A prosecutor on Tuesday sought a murder conviction against Oscar Pistorius before South Africa’s Supreme Court of Appeal, saying a lower court erred in acquitting the double-amputee athlete of that charge for killing his girlfriend, instead convicting him of culpable homicide.
Advertisement
Pistorius himself did not attend the one-day Supreme Court hearing into his highly-charged case, which has prompted a fierce debate in South Africa, and accusations from a few rights groups that the white track star got preferential treatment.
A panel of five judges will hear the appeal – they are P Mpati, JA Mhlantla, JA Leach, JA Majiedt and AJA Baartman.
Reeva died after being hit in the head, arm and hip after Pistorius fired four shots into the door.
Pistorius, 28, said he thought there was an intruder in his house when he blasted four bullets through the bathroom door of his bedroom, killing Steenkamp, a model and law graduate.
South African state prosecutors on Tuesday argued in court for Oscar Pistorius to be convicted of murder and sent back to jail, two weeks after he was released on house arrest. The identity of the dead person is not relevant in such cases.
Questions have been raised about whether Pistorius genuinely believed that he was entitled to shoot through the door.
Evidence in the trial indicated Pistorius was a gun enthusiast who understood the impact of different weapons and ammunition.
He also testified that had he meant to kill, he would have aimed higher.
Speaking to Sky News ahead of the appeal, Reeva Steenkamp’s mother June said she felt the initial sentence was too short: “He killed her and he’s been in jail for 11 months and it’s too short a time for taking someone’s life, and even though I don’t want to hurt him in any way, he has to face the truth… it’s justice for Reeva”. Pistorius who was released October 19 to serve the remainder of his five-year term in his uncle’s Pretoria mansion, was not present for the appeal.
After the trial last September, Pistorius, a gun enthusiast, was also convicted of firing a pistol under the table of a Johannesburg restaurant but was let off on charges of illegal possession of ammunition and firing a gun out of a vehicle sun-roof.
Advertisement
Lead defence attorney Barry Roux said it was unfair to say that the court had ignored evidence.
