to the stand, this was probably because the witnesses referred to contradicted those called.  Namely they cite not hearing a woman screaming at all, and describe rather a man crying.  This would not be very useful for the state’s case.  What these uncalled witnesses are doing is supporting Pistorius’ version of events, and the defence then moved on to explaing (read: disproving) some of the witnesses that were called.

Before 10:40 (SA time), I will admit that I was beginning to lean towards the defence’s case, purely from an objective point of view, everything seemed to match up and make sense.  Well I will say that changed rapidly at 10:40 when Gerrie Nel began cross examination of Pistorius.  He began by asking him about a video in which Pistorius shot at a watermelon and in the same video made reference to human brains and killing zombies.  I will only mention the to-ing and fro-ing that occured as to whether the video was admissable evidence as this took ages and it eventually was accepted to be presented but not as evidence.  I sense that by showing this video Nel was trying to present Pistorius as someone fascinated with the idea of shooting living (or living-dead) things, but I was really quite shocked and frankly disappointed with his next action.  Nel said that Steenkamps head exploded, just as the watermelon had in the video and topped off this statement with an unexpected and graphic photo of her head injuries.  This to me didn’t feel like the actions of a trained professional, instead this felt like an attack on Pistorius on a very deep and personal level.   “I [he] don’t [didn’t] have to look at the picture. I [he] was there” was Pistorius’ response.  I one hundred percent agree with Nel that justice is of the greatest importnace for Steenkamp and her family but I dont’ believe ambush tactics are the appropriate way to rattle the accused.  Luckily Judge Masipa agrees and the picture was removed.

The cross examination resumed and it was like Nel was running a fine toothed comb through Pistorius’ version of the evening.  Everything from whether he went onto the balcony (as stated in his bail application) or not (as stated yesterday) to whether there was one fan (bail) or two fans (testimony) was scrutinised.  Throughout this I will agree with Nel that Pistorius seemed argumentative in response to the questions rather than answering them, which I don’t think helps his case in any way.  There were times when I physically wanted to reach through my cell phone and shake him so he would stop shooting himself in the foot by being so defensive.  Pistorius stated that it was not ever his intention to kill anyone for the umpteenth time in a somewhat monotonous and rehearsed tone.  Nel asks him if he thinking about the implications of his answers and he replies that of course he is, it is his life on the line.  Nels response actually hit me like a ton of bricks; “Reeva doesn’t have a life any more because of what you did.  Please answer and don’t think of implications to you.”  Court then adjourned with a final warning from Nel that Pistroius can’t get away.

I am actually shocked at the tactics being used by Nel, to the extent its put a bad taste in my mouth.  On the other hand, if his aim is to shake up Pistorius and find discrepencies in his statements, then I can’t say he’s not doing an alright job.

“I wake up, and I smell the blood”- Oscar Pistorius trial 7 April: Pistorius takes the stand

So, today was the day that Oscar Pistorius finally took the stand in his defence in his ongoing murder trial.  Previously, I have done weekly round ups of the case but I thought since his testimony, to me anyway, is one of the most interesting parts of the trial and I have no more university lectures, that I would do a day by day round up of it.

When recapping what I watched live earlier, the line I have quoted in my title seems to dominate the headlines.  Pistorius began speaking even before his lawyer Barry Roux asked him a single question.  He began with an apology to Reeva Steenkamp’s family who were in court, expressing that he can’t imagine the pain and heartbreak they are experiencing.  Pistorius sobbed as he told them that that fateful night, Steenkamp went to bed loved and he was only ever trying to protect her.  He described how he has trouble sleeping and wakes terrified, with the smell of blood in his mind’s nose.  I will admit, that listening to this did choke me up, not because I believe that this was an innocent mistake (again, I am withholding my judgement until I’ve heard both cases) but what I do believe is that Pistorius is truly a broken man and, I say this tentatively, deeply regrets what happened that morning.  His voice was weak, he stuttered and spoke through heart wrenching sobs.

When Roux began his questioning, it became clear that the aim of today’s game was to get Pistorius used to the stand, and to establish a bit of background about the Blade Runner’s life.  It came to light that Pistorius was very aware of crime; he spoke of personal experiences, both where he was a victim and situations where he helped a victim and of hear-say about the areas surrounding his estate.  He also told the court how his mother even kept a pistol under her bed when they were growing up.  This is a clever place for the defence to start their questioning as they are painting a picture of a man who has been affected quite a lot by the crime in South Africa and so would possibly have reason to have a more volatile reaction when a threat is suspected.

Today, the defence also began to repair some of the potential damage to Pistorius’ character as a result of some of the state’s witnesses.  Roux questioned Pistorius about his father leaving him, his mother’s death and his religion which along with the occassionaly sob, made him seem more vulnerable and soft.  The court adjourned about half an hour early on request of Pistorius through Roux who described the athlete as “exhausted” and when asked, Pistorius confirmed he had not slept the night before.  Nel, for the state, countered that this was okay for today as long as it didn’t become a daily occurence, its quite clear that Nel draws the line at sympathy!

In this article, there is a video summarising Pistorius’ key points: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/oscar-pistorius-trial-live-recap-3383787