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 8 Version 9
Oscar Pistorius sentencing: witness says more prison would have 'detrimental effect' – live Oscar Pistorius sentencing: witness says more prison would have 'detrimental effect' – live
(35 minutes later)
2.08pm BST
14:08
Scholtz and Roux agree that two medications found in Pistorius’ cell (apologies, I did not catch the name of the drugs) were “not illegal”.
The witness is now excused. The first witness testimony is done.
Court now adjourns to tomorrow at 9.30am local time (8.30am GMT).
I will post a summary of today’s events shortly.
2.06pm BST
14:06
Barry Roux says Pistorius paid the R6,500-a-month to the Steenkamp family without any conditions.
Scholtz: This is the kind of person he is … It was not seen by him as some kind of means to change anything …
This is what he does: he helps. It comes almost naturally to him and he enjoys doing it.
2.03pm BST
14:03
Roux turns to the incident mentioned by Nel in which Pistorius apparently banged his hands on a table.
Roux says Pistorius was frustrated because he had swollen hands and a medicine (Voltaren, an anti-inflammatory drug) brought to the prison by his family was not given to him.
Scholtz says this was a situation of high stress. One incident doesn’t mean that a person has a violent personality.
1.59pm BST
13:59
Barry Roux, for the defence, is on his feet again for re-examination.
He asks Roux to read from a different section of the prison psychologist report, which concludes that the risk of reoffending is low.
Scholtz says he agrees with this part.
1.57pm BST
13:57
Why were you at first reluctant to take on the writing of this report, Nel asks Scholtz.
Scholtz says it was an “ethical dilemma” – because he had already assessed Pistorius in 2014, and “your objectivity is affected the second time”.
You’re biased towards the accused, Nel alleges.
Scholtz says he merely tried to “present the court with this person in the fullest extent”. He wanted the court to “see the person that is being sentenced”.
That’s it – Nel takes his seat.
1.55pm BST
13:55
If someone is suffering from PTSD, is it safe for him to work with children, Nel wants to know.
Scholtz says he wouldn’t expect there to be any problem. Pressed by Nel he says Pistorius might “snap” if there was a confrontation, or pressure builds up, or an argument – but says this is unlikely to be a problem working with children.
Updated
at 1.55pm BST
1.52pm BST
13:52
Nel says Scholtz failed to include the negative portions of the prison psychologist report in his own report.
Scholtz said in his own assessment he “could not find any anger or aggression” in Pistorius.
1.50pm BST
13:50
Gerrie Nel is not letting go of this point. He continues to read from the prison psychologist report, which says that Pistorius refused to acknowledge he had committed a crime.
Scholtz says he saw Pistorius a year later:
It is not like that now.
He knew that you were seeing him to draft a report for re-sentencing, Nel says.
1.48pm BST
13:48
Judge Masipa intervenes: she wants to know more about the prison psychologist report.
It says that at the beginning he struggled to adapt to prison life and was verbally violent, she says.
It doesn’t say anything about him being violent in nature.
Scholtz agrees:
I am happy with my view that he is not a violent man.
1.45pm BST
13:45
#OscarPistorius Scholtz says anger is normal for someone suffering from PTSD. ‘But he’s not a violent person in nature'
1.43pm BST
13:43
Scholtz says he spent 27 hours with Pistorius and it was not his impression that he was violent and aggressive.
Nel says the prison psychologist saw Pistorius on three occasions. Scholtz insists the report is “limited”.
1.41pm BST
13:41
Scholtz says he thought the report was “unscientific”.
Nel is incredulous: it is a factual paragraph, he says. Why did you not talk to the prison psychologist if you did not agree with her, he asks:
Why would you select only positive things that suits your view … Why would you do that?
Why was the prison psychologist report not included in Scholtz’s report, Nel wants to know:
You never mentioned another report to this court: why?
Scholtz says he didn’t want to “single out” a colleague. He didn’t agree with her findings.
1.38pm BST1.38pm BST
13:3813:38
#OscarPistorius Nel turns to the report Scholtz gave to the court - Nel asks why the report didn't include a report by prison psychologist?#OscarPistorius Nel turns to the report Scholtz gave to the court - Nel asks why the report didn't include a report by prison psychologist?
Scholtz says he did read that report, but he “didn’t deem it necessary” to refer to it in his own report.Scholtz says he did read that report, but he “didn’t deem it necessary” to refer to it in his own report.
Nel: I know why.Nel: I know why.
He reads from the report, which says Pistorius was “verbally violent and aggressive” towards staff in prison.He reads from the report, which says Pistorius was “verbally violent and aggressive” towards staff in prison.
Scholtz says he thought it was a “poor report”. He says Pistorius was going through an “adaptation” of being incarcerated.Scholtz says he thought it was a “poor report”. He says Pistorius was going through an “adaptation” of being incarcerated.
Nel: I find your answers to be totally biased to the accused. They are not objective.Nel: I find your answers to be totally biased to the accused. They are not objective.
1.34pm BST1.34pm BST
13:3413:34
Do you think you can be objective, Nel asks Scholtz. Are you able to put all factors before the court, positive and negative? Scholtz says yes, he can be objective.Do you think you can be objective, Nel asks Scholtz. Are you able to put all factors before the court, positive and negative? Scholtz says yes, he can be objective.
1.31pm BST1.31pm BST
13:3113:31
Having gone through a trial would cause depression, wouldn’t it, Nel asks Scholtz.Having gone through a trial would cause depression, wouldn’t it, Nel asks Scholtz.
The doctor agrees that it would exacerbate depression. He says there is no “easy fix”, it could take years for his condition to improve.The doctor agrees that it would exacerbate depression. He says there is no “easy fix”, it could take years for his condition to improve.
Scholtz: There is consistent adversity. The trial isn’t finished, he doesn’t know where he stands.Scholtz: There is consistent adversity. The trial isn’t finished, he doesn’t know where he stands.
1.29pm BST1.29pm BST
13:2913:29
Nel wants to know about Pistorius’ current medications.Nel wants to know about Pistorius’ current medications.
Scholtz says yes, for depression, anxiety and insomnia, prescribed by his own psychiatrist, Dr Bosch.Scholtz says yes, for depression, anxiety and insomnia, prescribed by his own psychiatrist, Dr Bosch.
You’re of the opinion that Pistorius needs to be hospitalised, Nel says – don’t you think you should have mentioned this to the psychiatrist?You’re of the opinion that Pistorius needs to be hospitalised, Nel says – don’t you think you should have mentioned this to the psychiatrist?
Scholtz said he mentioned it to Bosch and to the defence.Scholtz said he mentioned it to Bosch and to the defence.
Did Bosch or the defence counsel do anything, Nel wants to know.Did Bosch or the defence counsel do anything, Nel wants to know.
No, Scholtz says.No, Scholtz says.
1.26pm BST1.26pm BST
13:2613:26
Court resumesCourt resumes
Judge Masipa arrives and the hearing begins again.Judge Masipa arrives and the hearing begins again.
Gerrie Nel requested this lengthy break in order to consult with prosecution experts about the report by psychologist Dr Jonathan Scholtz, a witness appearing for the defence.Gerrie Nel requested this lengthy break in order to consult with prosecution experts about the report by psychologist Dr Jonathan Scholtz, a witness appearing for the defence.
1.09pm BST1.09pm BST
13:0913:09
Oscar Pistorius, who left the courtroom during the break, is now heading back. The hearing is due to resume in around 20 minutes.Oscar Pistorius, who left the courtroom during the break, is now heading back. The hearing is due to resume in around 20 minutes.
#OscarPistorius walking back to court.@MarykeVermaak pic.twitter.com/KfNJHVRtPH#OscarPistorius walking back to court.@MarykeVermaak pic.twitter.com/KfNJHVRtPH
11.41am BST11.41am BST
11:4111:41
What we've learned so farWhat we've learned so far
Claire PhippsClaire Phipps
The court has now taken a break until 2.30pm local time (12.30pm GMT) to allow the state to consult its own experts on the contents of the defence psychiatric report.The court has now taken a break until 2.30pm local time (12.30pm GMT) to allow the state to consult its own experts on the contents of the defence psychiatric report.
Here’s what we’ve heard so far in this first morning of Oscar Pistorius’ sentencing hearing for the murder of Reeva Steenkamp:Here’s what we’ve heard so far in this first morning of Oscar Pistorius’ sentencing hearing for the murder of Reeva Steenkamp:
First defence witnessFirst defence witness
Further imprisonment would have a detrimental effect on him.Further imprisonment would have a detrimental effect on him.
[It] would not be psychologically or socially constructive.[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.Mr Pistorius would be better served … if he gave back in a positive and constructive way, using his skills.
I don’t think he is able to be a witness in this trial: his condition is severe.I don’t think he is able to be a witness in this trial: his condition is severe.
Cross-examinationCross-examination
Nel: Did Mr Pistorius indicate to you that he intentionally shot at the door knowing there was a person in the bathroom?Nel: Did Mr Pistorius indicate to you that he intentionally shot at the door knowing there was a person in the bathroom?
Scholtz: Yes …Scholtz: Yes …
Nel: That’s the first version of him intentionally shooting at the person that we’ve had in this court.Nel: That’s the first version of him intentionally shooting at the person that we’ve had in this court.
I’ll be back with further live updates when the court resumes.I’ll be back with further live updates when the court resumes.
11.25am BST
11:25
Nel says he would like the court to take a break so his own experts can look at Scholtz’s report.
He asks for the court to adjourn until 2.30pm.
The court takes a break.
11.21am BST
11:21
Nel turns to the claim warders brought visitors to peer at him in his cell.Scholtz says happened twice that he knew, they'd switch on lights
This did happen, Nel says. It happens to all inmates, when inspectors come to the prison.
That is not the context here, says Scholtz.
#OscarPistorius Scholtz: it was either family or friends of the warders and they were shown “there is Oscar”. BB
11.19am BST
11:19
Nel cites Scholtz’s earlier testimony that while in prison, Pistorius overheard an inmate being raped and later saw that the man had hanged himself.
Nel: That did not happen … Perhaps if Mr Pistorius was here [on the stand] he could have testified to that.
11.16am BST
11:16
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 go 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.
Updated
at 1.23pm BST
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.