The Oscar questions that are still unanswered
As the world's press once again gathered outside the North Gauteng High Court on Friday to hear Judge Thokozile Masipa's final verdict in the murder trial of Oscar Pistorius, there are many questions which may remain unanswered.
Cellphone image of defence lawyer Barry Roux arriving at the High Court in Pretoria on Friday, 12 September 2014. Judge Thokozile Masipa will continue handing down judgment in the murder trial of Oscar Pistorius. Picture: SAPA
Although Masipa in essence accepted Pistorius’ version that he had shot his girlfriend Reeva accidentally, thinking she was an intruder, Masipa yesterday described the circumstances under which she was killed on Valentine’s day last year as “peculiar”.
She said there were a number of aspects in the case which did not make sense.
This included:
*Why did he not ascertain from Reeva if she had heard anything.
*Why he did not ascertain that she heard him since he did not get a response from her.
Why Reeva was in the toilet and only a few meters away from Pistorius and did not communicate with him or phone police as he had requested. She could have done this irrespective if she was in the bedroom or toilet.
It makes no sense to say she did not hear him scream “get out” as Pistorius said he screamed on top of voice for the intruders to get out.
Another question is why the accused fired not one but four shots before he ran back to bedroom to scream for help.
“The questions shall unfortunately remain a matter of conjecture,” Masipa said.
However, she added that it was no conjecture that Pistorius had armed himself with a firearm when he suspected an intruder might be coming into the bathroom.
“He was not truthful about the reasons he armed himself. He was clearly not candid with court when he said he had no intention to shoot at anyone as he had a loaded firearm in his hand, ready to shoot,” Masipa said.
