Murder, culpable homicide - or just a dreadful mistake? Judge Masipa will probably take 2 days to deliver what is expected to be a lengthy judgment. Masipa will hand down her verdict on whether the state successfully proved its case against OP, or whether he successfully proved to the court that his version of what transpired on Valentine’s Day last year is reasonably possibly true. Masipa will prepare a written judgment and will be reading from it in open court. For those not familiar with court procedures, this might seem like a rather long affair. Masipa will be summarizing the testimony of each of the 37 witnesses who testified during the trial, both for the state and the defence, after which she will make a finding on the credibility of the testimony. Here she will take into consideration the value of the testimony, how applicable it is to the case, whether it corroborated or contradicted other witnesses and how well the witnesses fared when placed under cross-examination. Masipa will be referring to authoritative case law during her judgment, comparing the legal principles in the Pistorius case with similar principles which have been evident on other cases. Interesting principles were raised by the defence during the trial, and one can expect Masipa to refer to the principles of the reasonable disabled person test, as well as the fight-or-flight and startle principles raised by expert witnesses who testified on the athlete’s behalf. Pistorius faced a main charge of murder, with culpable homicide being a competent verdict. This means that should Masipa find that the state did not successfully prove that Pistorius murdered Reeva Steenkamp, she can still find him guilty of culpable homicide. The difference between the two charges is as follows: murder is the intentional unlawful killing, whereas culpable homicide is the negligent unlawful killing of another person. If Masipa finds Pistorius’ version to be reasonably possibly true pertaining to all the charges, she will acquit him, after which he will be free to go. Should Pistoroius be convicted on either of the charges, he will have to re-apply for bail, pending his sentencing. If he is convicted of premeditated murder, he will have to bring a bail application in terms of schedule six of the Criminal Procedures Act, which stipulates that he must show the existence of exceptional circumstances which permit his release on bail. In the event he is convicted of murder, he will have to bring a bail application in terms of schedule five of the act, which states that he must show that the interests of justice permit his release on bail. A conviction of culpable homicide or any of the other three charges will fall under schedule one of the act and he should theoretically not have difficulty in securing his release on bail. If there is a guilty verdict of premeditated murder, murder or culpable homicide, one can expect the matter to be postponed for about a month to allow parties to prepare for sentencing. During sentencing, the defence will lead evidence in mitigation of sentence in an attempt to convince the court to pass a lighter sentence, and the state will lead evidence in aggravation of sentence in an attempt to convince the court to pass a heavier sentence. One can expect social workers and psychologists to testify in open court in this regard. Family members, friends and acquaintances might also testify about his good character. Pistorius will have the option to bring an application to Masipa for leave to appeal against either a conviction, or the sentence, or both. ~ Sunday Times article by Ulrich Roux.
Posted on: Sun, 07 Sep 2014 09:05:34 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015