The death of Reeva Steenkamp on the early morning of Thursday, 14 February 2013, was undoubtedly a tragic event. Reeva was a beautiful, intelligent woman, aged 29, who had worked as a model and a paralegal, and was hoping to be a qualified legal advocate by the age of 30. The day before she died, she was preparing a speech on domestic violence, planning to use her growing fame to make a difference. She had canceled a coffee date with her best friend, Gina Myers, to keep working on the speech. She had been dating Oscar Pistorius for just four months, and had chosenValentine’s day to give him a card in which she declared her love for the first time. Inside the card she wrote
“I think today is a good day to tell you that… I love you”
However Reeva never gave the speech, instead, shortly after 3am on the morning of 14th February, noises were heard by neighbours, and at 3:18am Oscar Pistorius called his friend and manager of the estate Johan Stander, pleading
“Please, please come to my house. I shot Reeva, I thought she was an intruder. Please, please come quick.”
He then made two further telephone calls, one to emergency services and then a very brief call lasting just 9 seconds to Estate security. He then picked Reeva up and carried her down the stairs , where he was met by Johan Stander and Stander’s daughter coming down the stairs with Steenkamp in his arms. Stander testified
“He was broken, he was screaming, he was crying, he was praying, I saw the truth that morning”
Dr Johan Stipp testified that when he examined Reeva at around 3:25am, there was no pulse or signs of life, her pupils were fixed dilated and cornea milky, and had already started to dry out.
However, Pistorius was arrested, and according to Chief investigating officer Hilton Botha’s testimony at a bail hearing on 29th February, a witness had heard gunshots coming from Pistorius’ home, then a female screaming followed by more gunshots, suggesting that Reeva had been murdered.
Trial commenced on 3 March 2014. Witness and neighbour Estelle Van Der Merwe testified in Afrikaans that she woke up at 1:56am to a woman’s raised voice for about an hour, followed by four loud sounds. She could not hear what was said, or even the language. She had put pillow over her head and looked out window on opposite side of house, away from Pistorius’s home facing open land at some point to see where voice was coming from but couldn’t ascertain the source. No other witnesses heard a raised voice.
Many witnesses heard screams coming from the house around 3:15am, and the defence case was that these screams were in fact Pistorius screaming for help and not Reeva. In summary Michelle Burger, Charl Peter Johnson, Dr Johan Stipp and Anette Stip all heard screams, which they interpreted as a woman or were not sure.
However, immediate neighbours Michael Nhlengethwa and his wife Eontle both testified they heard a man crying loudly in a high-pitched voice and calling three times for help. Another immediate neighbour Rika Motshuane, insisted that she heard a man crying, describing it as a “cry of pain”.
Pistorius testified commencing 7th April that he had mistaken Reeva for an intruder, after hearing the bathroom window open, believing her to be in bed. After advancing on the bathroom, hearing a noise from inside the toilet, he had opened fire without thinking, firing four shots in a state of terror. After firing the shots, he waited for an indeterminate length of time, and then made his way back to the bedroom, where he could not locate Reeva. After an unsuccessful attempt to break down the toilet door, he put on his artificial legs, and broke down the toilet door with a cricket bat he had used to wedge bedroom door shut ( the bedroom door having a lock that was not substantial ).
On 12 May, forensic psychiatrist Dr. Merryl Vorster testified that Pistorius had a generalised anxiety disorder (GAD). After a prosecution request, Pistorius’ mental condition was evaluated. The evaluation found that Pistorius was not mentally incapacitated, and did not find GAD, however the report largely confirmed the defence case, finding that
“Mr Pistorius has been severely traumatised by the events that took place on 14 February 2013, He currently suffers from a post-traumatic stress disorder, and a major depressive disorder … The degree of anxiety and depression that is present is significant. He is also mourning the loss of Ms Steenkamp. Mr Pistorius is being treated and should continue to receive clinical care by a psychiatrist and a clinical psychologist for his current condition. Should he not receive proper clinical care, his condition is likely to worsen and increase the risk for suicide.”
The report found some jealousy but no evidence of abuse by Pistorius:
“There is evidence to indicate that Mr Pistorius was genuine with his feelings towards Miss Steenkamp and that they had a normal loving relationship. He did become insecure and jealous at times but this was normal for the specific situation. He would express his displeasure and irritation but would try and sort it out later by talking with Miss Steenkamp. Although the relationship was still young, there were no signs of abusive coercion like those often found in these kinds of relationships.”
The defence case was reinforced by the many factors that could have disposed Pistorius to fight rather than flee when confronted by a perceived intruder.
- Experiences from childhood, his mother kept a gun under her pillow
- High rates of crime generally in South Africa
- Pistorius’ inability to flee due to not having his prosthetic legs on
- His strong desire to protect Reeva
- The bedroom door being locked
- Sprint athletes are trained to react to the noise of a starting gun
- Incidents at the Estate where Pistorius lived
- Violent incidents which Pistorius had experienced prior to shooting Reeva
The prosecution case was apparently that Pistorius had shot Reeva shortly before making the call to Johan Stipp, and the sounds which the defence attributed to the cricket bat breaking down the door were actually the gun shots.
There appear to be numerous problems with this prosecution case:
- While the prosecution has sought to portray Pistorius as hot-headed, there is no evidence of abuse, as confirmed by the psychiatric reports.
- There is no evidence of an argument, other than from Van Der Merwe, who apparently heard an unrelated event.
- The time from when witnesses heard a second series of loud bangs to the time at which Pistorius called Johan Stipp is not sufficient for Pistorius to have carried all the necessary actions. Immediately after the last set of loud bangs, Pistorius was heard calling loudly for help, and he then made the series of telephone calls.
- Especially significant is an unopened Valentine’s card Reeva gave to Oscar, telling him for the first time that she loved him.This indicates the relationship was at an early stage, far too early for a major argument to be plausible.There is no evidence of a progression of violence, or that Oscar had ever been verbally or physically abusive to a woman.His character generally is exemplary, performing charitable work for the disabled, and also helping victims of crime on two occasions.
- Forensic evidence given by prosecution expert witness Johannes Vermeulen, a police forensic analyst, shows that the door was struck by the cricket bat after the gun shots were fired:
Roux: Whats your view, was the door hit after the shots?
Vermeulen: My lady, in my view the door was hit after the shots. There is a crack here. There had to be a hole in the door, otherwise the crack would have gone straight through.
Roux: You explained the crack that ran down into a hole and then down to a different place.
Vermeulen: Yes, My lady. I have quickly drawn a picture to show you. There is a crack coming into the bullet hole. The crack goes out on the left hand side of the bullet hole. That is why I say the bullet hole was there before the crack.
- It is agreed that Pistorius was not wearing his artificial legs when the shots were fired. It seems unlikely that he could have broken the door while on his stumps, as he is barely able to balance, let alone wield a cricket bat with force. It seems very implausible that he would remove his artificial legs solely to fire the shots, and then put them on again before carrying Reeva down the stairs.
In the author’s opinion, the prosecution has so far not only failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Pistorius intended to kill Reeva, but there is substantial evidence that indicates that this was in all likelihood a tragic accident.
On Thusday 3d July, the court adjourned until Monday 7th July, to allow the prosecution to prepare possible further cross-examination of defence witness Wayne Derman, professor of sport and exercise medicine at the University of Cape Town, reportedly the last witness for the defence.
Support for Oscar Pistorius has grown steadily, with membership of a grass-rootsFacebook group discussing the trial growing from a handful to over 4,600 members as the trial has progressed. A poll of members showed that more than 75% are of the opinion that Pistorius did not know that Reeva was in the toilet when he opened fire.
Note: article was first published by the author at http://geebee2.wordpress.com/2014/07/05/oscar-pistorius/