This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2016/jun/13/oscar-pistorius-sentencing-murder-reeva-steenkamp

The article has changed 12 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 4 Version 5
Oscar Pistorius is 'broken and should be in hospital' – sentencing hearing live Oscar Pistorius is 'broken and should be in hospital' – sentencing hearing live
(35 minutes later)
11.13am BST
11:13
Nel says Pistorius complained a lot in prison.
It’s a different thing to complain about being assaulted, in a place where that shouldn’t happen, than to complain about having “no soap”, Scholtz argues.
Pistorius had access to an open courtyard, Nel points out, but the doctor says he was often too afraid to use it, “something might happen to him there”.
11.11am BST
11:11
Defence witness: Pistorius 'assaulted in prison'
Nel turns to Pistorius’ period of imprisonment. He was not confined to his cell, Nel says, contrary to Scholtz’s report.
Scholtz says his understanding is that he was confined “most days” for up to 18 hours a day.
Nel says his cell was open during the day and he could move around the section he was held on. Scholtz says he was too fearful to leave his bed:
He had fear because someone did through into his section and assaulted him there.
It’s not true, Nel says. He didn’t report this. It’s a lie, he says.
11.07am BST
11:07
Nel: Your report deals with the accused and what’s best for the accused.
It doesn’t take other factors into account.
I just find it peculiar that you place a lot of emphasis [on] the negative media as a factor that impacts on the accused … You indicate that ‘his children may in future search the internet and find negative report of the trial’. Don’t you think the fact the father murdered somebody is more significant than negative reports?
11.05am BST
11:05
Nel turns to the money paid by Pistorius to the Steenkamp family: R6,500 a month, which continued for about 17 months. He doesn’t want that back, Scholtz says.
The prosecutor says the R6,500 was viewed as part payment for a civil claim “by all parties concerned” and was meant to be kept confidential:
It then came out in the trial from the accused’s side.
11.03am BST
11:03
June Steenkamp has said Pistorius’ apology in court left her “unmoved”, Nel tells Scholtz.
Scholtz says he understands that Pistorius did try to contact Steenkamp’s family directly after her death.
Did he try to contact them after he left prison, Nel asks. No, says Scholtz.
Nel says that would have been a good opportunity to do so.
Scholtz says Pistorius thought he might do so “at a later stage”.
Nel says there was an attempt by Pistorius to meet the family – in April, during preparations for the sentencing arguments.
11.00am BST
11:00
Judge Masipa intervenes: the state wants to know what Pistorius told the doctor, not what the doctor understands from the court judgment.
She allows the question.
Nel: Did Mr Pistorius indicate to you that he intentionally shot at the door knowing there was a person in the bathroom?
Scholtz says yes, he did.
Nel says that would be the first admission by Pistorius. He says he doesn’t accept it.
That’s the first version of him intentionally shooting at the person that we’ve had in this court.
Nel says he would have liked to have been able to question Pistorius on this admission.
10.57am BST
10:57
Listen carefully, Nel tells the witness. Did Pistorius tell you he armed himself and intentionally shot through the door?
Scholtz says he did not ask Pistorius this question.
So he intended to kill a person, just not Steenkamp, Nel asks.
Scholtz agrees – but Nel presses him. That’s his view, not that of Pistorius. Nel wants to know if Pistorius himself agrees that he intended to kill a person.
Scholtz: Perhaps these are legal nuances that I don’t understand properly.
Nel pushes on. Did he tell you he intended to shoot through the door at the person?
Barry Roux chips in: it is getting too technical, he says. It’s unfair to the witness, he adds. He says the court ruled that Pistorius foresaw that he could kill someone and proceeded anyway (dolus eventualis). It’s not about intending to kill.
10.52am BST
10:52
Nel wants to know why Scholtz believes Pistorius has taken responsibility for his actions. Did he accept that he killed her intentionally, Nel asks.
Scholtz says even though he didn’t know it was Steenkamp behind the door, he does accept he killed her. He accepts he took a human life when he shouldn’t have and that is murder.
That’s your view, not his, says Nel.
Scholtz says Pistorius does accept it was murder because the court has said so.
(Nel is pushing him very hard on this point, and what Pistorius himself has actually said.)
Does he accept he intentionally fired four shots into the door, Nel asks.
Yes, says Scholtz.
He has never admitted that to the court, Nel says. He says this is yet another version of events from Pistorius.
10.48am BST
10:48
Nel asks how Scholtz knows that the family of Reeva Steenkamp forgives Pistorius.
Scholtz says he has seen a letter they wrote to the parole board.
Reeva’s mother, June Steenkamp, wrote a book, Nel says. Scholtz doesn’t know about this.
Nel reads from the book, A Mother’s Story. He says she has forgiven him “for her sake, not for his sake”, because of her faith.
Related: June Steenkamp interview: ‘Now it’s crystal clear Reeva is never coming back’
10.45am BST
10:45
Nel now turns to the doctors who saw Pistorius while he was in prison. Scholtz says he knows he was visited by his private psychologist but is not aware of the others.
How then can you talk about the infection in his stumps, Nel asks. Scholtz says he was concerned with the psychological effects.
#OscarPistorius Nel hasnt lost his appetite for aggressive courtroom questioning since last here
10.44am BST
10:44
Nel turns to the medication Scholtz says Pistorius has been taking.
Scholtz confirms he has not seen the medication or the dosage, but has relied on what Pistorius told him.
Nel asks about Pistorius’ “temper tantrums” while in prison. He was “so agitated” when talking to someone in prison (named as Sister Mashabane) that “he banged a table in her presence” in January 2015. Scholtz isn’t aware of this incident.
Nel: He got so upset … He approached her in her office, he was shaking and he banged the table.
10.39am BST10.39am BST
10:3910:39
Nel asks Scholtz if he ever discussed with Pistorius why he fired the shots through the toilet cubicle door. He did not.Nel asks Scholtz if he ever discussed with Pistorius why he fired the shots through the toilet cubicle door. He did not.
Why, Nel asks. Scholtz said in his view it no longer mattered what Pistorius thought about it, but what the court had ruled.Why, Nel asks. Scholtz said in his view it no longer mattered what Pistorius thought about it, but what the court had ruled.
But, Nel says, you deal with his remorse. Isn’t it key that he accepts what he did?But, Nel says, you deal with his remorse. Isn’t it key that he accepts what he did?
Scholtz says Pistorius does accept that he took Reeva Steenkamp’s life.Scholtz says Pistorius does accept that he took Reeva Steenkamp’s life.
Nel says there is a difference between accepting “I took her life” and “I murdered her”. It could be remorse for himself, he adds.Nel says there is a difference between accepting “I took her life” and “I murdered her”. It could be remorse for himself, he adds.
Scholtz says he can’t “clinically substantiate” the idea that Pistorius only feels sorry for himself.
Updated
at 10.40am BST
10.38am BST10.38am BST
10:3810:38
Asked about TV interview, psychologist calls it "different circumstances" from trial. Nel: yes, because he can't be cross-examined.Asked about TV interview, psychologist calls it "different circumstances" from trial. Nel: yes, because he can't be cross-examined.
10.35am BST10.35am BST
10:3510:35
Court resumesCourt resumes
(The live stream at the top of the blog doesn’t seem to have noticed this, apologies.)(The live stream at the top of the blog doesn’t seem to have noticed this, apologies.)
Defence witness Dr Jonathan Scholtz is now being questioned by Gerrie Nel, for the state.Defence witness Dr Jonathan Scholtz is now being questioned by Gerrie Nel, for the state.
Scholtz told the court that Pistorius is not in a fit state to testify, but Nel wonders how he was able to do an interview with international media. (Pistorius has been interviewed for Britain’s ITV, for a programme to be shown after this hearing.) Scholtz says he did not know about the interview, and learned about it only yesterday.Scholtz told the court that Pistorius is not in a fit state to testify, but Nel wonders how he was able to do an interview with international media. (Pistorius has been interviewed for Britain’s ITV, for a programme to be shown after this hearing.) Scholtz says he did not know about the interview, and learned about it only yesterday.
10.31am BST10.31am BST
10:3110:31
During the break, it appears Pistorius approached the mother of Reeva Steenkamp but was rebuffed:During the break, it appears Pistorius approached the mother of Reeva Steenkamp but was rebuffed:
As he leaves court,a weeping Pistorius goes over to speak to June Steenkamp.He seems to get short shrift and stumbles away,his face crumpledAs he leaves court,a weeping Pistorius goes over to speak to June Steenkamp.He seems to get short shrift and stumbles away,his face crumpled
10.22am BST10.22am BST
10:2210:22
Oscar Pistorius has not spoken in court, and we don’t expect him to be called to testify.Oscar Pistorius has not spoken in court, and we don’t expect him to be called to testify.
The defence said it would present two witnesses: Dr Jonathan Scholtz, who has said so far this morning that a further period of imprisonment would be “detrimental” to Pistorius; and a second witness who will apparently talk about Pistorius’ charity work.The defence said it would present two witnesses: Dr Jonathan Scholtz, who has said so far this morning that a further period of imprisonment would be “detrimental” to Pistorius; and a second witness who will apparently talk about Pistorius’ charity work.
Here’s Pistorius arriving at the court this morning.Here’s Pistorius arriving at the court this morning.
10.09am BST
10:09
Scholtz reiterates his earlier assertion that Pistorius ought to be under medical supervision:
If he was my patient in private practice, I would admit him to hospital.
The court now takes a short adjournment.
10.08am BST
10:08
Scholtz is asked by Roux to turn to a theme aired during the original trial: the notion of “two Oscars”. The first Oscar being the athlete, tall on his prostheses, confident; the second the man on his stumps, anxious and vulnerable.
There’s more on that from the original trial here:
Related: Pistorius murder trial hears of 'two Oscars'
Scholtz says there is – almost – now a third Oscar, one who has given up, whose spirit is broken and does not have hope for the future.
10.05am BST
10:05
Scholtz says he has concluded that Pistorius should not be returned to prison:
Further imprisonment would have a detrimental effect on him.
[It] would not be psychologically or socially constructive.
Mr Pistorius would be better served … if he gave back in a positive and constructive way, using his skills.
10.03am BST
10:03
For the first five weeks in prison, Pistorius had no chair to sit on while showering and contracted an infection in his stumps, Scholtz says.
He overheard the rape of a fellow inmate who later hanged himself.
Pistorius was held separately from other prisoners for his safety, but the isolation had a negative effect on him, like “an animal in a cage”. It was effectively solitary confinement, Scholtz says.
There were several “humiliating and hurtful” experiences inside prison, he tells the court.
9.59am BST
09:59
Scholtz says Pistorius has displayed “true remorse” and contributed financially to Reeva Steenkamp’s family for several months “without expecting the money back”.
Scholtz says the Steenkamp family has forgiven him.
He has complied with all conditions of his house arrest.
9.56am BST
09:56
Pistorius is 'broken' and should be in hospital: defence witness
Scholtz says it is “good practice” to consider the offender’s personality as well as the facts of the case.
His conclusion for the court is that the following points could be taken into account:
In layman’s terms, one would describe him as ‘broken’.
In my opinion his current condition requires hospitalisation
Updated
at 9.57am BST
9.48am BST
09:48
Pistorius has plans for a life outside prison, Scholtz tells the court:
#OscarPistorius Scholtz: he would like to take up a job offer from Twin City Developments (<— his uncle Arnold’s company.) BB
9.47am BST
09:47
Pistorius has sold all his firearms and never wants to touch one again, Scholtz says.
He adds that Pistorius told him it was wrong to take a human life, and only god could do that.
9.44am BST
09:44
Defence witness says Pistorius has 'low risk' of future offending
Scholtz concludes that Pistorius is not a future danger:
The risk for future violence was low.
9.41am BST
09:41
Scholtz stresses that #OscarPistorius cannot be defined as a psychopath. He scored 3 on test where anything over 12 raises concern.