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/2014/09/12/world/africa/oscar-pistorius-south-africa-verdict.html

The article has changed 14 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
Judge in Oscar Pistorius Trial Begins Reading Verdict Judge in Oscar Pistorius Trial Begins Reading Verdict
(35 minutes later)
PRETORIA, South Africa — The long-running and oft-delayed murder trial of Oscar Pistorius neared its climax on Thursday as Judge Thokozile Matilda Masipa began reading her judgment.PRETORIA, South Africa — The long-running and oft-delayed murder trial of Oscar Pistorius neared its climax on Thursday as Judge Thokozile Matilda Masipa began reading her judgment.
After 41 days of testimony spread over months since the trial opened in March, it was not clear when the judge would finally pronounce a verdict. Some South African legal specialists said the hearing could run into Friday.After 41 days of testimony spread over months since the trial opened in March, it was not clear when the judge would finally pronounce a verdict. Some South African legal specialists said the hearing could run into Friday.
Mr. Pistorius, 27, is accused of murdering his 29-year-old girlfriend, Reeva Steenkamp, in the early hours of Feb. 14, 2013. Until that point, Mr. Pistorius, a double amputee track star who had challenged able-bodied runners at the London Olympics in 2012, seemed to be reveling in a glittery career of sporting success and celebrity acclaim.Mr. Pistorius, 27, is accused of murdering his 29-year-old girlfriend, Reeva Steenkamp, in the early hours of Feb. 14, 2013. Until that point, Mr. Pistorius, a double amputee track star who had challenged able-bodied runners at the London Olympics in 2012, seemed to be reveling in a glittery career of sporting success and celebrity acclaim.
Judge Masipa began her reading with a recital of the charges, including those that accused Mr. Pistorius of showing recklessness in handling firearms on various occasions. They were said to include incidents when he was accused of firing a pistol in a restaurant and through the open sun-roof of a car. Judge Masipa began her reading with a recital of the charges, including those that accused Mr. Pistorius of showing recklessness in handling firearms on various occasions. They were said to include incidents when he was accused of firing a pistol in a restaurant and through the open sunroof of a car.
Dressed in a dark suit, white shirt and black tie, Mr. Pistorius sat in the wooden dock as the judge read to a courtroom packed with lawyers, journalists and relatives of both Ms. Steenkamp and Mr. Pistorius.Dressed in a dark suit, white shirt and black tie, Mr. Pistorius sat in the wooden dock as the judge read to a courtroom packed with lawyers, journalists and relatives of both Ms. Steenkamp and Mr. Pistorius.
The athlete, Judge Masipa said, had denied the state’s accusation that he killed Ms. Steenkamp after an argument and had denied that he acted with premeditation. She said it was “common cause” that, after the shooting, Mr. Pistorius broke down the locked toilet cubicle door behind which Ms. Steenkamp was slumped, cried out for help and was in an emotional state. The athlete, Judge Masipa said, had denied the state’s accusation that he killed Ms. Steenkamp after an argument, and had denied that he acted with premeditation. She said it was “common cause” that, after the shooting, Mr. Pistorius broke down the locked toilet cubicle door behind which Ms. Steenkamp was slumped, cried out for help and was in an emotional state.
Judge Masipa said the issues were limited to whether Mr. Pistorius “had the requisite intention” to commit murder and “whether there was any premeditation.”Judge Masipa said the issues were limited to whether Mr. Pistorius “had the requisite intention” to commit murder and “whether there was any premeditation.”
“There were no eyewitnesses,” Judge Masipa said and the only people at the scene when the shooting happened were Mr. Pistorius and Ms. Steenkamp.“There were no eyewitnesses,” Judge Masipa said and the only people at the scene when the shooting happened were Mr. Pistorius and Ms. Steenkamp.
The fascination with the trial, which was initially set to last three weeks, has been compared in South Africa and elsewhere to the attention paid to the O.J. Simpson case in the United States.The fascination with the trial, which was initially set to last three weeks, has been compared in South Africa and elsewhere to the attention paid to the O.J. Simpson case in the United States.
He has not disputed that he fired four rounds through the toilet cubicle door, killing Ms. Steenkamp, a law graduate, model and budding television personality. But while the prosecution has said he committed premeditated murder, the athlete, nicknamed the Blade Runner for the scythe-like prosthetic limbs he uses to compete, insists he killed her by mistake, believing an intruder had entered his home. Mr. Pistorius has not disputed that he fired four rounds through the toilet cubicle door, killing Ms. Steenkamp, a law graduate, model and budding television personality. But while the prosecution has said he committed premeditated murder, the athlete, nicknamed the Blade Runner for the scythe-like prosthetic limbs he uses to compete, insists he killed her by mistake, believing an intruder had entered his home.
As the trial unfolded, moreover, the defense and the prosecution offered Jekyll-and-Hyde depictions of Mr. Pistorius. As the trial unfolded, the defense and the prosecution offered Jekyll-and-Hyde depictions of Mr. Pistorius.
The prosecutor, Gerrie Nel, described him as trigger-happy, mendacious, narcissistic and prone to rage. By contrast, the lead defense lawyer, Barry Roux, sought to present him as anxious, vulnerable and fearful of South Africa’s violent crime, laboring under the psychological burden of growing up since the age of 11 months with both legs amputated below the knee.The prosecutor, Gerrie Nel, described him as trigger-happy, mendacious, narcissistic and prone to rage. By contrast, the lead defense lawyer, Barry Roux, sought to present him as anxious, vulnerable and fearful of South Africa’s violent crime, laboring under the psychological burden of growing up since the age of 11 months with both legs amputated below the knee.
If Mr. Pistorius is found guilty of premeditated murder, he will face a minimum 25-year jail term. The judge – presiding with two assessors in the absence of juries under the South African legal system – could also consider lesser charges. Mr. Pistorius also faces three counts related to firearms offenses. If Mr. Pistorius is found guilty of premeditated murder, he will face a minimum jail term of 25-year. The judge — presiding with two assessors in the absence of juries under the South African legal system — could also consider lesser charges. Mr. Pistorius also faces three counts related to firearms offenses.
In part, the trial has been held up as evidence of a dramatic reversal of South Africa’s white-dominated apartheid-era legal system. In 1998, four years after South Africa’s first democratic election, Judge Masipa, who is 66 today, became only the second black female judge to be appointed to the High Court. Born in a poor township, she had been a social worker and newspaper journalist before studying law at the height of the apartheid era. Now, under South African judicial protocols, lawyers and witnesses are obliged to address her with the honorific “My Lady.”
But the trial has also highlighted the country’s continued racial preoccupations and its high levels of crime against women. In other cases, Ms. Masipa has handed down tough sentences in cases of rape and violence against women.
Ms. Masipa said on Thursday that it would be “fruitless” to rehash every single item of evidence in the trial, but she had considered them all and would summarize them. She said witnesses had been confused about the sounds they heard coming from Mr. Pistorius’s upscale villa, including screams, gunshots and the strikes of the cricket bat the athlete used to break down the toilet door after the shooting.
“The witnesses failed to describe the events in the same way,” she said.
Judge Masipa said the second-by-second timeline of events would help her determine whether Mr. Pistorius had “direct intention” to kill Ms. Steenkamp. She also alluded to the question of whether the prosecution had proved its case “beyond reasonable doubt.” After 60 minutes of reading her judgment in a calm and dispassionate voice, the judge had given no indication of the likely verdict.