This article is from the source 'nytimes' 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 http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/14/world/africa/oscar-pistorius-sentence.html

The article has changed 6 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
Oscar Pistorius Sentencing Hearing Begins Oscar Pistorius Is Unfit to Testify at Sentencing, Psychologist Says
(about 3 hours later)
LONDON — Oscar Pistorius, the double-amputee Olympic runner who shot his girlfriend to death on Valentine’s Day 2013, appeared in a court in Pretoria, South Africa, on Monday to await his sentencing for murder. The sentencing would bring to a close a case that has riveted and divided South Africa. LONDON — Oscar Pistorius, the double-amputee Olympic runner who shot his girlfriend to death on Valentine’s Day 2013, is unfit to testify at his sentencing for murder, a defense psychologist said as the hearing opened on Monday in a court in Pretoria, South Africa.
Mr. Pistorius, 29, was found guilty in December of murder in the death of his girlfriend, Reeva Steenkamp, after South Africa’s top appeals court overturned a lower court’s conviction on the lesser charge of manslaughter. “Currently, in my opinion, he is not able to testify,” the psychologist, Jonathan Scholtz, told Judge Thokozile Matilda Masipa of the High Court in Pretoria, arguing that Mr. Pistorius should be hospitalized rather than imprisoned. “His condition is severe.”
Gerrie Nel, the chief prosecutor, rejected that argument, saying that Mr. Pistorius had not expressed remorse for the death of his girlfriend, Reeva Steenkamp.
The sentencing decision, which is not expected until later this week, would bring to a close a case that has riveted and divided South Africa.
Mr. Pistorius, 29, was found guilty in December of murdering Ms. Steenkamp after South Africa’s top appeals court overturned a lower court’s conviction on the lesser charge of manslaughter.
The court found that the earlier conviction had been based on a misinterpretation of laws and an erroneous dismissal of circumstantial evidence.The court found that the earlier conviction had been based on a misinterpretation of laws and an erroneous dismissal of circumstantial evidence.
The appeals court said that Mr. Pistorius, who has said repeatedly that he accidentally killed Ms. Steenkamp under the mistaken belief that an intruder had broken into his home, should have foreseen that his actions would cause the death of a person. The appeals court said that Mr. Pistorius, who has insisted that he accidentally killed Ms. Steenkamp under the mistaken belief that an intruder had broken into his home, should have foreseen that his actions would kill someone.
In a country with a high crime rate, the fear of home intrusion cuts across social and racial lines, and high walls and security guards are common in gated communities like the one where Mr. Pistorius lived in Pretoria.In a country with a high crime rate, the fear of home intrusion cuts across social and racial lines, and high walls and security guards are common in gated communities like the one where Mr. Pistorius lived in Pretoria.
Mr. Pistorius’s arrest in the killing of Ms. Steenkamp on Feb. 14, 2013, sent South Africans reeling. Known as the Blade Runner for the flexible carbon-fiber prosthetic legs he used when competing, Mr. Pistorius achieved worldwide fame by challenging able-bodied athletes, most notably at the 2012 London Games. He won medals at the 2004, 2008 and 2012 Summer Paralympics.Mr. Pistorius’s arrest in the killing of Ms. Steenkamp on Feb. 14, 2013, sent South Africans reeling. Known as the Blade Runner for the flexible carbon-fiber prosthetic legs he used when competing, Mr. Pistorius achieved worldwide fame by challenging able-bodied athletes, most notably at the 2012 London Games. He won medals at the 2004, 2008 and 2012 Summer Paralympics.
Ms. Steenkamp, who was 29 at the time of her death, was a model, a law-school graduate and a budding reality-television star.Ms. Steenkamp, who was 29 at the time of her death, was a model, a law-school graduate and a budding reality-television star.
In September 2014 — after a lengthy and highly publicized trial that was likened to the 1994-95 trial of O.J. Simpson in the United States — Judge Thokozile Matilda Masipa of the High Court in Pretoria convicted Mr. Pistorius of culpable homicide but found him not guilty of murder. The judge found that prosecutors had failed to present “strong circumstantial evidence” and to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Pistorius had shown intent to kill. In September 2014 — after a lengthy and highly publicized trial that was likened to the 1994-95 trial of O.J. Simpson in the United States — Judge Masipa convicted Mr. Pistorius of culpable homicide but found him not guilty of murder. She found that prosecutors had failed to present “strong circumstantial evidence” and to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Pistorius had shown intent to kill.
Prosecutors, and Ms. Steenkamp’s family, argued that Mr. Pistorius had deliberately killed his girlfriend after an argument.Prosecutors, and Ms. Steenkamp’s family, argued that Mr. Pistorius had deliberately killed his girlfriend after an argument.
Although Mr. Pistorius was regarded as a hero to many in South Africa, the trial revealed another, darker side: a man with a mercurial temper, given to jealousy and occasional anger; an aggressive driver; an irresponsible gun owner; and a celebrity who was used to getting his way.Although Mr. Pistorius was regarded as a hero to many in South Africa, the trial revealed another, darker side: a man with a mercurial temper, given to jealousy and occasional anger; an aggressive driver; an irresponsible gun owner; and a celebrity who was used to getting his way.
In presenting their case before the Supreme Court of Appeal, in Bloemfontein, prosecutors argued that Judge Masipa had misinterpreted a crucial legal concept in finding Mr. Pistorius not guilty of murder.In presenting their case before the Supreme Court of Appeal, in Bloemfontein, prosecutors argued that Judge Masipa had misinterpreted a crucial legal concept in finding Mr. Pistorius not guilty of murder.
They argued that Mr. Pistorius should be found guilty because — under a legal principle known as dolus eventualis — he should have known that firing through the locked door would kill the person inside. The appeals court agreed.They argued that Mr. Pistorius should be found guilty because — under a legal principle known as dolus eventualis — he should have known that firing through the locked door would kill the person inside. The appeals court agreed.
Mr. Pistorius was released from prison in October after serving one year of the five-year sentence for manslaughter, and he has been living under house arrest.Mr. Pistorius was released from prison in October after serving one year of the five-year sentence for manslaughter, and he has been living under house arrest.
The sentencing hearing, before Judge Masipa, on Monday came after a psychologist, Jonathan Scholtz, gave an extensive and largely sympathetic account of Mr. Pistorius’s background, personality and mental health. The sentencing hearing, before Judge Masipa, on Monday came after Dr. Scholtz gave an extensive and largely sympathetic account of Mr. Pistorius’s background, personality and mental health.
Dr. Scholtz said that Mr. Pistorius showed symptoms of depression, anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder; was taking psychiatric medication; and had problems with short-term memory.Dr. Scholtz said that Mr. Pistorius showed symptoms of depression, anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder; was taking psychiatric medication; and had problems with short-term memory.
“I don’t think he is able to be a witness in this trial: His condition is severe,” Dr. Scholtz said.“I don’t think he is able to be a witness in this trial: His condition is severe,” Dr. Scholtz said.
Mr. Pistorius was born in 1986 without a fibula in either leg. (The fibula runs between the knee and ankle, beside the tibia.)Mr. Pistorius was born in 1986 without a fibula in either leg. (The fibula runs between the knee and ankle, beside the tibia.)
His parents yielded to doctors’ recommendations that his lower legs be amputated, just below the knee. At 13 months, he was fitted with prostheses. At 17 months, he was walking. His journey to becoming one of the world’s fastest runners inspired people around the world.His parents yielded to doctors’ recommendations that his lower legs be amputated, just below the knee. At 13 months, he was fitted with prostheses. At 17 months, he was walking. His journey to becoming one of the world’s fastest runners inspired people around the world.
While Mr. Pistorius was estranged from his father — his parents divorced when he was 6 — and his mother died when he was 15, he was close to his aunt and uncle, Dr. Scholtz said.While Mr. Pistorius was estranged from his father — his parents divorced when he was 6 — and his mother died when he was 15, he was close to his aunt and uncle, Dr. Scholtz said.
Mr. Pistorius never abused illegal drugs, except for a brief experiment with marijuana while in school, and had no prior criminal convictions nor any signs of antisocial personality disorder or psychopathy, Dr. Scholtz said.Mr. Pistorius never abused illegal drugs, except for a brief experiment with marijuana while in school, and had no prior criminal convictions nor any signs of antisocial personality disorder or psychopathy, Dr. Scholtz said.
“One can safely say that his fall from grace was enormous,” Dr. Scholtz said, adding that Mr. Pistorius was “genuine in his affection for the deceased.”“One can safely say that his fall from grace was enormous,” Dr. Scholtz said, adding that Mr. Pistorius was “genuine in his affection for the deceased.”
Dr. Scholtz called Mr. Pistorius’s relationship with Ms. Steenkamp “a normal, loving relationship,” with “no signs of abuse or coercion.”Dr. Scholtz called Mr. Pistorius’s relationship with Ms. Steenkamp “a normal, loving relationship,” with “no signs of abuse or coercion.”
Dr. Scholtz said that Mr. Pistorius “has found some solace in the belief that the deceased is with God,” and that he was enrolled in a degree program at the University of London. He urged the court not to sentence Mr. Pistorius to additional time in prison, arguing that further incarceration “would not be psychologically or socially constructive” and that Mr. Pistorius was not a threat to society. Dr. Scholtz said that Mr. Pistorius “has found some solace in the belief that the deceased is with God,” and that he was enrolled in a degree program at the University of London.
He urged the court not to sentence Mr. Pistorius to additional time in prison, arguing that further incarceration “would not be psychologically or socially constructive” and that Mr. Pistorius was not a threat to society.
Mr. Pistorius, once a gun enthusiast, had sold his firearms, Dr. Scholtz said.Mr. Pistorius, once a gun enthusiast, had sold his firearms, Dr. Scholtz said.
“He is adamant that he never wants to touch or fire a firearm again,” the psychiatrist said. “He is adamant that he never wants to touch or handle a firearm again,” the psychiatrist said.
Mr. Scholtz gave his largely sympathetic account under questioning from Mr. Pistorius’s defense lawyer, Barry Roux. Mr. Scholtz gave his account under questioning from Mr. Pistorius’s defense lawyer, Barry Roux.
But Gerrie Nel, the chief prosecutor, who cross-examined Dr. Scholtz, suggested that Mr. Pistorius had not expressed remorse for his crime. But Mr. Nel, who cross-examined Dr. Scholtz, suggested that Mr. Pistorius had not expressed remorse for his crime.
“Does he understand that he committed murder?” Mr. Nel asked.“Does he understand that he committed murder?” Mr. Nel asked.
“Yes,” Dr. Scholtz said.“Yes,” Dr. Scholtz said.
“In what way?” Mr. Nel asked.“In what way?” Mr. Nel asked.
The prosecutor then made it clear that he was unconvinced.The prosecutor then made it clear that he was unconvinced.