Born on 22nd November 1986 Oscar Leonard Carl Pistorius is a South African Sprinter Champion (now former) and also a condemned murderer. Due to a birth defect, Oscar’s feet were amputated at the mere age of eleven months old. Oscar took part in both non-disabled and disabled sprint events. This includes being part of both the Paralympic and Olympic games. In this article, we will discuss the life of Oscar Pistorius and the events that followed his murder trial.
“Often awe-inspiring, sometimes controversial, the image of Oscar Pistorius bestrode London’s Olympic and Paralympic summer. As the first global Paralympic superstar, his feats on the track allied to a gregarious personality and some canny image building, have made him a multi-millionaire and one of the world’s most recognizable sportsmen off it. Not only has he transcended the world of the Paralympics, but even while helping the movement grow to unprecedented heights, Pistorius is one of a rare handful of athletes to transcend the world of sport. From the moment it was confirmed that he would become the first double amputee to compete in both the Olympic and Paralympic Games, his place in history was assured.”[1]
Oscar Pistorius was keen on being part of international competitions for non-disabled. However, the (IAAF) International Association of Athletics did not agree to allow him the same and considered his artificial limbs as advantageous over other sportsmen. Oscar went on to sort this issue out in court and victoriously won the legal dispute. He then went on to become the first amputee in the years 2011 and 2012 to win the World Championship and the Olympics. In the year 2013 on Valentine’s Day, Oscar shot his girlfriend in his own home, mistaking her to be an intruder. Reeva Steenkamp was a model as well as a paralegal.
At his trial the following year, Pistorius was found not guilty of murder, but guilty of culpable homicide.[2] [3] He received a five-year prison sentence for culpable homicide and a concurrent three-year suspended sentence for a separate reckless endangerment conviction both in October 2014.[4] Pistorius was temporarily released on house arrest in October 2015 while the case was presented on appeal to a panel at the Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa, which overturned the culpable homicide verdict and convicted him of murder.[5] In July 2016, Judge Thokozile Masipa extended Pistorius’s sentence to six years.[6] On appeal by the state for a longer prison sentence, the Supreme Court of Appeal increased the prison term to a total of 15 years.[7] Pistorius was released on parole on 5 January 2024.[8]
IAAF medal and competition in 2012 Olympics[9]
Head injuries that Pistorius sustained in a boating accident in 2009 set him back throughout 2010, but he rebounded in 2011 to win gold in the 100 meters and 400 meters at the Paralympic World Cup before qualifying for the IAAF world championships. Although he was not a member of the South African relay team that raced in the final, his participation in the qualifying heats of the 4 × 400-meter relay earned Pistorius a world championship silver medal, making him the first Paralympian to win a medal in open competition. He was the 22nd fastest 400-meter runner in the world in 2011.
Although his times did not qualify him for the South African Olympic team in 2012, Pistorius was selected to race in the individual 400 meters and the 4 × 400-meter relay. When he ran in the former event at the London Games, he became the first amputee to compete in track at the Olympics. Although he reached the semifinals, Pistorius failed to advance to the medal round. In the 4 × 400 relay, his team made the finals but did not medal.
Sporting Career
Pistorius competed in T44 (single below-knee amputees) events though he is classified in T43 (double below-knee amputee).[10] Sometimes referred to as the “Blade Runner” (after the science fiction film of the same name) and “the fastest man on no legs”,[11] Pistorius took part in the 2004 Summer Paralympics in Athens and came third overall in the T44[12] 100-metre event.[13] Despite falling in the preliminary round for the 200 metres, he qualified for the final.[14] He went on to win the final in a world record time of 21.97 seconds, beating a pair of American runners, Marlon Shirley and Brian Frasure, both with single amputations.[15]
In 2005, Pistorius finished sixth in the nondisabled South African Championships over 400 metres with a world-record time of 47.34 seconds,[16] and at the Paralympic World Cup in the same year, he won gold in the 100 metres and 200 metres, beating his previous 200-metre world record.[17] At the 2006 IPC Athletics World Championships, Pistorius won gold in the 100-, 200- and 400-metre events, breaking the world record over 200 metres.[18] On 17 March 2007, he set a disability sports world record for the 400 metres (46.56 seconds) at the South African Senior Athletics Championships in Durban;[19] He became the world record holder of the 100- and 200-metre events with times of 10.91 and 21.58 seconds, respectively.[20] [21]
In the case of, Director of Public Prosecutions, Gauteng v Pistorius (96/2015) [2015] ZASCA 204 (3 December 2015), excerpts of the judgement read: “[1] This case involves a human tragedy of Shakespearean proportions: 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. The issue before this court is whether in doing so, he committed the crime of murder, the intentional killing of a human being, or the lesser offence of culpable homicide, the negligent killing of another.
[2] It is common cause that in the early hours of 14 February 2013 the respondent, Mr Oscar Pistorius, shot and killed the 29-year-old Miss Reeva Steenkamp at his home in a secured complex known as Silver Woods Country Estate in the district of Pretoria. Pursuant to this, he was tried in the Gauteng Division of the High Court, Pretoria on several charges, including one of the murder of Miss Steenkamp. Throughout the proceedings in the trial court, the respondent was referred to as ‘the accused’ and, for convenience, I intend to do so as well. I trust that those near and dear to her will forgive me if I refer to Miss Steenkamp at times by her given name of Reeva, although I shall endeavour to do so only where it is necessary to emphasize her identity. I shall otherwise refer to her simply as ‘the deceased’.
[3] The proceedings in the trial court were attended by unprecedented publicity. As far as I am aware, for the first time in the history of this country the trial was covered on live television (as was the appeal in this court). Although I did not follow the proceedings closely, it was impossible not to learn that although it was common cause that the accused had shot and killed the deceased, the trial court had found him not guilty of her murder but guilty of culpable homicide. Contending that the trial court erred on certain legal issues, the Director of Public Prosecutions, with leave of the trial court, now appeals to this court on questions of law reserved, arguing that the appropriate conviction would be one of murder.
[4] It is necessary at the outset to clear a technical issue out of the way. The appeal to this court relates solely to count 1 of the indictment, namely, the alleged murder of the deceased. The accused was not charged in the alternative with the lesser offence of culpable homicide. It was unnecessary for the State to do so as s 258 of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 (the CPA) provides that if the evidence led on a charge of murder does not prove that offence but the offence of culpable homicide (or numerous other offences unnecessary to mention for present purposes) ‘the accused may be found guilty of the offences so proved’. That is what happened in the present case. The trial court held that the State had not proved that the accused was guilty of the murder but had shown that he was guilty of culpable homicide. Relying on s 258 it accordingly found him guilty of the latter offence.”[22]
Additional Information on the Trial:
“No absolute freedom
Upon release, Pistorius will not enjoy absolute freedom. He must comply with specific parole conditions until December 2029, when his sentence ends. These include regular monitoring, participation in gender-based violence programmes and ongoing therapy for anger management, Reuters reported. His movements, such as changing residences or seeking employment, will require approval from a designated official.”[23]
Pistorius was taken into police custody and was formally charged with murder in a Pretoria court on 15 February 2013.[24] The entire trial was broadcast live via audio, and parts of the trial were also broadcast live via television.[25]
Difference Between Murder and Culpable Homicide
In a murder investigation, there has to be key essentials in order to convict an accused. That is possessing a motive, intention to kill (mens rea), weapon used in the murder etc., so in this case, how do we define culpable homicide? In Canada, the term is used in the Criminal Code to classify all killings of persons as either culpable or not culpable homicide.[26] Non-culpable homicide includes those committed in self-defence.[27] In South Africa, “Culpable homicide” has been defined (in South African law) simply as “the unlawful negligent killing of a human being”, the rough equivalent of involuntary manslaughter in Anglo-American law.[28]
Example: “A knows Z to be behind a bush. B does not know it. A, intending to cause, or knowing it to be likely to cause Z’s death, induces B to fire at the bush. B fires and kills Z. Here B may be guilty of no offence, but A has committed the offence of culpable homicide.”[29]
Conclusion
Accident or Rage? We will never know the true story behind the murder of the innocent Ms Reeves. Bullets from Oscar’s gun were shot four times on Reeves which ultimately led to her fatal death. There are rare but high-profile cases that remain unsolved to his day! For example, in the famous O.J. Simpson case, there are again various variations of narrations about this case. Some say he stabbed them in a fit of rage after seeing Nicole (the wife) and her friend Ron in a compromised position. That she was having an affair with Ron who was the waiter in a famous restaurant that Nicole frequently visited. Did he kill her or not? This case had huge international coverage and was influenced so much by public opinion. A poll of Los Angeles County residents showed that most African Americans thought that the “not guilty” verdict was justified, while the majority of whites thought it was a racially motivated jury nullification[30] by the mostly African American jury.[31] In addition to this, the latest polling showcases that the “gap” has been determinate ever since the trial. In 2013, more than half of polled black respondents said that they believed Simpson was guilty.[32] In 2017 on an episode of The Jury Speaks, three of the jurors that acquitted Simpson stated that in retrospect they would still vote to acquit, while one said he would vote to convict.[33] Another case in India called the 2008 Noida double murder case or simply the Arushi Talwar case too had various media coverage. Often such media coverage proves more harm than good. If anything, they change the narrative of the entire case, they change the perception of the jury, public, and the Judge. Moreover, what is worse if the investigating authorities do not follow the investigation procedure duly and diligently – which only jeopardizes the state of the case and the accused. The same can be said for the O.J. Simpson case, where blood samples were considered “tampered” by the LAPD lab.
The media in the case of the Noida double murder investigation made a whodunit story out of it. This case was a mockery of how judicial proceedings and investigation should be taking place. Arushi Talwar – a thirteen-year-old girl was found dead in her bedroom on the year 2008 of 16th May, their live-in domestic help Hemraj who was missing at that time was the immediate suspect. However, he was found the next day on the terrace of the house – dead. Naturally, the police pointed their fingers at the parents of Arushi – Dr. Rajesh Talwar (father) and Dr. Nupur Talwar (mother) (hereinafter referred as the Talwar’s or simply the parents) and considered them suspects. There were various issues in this case, the police did not conduct a thorough search of the house – that is they did not secure the crime scene – which also led to further tampering of evidence. The case was later transferred to another department called the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) – a domestic crime investigation agency. The CBI pardoned the parents but presumed Talwar’s assistant and their additional two domestic help. These three men were then forced to take narcotics tests. The conclusion was that they tried an attempt to sexually assault the thirteen-year-old and later killed her and the domestic help (Hemraj) who was a witness to their crime. However, the court deemed since there were more circumstantial evidence the court released the three men and imposed, the verdict of life imprisonment on the Parents of Arushi for the murder of their child. The Talwar’s challenged the decision of the court and won. They were acquitted of insufficient evidence against them as well, the case remains unsolved.
What went wrong? The power of media and the way it is capable of influencing high profile cases and the lackadaisical approach in following procedure by the legal authorities often blunder the crux of the case. As such, cases of heinous crimes or high-profile cases that include celebrities or renowned people should be dealt with quickly, sensitively and carefully. Adequate care has to be taken while dealing with evidence. Social media grows at a rapid rate each day, as such certain regulations need to be in place in order to regulate false or make-believe news. Every piece of information on a particular case needs to be fact-checked, and unnecessary information needs to be taken down immediately or blocked.
“Oscar Pistorius, the former Paralympic athlete from South Africa, was released on parole this Friday, (Jan 5th, 2024) nearly 11 years after the murder of his girlfriend, Reeva Steenkamp, on Valentine’s Day. Maintaining that he mistakenly believed Steenkamp was an intruder, he has pursued numerous appeals against his conviction on these grounds.
Having spent approximately eight and a half years in prison and seven months under house arrest before his murder sentence, Pistorius was granted parole by a board in November, having served more than half of his term. A monitoring official will oversee him until his sentence concludes in December 2029, requiring him to report job opportunities or changes of address. As part of his parole conditions, Pistorius must continue therapy for anger management and attend sessions on gender-based violence, as outlined by a lawyer representing the Steenkamp family.”[34]
[1] Oscar Pistorius: athlete who overcame disability to become a global star | Oscar Pistorius | The Guardian [2] Germaner, Shain (12 September 2014). "Oscar: the verdict is in". The Star. Archived from the original on 12 September 2014. [3] Phipps, Claire (12 September 2014). "Oscar Pistorius verdict: judge to rule on culpable homicide". The Guardian. Archived [4] Germaner, Shain (21 October 2014). "Oscar gets 5 years for Reeva's death". The Star. [5] "Oscar Pistorius verdict changed to murder – Oscar Pistorius guilty of murdering Reeva Steenkamp". BBC News Online. 3 December 2015. [6] "Oscar Pistorius given six years for Reeva Steenkamp murder". BBC News. 6 July 2016. [7] "SCA increases Oscar Pistorius's murder sentence to 13 years". News 24. [8] Chutel, Lynsey (5 January 2024). "Oscar Pistorius, Olympic Athlete Convicted of Murder, Is Released". The New York Times. [9] Below Points retrieved from: Lindstrom, Sieg. "Oscar Pistorius". Encyclopedia Britannica, 18 Jan. 2024, https://www.britannica.com/biography/Oscar-Pistorius. Accessed 26 January 2024. [10] "Pistorius Oscar". IPC.InfostradaSports.com. International Paralympic Committee. Archived from the original on 8 March 2014. [11] Oscar Pistorius, Össur, [12] Oscar Pistorius, Össur, [13] "Oscar Pistorius". Paralympic.org. International Paralympic Committee. [14] From Paralympics to Olympics?, Disability Sport South Africa, 9 November 2006, archived from the original on 12 December 2008 [15] "Oscar Pistorius". Paralympic.org. International Paralympic Committee. [16] Oscar Pistorius, Össur, [17] Athletics results: Event 6: T44 100m (Men), Paralympic World Cup, archived from the original on 8 December 2008, [18] Crates leads superb day for GB, BBC Sport, 9 September 2006 [19] De Jongh Borchardt (19 March 2007), Oscar reaches for his dream, News24, archived from the original [20] Oscar sets 100m world record, News24, 4 April 2007, [21] "Oscar Pistorius shatters 100m, 200m Records", Mail & Guardian, 5 May 2007 [22] Director of Public Prosecutions, Gauteng v Pistorius (96/2015) [2015] ZASCA 204; [2016] 1 All SA 346 (SCA); 2016 (2) SA 317 (SCA); 2016 (1) SACR 431 (SCA) (3 December 2015) retrieved from: Director of Public Prosecutions, Gauteng v Pistorius (96/2015) [2015] ZASCA 204; [2016] 1 All SA 346 (SCA); 2016 (2) SA 317 (SCA); 2016 (1) SACR 431 (SCA) (3 December 2015) (saflii.org). [23] Sounak Mukhopadhyay, 3rd Jan 2024, Oscar Pistorius to be released from jail 11 years after killing girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp; what happens next? | Mint (livemint.com) [24] Dolan, David (15 February 2013). "Blade Runner Pistorius sobs in court after murder charge". Reuters. [25] du Plessis, Charl (25 February 2014). "Oscar trial to be broadcast live, court rules". City Press. South Africa. Archived from the original on 23 April 2014. [26] Criminal Code, RSC 1985, c C-46, s 222. [27] Criminal Code, RSC 1985, c C-46, s 34 [28] S v. Naidoo and Others Archived 12 September 2014 at the Wayback Machine, Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa, Case 321/2001 [29] Culpable homicide - Wikipedia [30] Chakravarti, Sonali (August 5, 2014). "The OJ Simpson Verdict, Jury Nullification and Black Lives Matter: The Power to Acquit". Public Seminar. [31] Decker, Cathleen (October 8, 1995). "The Times Poll : Most in County Disagree With Simpson Verdicts". Los Angeles Times. [32] "Most Black People Now Think O.J. Was Guilty". FiveThirtyEight. June 9, 2014. [33] "O.J. Simpson jurors reflect on the history-making trial in Oxygen's The Jury Speaks". Entertainment Weekly. [34] By HT News Desk, Jan 05th, 2024, retrieved from: Oscar Pistorius leaves jail: Know about Paralympic star who killed girlfriend | World News - Hindustan Times
