Oscar Pistorius trial closing arguments end; verdict in 5 weeks
August 8, 2014 -- Updated 1602 GMT (0002 HKT)
Oscar Pistorius verdict due Sept. 11
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
- NEW: Pistorius verdict set to be announced on September 11, 2014
- Pistorius shot dead his girlfriend Reeva Steencamp on Valentine's Day last year
- Defense attorney alleges the state made mistakes
- Prosecutor calls Olympian an "appalling" witness
The second and last day
of closing arguments caps months of proceedings that have seen the
Olympic sprinter gag, vomit and break down in heaving sobs. The judge
will consider her verdict over the next five weeks and announce it next
month, she said.
Pistorius sent a message
to supporters through his Twitter account at the end of court Friday:
"Thank you to my loved ones and those that have been there for me, who
have picked me up and helped me through everything. "
Pistorius shot his girlfriend, model and law graduate Reeva Steenkamp, on Valentine's Day last year.
The state has charged
Pistorius, 27, with premeditated murder in the death of Steenkamp, 29.
But the athlete contends he mistook her for an intruder when he fired
four fatal shots through a locked bathroom door at his home in South
Africa.
CNN legal analyst Kelly
Phelps said she was impressed with the way defense attorney Barry Roux
completed his closing arguments. "We've always said they'd need to come
out with their 'A' game, and that is certainly what they did here
today," Phelps said.
Roux alleged the
prosecution made mistakes and handled evidence poorly. He laid out
details of the noises from that night: the gunshots, screams and
pounding -- the last from Pistorius' using a cricket bat to break down
the door.
Witness testimony shows an anxious man screamed for help three times, which supports Pistorius' case, according to Roux.
The defense reminded the
court that Pistorius, who uses prostheses to walk after his lower legs
were amputated as a child, suffers from anxiety. Roux compared the
Olympian's situation to that of an abuse victim who suddenly snaps after
undergoing suffering for a while.
Roux argued that
Pistorius should be evaluated as a "reasonable" disabled person with
anxiety, not as an ordinary "reasonable man." If the court finds that
Postorius was "reasonable," then he must be acquitted, he said.
In an attempt to
discredit the prosecution's version of events, Roux also accused
investigators of tampering with the crime scene by moving items around,
including a fan and Steenkamp's jeans. In police pictures, the items
appeared in different spots from where the Olympian said they'd been,
Roux said.
He pointed out that the
burden of proof is on the state in this case, and accused the state of
avoiding certain important facts and ignoring other reasonable
scenarios.
Roux pointed out that
the burden of proof is on the state in this case, and accused the state
of avoiding certain important facts and ignoring other reasonable
scenarios.
Making his final
arguments, prosecutor Gerrie Nel accused the Olympian's attorneys of
presenting a defense that did not jibe with the facts.
Prosecution: Pistorius lied
Nel, renowned for his bulldog tenacity in questioning, maintained that Pistorius was dishonest and his testimony was "devoid of any truth."
Using a metaphor reflecting Pistorius' career on the track, Nel said the athlete had "dropped the baton of truth."
"Without the baton of truth, you cannot complete the race," he said.
Nel said the Olympian "displayed a blatant disregard for the law and the lives of others."
In Pistorius' version of
events, the prosecutor said, the athlete said he went to the bathroom
door and fired with the intention to kill or hit, believing there was
someone behind it.
Before he fired, he was armed with a high-powered weapon and was "in charge" of the situation, Nel said.
He said Pistorius should not go free regardless of whether the court believes he thought there was an intruder behind the door.
Calling the Olympic
sprinter an "appalling" witness, Nel said the evidence from the bullet
holes in the bathroom door suggests Pistorius had time to think, and
that he looked down the gun sight as he fired.
But Roux referenced Nel's metaphors in disputing the accusations.
"There's no crumbling of
the mosaic [Nel's metaphor for the defense's circumstantial evidence]
or dropping of the baton," he said.
Judge's decision
The closing arguments
lower the curtain on a courtroom drama that, since March, has seen the
Olympic sprinter weep and retch in the courtroom as disturbing evidence
was presented.
Proceedings were delayed while Pistorius underwent a court-ordered, monthlong psychiatric evaluation.
He was depressed,
suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder, and is a suicide risk,
the doctors concluded. But he did not appear to have a history of
abnormal aggression or psychopathic tendencies linked to "rage-type
murders in intimate relations."
Nicknamed "Blade Runner"
for the bladelike lower-leg prostheses he wears on the track, Pistorius
has always admitted that he killed Steenkamp. The key question in his
trial is that of intent.
Judge Thokozile Masipa said Friday that she would announce his fate on September 11.
There are no jury trials in South Africa. Masipa is assisted by two lay advisers -- called assessors -- in her decision.
The judge's options on
verdict and sentencing range from acquittal and freedom to conviction of
premeditated murder and life in prison.
Masipa and the assessors
will consider the evidence and testimony presented in court, which may
cover up to 4,000 pages of court transcripts.
If the judge believes
beyond a reasonable doubt that Pistorius knew he was shooting at
Steenkamp, then she will find him guilty of murder. If she rules it was
premeditated, Pistorius would face a life sentence. In South Africa, he
would be required to serve at least 25 years. If it is not premeditated,
he would serve a minimum of 15 years.
If Masipa sees any reasonable doubt that Pistorius knew Steenkamp was behind the bathroom door, she won't convict him of murder.
Still, if she determines
that Pistorius was unreasonable in his actions that led to Steenkamp's
killing, she would find him guilty of culpable homicide. In that case,
she would have to decide upon a sentence herself.
If she believes there is
a reasonable chance that Pistorius made a mistake and responded in a
reasonable fashion, she will find him not guilty, which means the
athlete could go free.
No comments:
Post a Comment