Oscar Pistorius has been found not guilty of murdering Reeva Steenkamp.
Masipa has yet to hand down her
final decision, which will come Friday. She did reveal in the waning moments of
Thursday's summation that she determined Pistorious to have been
"negligent," which means he could still be found guilty of culpable
homicide, a conviction that comes with a maximum of 15 years in prison but
carries no mandatory jail sentence. He also faces gun charges that carry
potential prison sentences.
Oscar Pistorius reacts during
judgement at the North Gauteng High Court in Pretoria. (REUTERS)
But a murder charge is out, for the
time being anyway. The prosecution can appeal the decision and, if they do,
Pistorius could still be convicted of murder, according to legal experts
contacted by Yahoo Sports.
The prosecution, Masipa said in her
summation, "failed to show requisite intention to kill the deceased, let
alone premeditation."
All along, the prosecution pressed
for a conviction for cold-blooded murder. But the Blade Runner has always
maintained it was a tragic accident, that he shot his girlfriend in the
pre-dawn hours of Valentine's morning last year in a moment of terror,
believing that he was protecting them both from an intruder locked behind a
bathroom door.
Masipa called Pistorius a "very
poor witness," saying he was "evasive" in the face of
prosecution questioning. Still, in her opinion that did not warrant a guilty
verdict on the charge of premeditated murder, or even dolus eventualis –
the grey area between premeditated murder and culpable homicide.
Under dolus eventualis, if Pistorius
should have foreseen that his actions could result in death, yet recklessly
proceeded anyway, it still would have been considered murder in South African
law. That would have come with a minimum sentence of 15 years.
Masipa ruled out any murder
conviction based on several key factors:
• Phone records support Pistorius'
timeline of events.
Pistorius relayed his version of
events – that he thought an intruder had entered his home – minutes after the
shooting took place, and that his version did not waiver later in questioning.
Masipa agreed with the defense that it would be "highly improbable"
for Pistorius to have made up this story so quickly, and that his version
remained unwaivered throughout questioning even without access to his original
statement or evidence from the scene.
Masipa determined that Pistorius did
not subjectively foresee killing whoever was behind the locked bathroom door,
and that it is clear to her that he genuinely believed Steenkamp to be in bed, not
in the toilet.
"To find otherwise would be
tantamount to saying that the accused's reaction after he realized that he shot
the deceased was fake, that he was play acting merely to delude the onlookers
at the time," Masipa said.
Pistorius could still be convicted
of murder if the prosecution chooses to appeal.
The main point of contention is the interpretation of the law around dolus eventualis. In her summation, Masipa said murder with dolus eventualis is when someone foresees they could cause death, but recklessly proceeds anyway. It could be argued that it should be interpreted as when someone ought to foresee they could cause death, but recklessly proceeds anyway.
However, if Pistorius is convicted of culpable homicide and the judge hands down a stiff sentence, it's highly unlikely that the state will appeal. If she acquits him entirely, an appeal would be expected.
The main point of contention is the interpretation of the law around dolus eventualis. In her summation, Masipa said murder with dolus eventualis is when someone foresees they could cause death, but recklessly proceeds anyway. It could be argued that it should be interpreted as when someone ought to foresee they could cause death, but recklessly proceeds anyway.
However, if Pistorius is convicted of culpable homicide and the judge hands down a stiff sentence, it's highly unlikely that the state will appeal. If she acquits him entirely, an appeal would be expected.
Comments
Post a Comment