Oscar Pistorius: why is the trial facing a 'significant' delay?
14 May :
OSCAR PISTORIUS is to be sent for a 30-day psychiatric evaluation in a state-run mental health institution, potentially causing a "significant delay" to his murder trial.
Judge Thokozile Masipa today granted a request from the prosecution that the athlete should undergo a proper psychiatric enquiry. It comes after defence witness Dr Merryll Vorster diagnosed Pistorius with 'generalised anxiety disorder'.
Vorster did not think he suffered with a mental illness, but conceded that Pistorius's ability to act in accordance with his understanding of right and wrong was affected by the disorder.
She said that his increased fear of crime, physical vulnerability and anxiety disorder may have affected his "flight or fight" response on the night that he shot his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp.
Judge Masipa told the court this morning that evidence from Vorster, who only met with Pistorius twice, cannot replace a proper psychiatric enquiry. "A proper enquiry would ensure the accused receives a fair trial," she said.
The evaluation will need to determine whether or not Pistorius suffers from a "mental illness or mental defect" that makes him incapable of appreciating the "wrongfulness" of his act or of "acting in accordance with an appreciation of the wrongfulness of his act".
Not only will the observation take around 30 days, the waiting lists for inpatient treatment in Pretoria are reported to be several months long, which would cause a "significant delay" to the murder trial, says The Guardian.
Masipa has agreed with the defence that outpatient treatment would be preferable for Pistorius, as the aim of the referral is "not to punish the accused". This could reduce the delay, but experts are also expected to spend a further 30 days compiling their reports, meaning that the minimum delay is likely to be two months.
The Guardian notes that some believe Pistorius's defence has slipped up in calling Vorster as a witness and introducing the diagnosis of generalised anxiety disorder at such a late stage in the trial. Prosecutor Gerrie Nel yesterday accused the defence of changing its plea from putative self-defence to a psychiatric disorder.
The court will adjourn until Tuesday, when the full ruling on the referral will be given.
Oscar Pistorius 'lonely' and 'probably shouldn't own a gun'
13 May:
OSCAR PISTORIUS was described as "lonely" today as he waits to find out if he will have to spend four weeks under observation in a psychiatric facility.
The athlete – on trial for killing his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp – has been diagnosed with 'general anxiety disorder' by forensic psychiatrist Dr. Meryl Vorster, who has been giving evidence in court.
Vorster has said the disorder may have played a role "to a degree" in his actions on the night of the shooting on 14 February last year.
Pistorius had friends "to avoid feeling lonely", she told the court. "They were not friends he could confide in." His sexual relationships tended to be short, she said, adding that he coped socially, but this was "superficial".
People suffering from the disorder are not "dangerous", said Vorster, but they should "probably not have firearms". She added: "That makes that person at risk of being involved in violent activities."
Vorster said that she would not expect Pistorius to remember exactly what happened at the time of the shooting because of the anxiety disorder and the fear he felt. But she said that Pistorius was still able to know what he was doing.
Prosecutor Gerrie Nel has argued that Pistorius should go for a 30-day psychiatric evaluation and suggested that the defence team may be using the Vorster's testimony as a fall-back defence.
He questioned why Vorster had been called in at such a late stage to evaluate Pistorius, reports The Guardian. "We will argue that the accused was not the most impressive witness," he said. "Now we have a witness being called by the defence saying that a psychiatric disorder may play a role in his actions... there should be red lights going off."
The defence and prosecution have disagreed on whether or not the disorder can be classed as a mental illness under South African law. The defence says it is not and claims there is "no merit" in the prosecution's application to have Pistorius undergo further tests.
Judge Thokozile Masipa will announce her decision tomorrow.
Oscar Pistorius has anxiety disorder, says psychiatrist
12 May:
OSCAR PISTORIUS has an anxiety disorder, according to a forensic psychiatrist, and may have to undergo a mental health assessment at a state hospital.
Dr Meryl Vorster has told the Pretoria court that the amputation of the athlete's lower legs as baby, his family's heightened fear of crime, his parents' divorce and his mother's death when he was 14 led to a generalised anxiety disorder.
The removal of his legs when he was unable to understand what was going on would have been perceived as a "traumatic assault", she said. His father was "an irresponsible and absent" parent, while his mother "abused alcohol intermittently" and slept with a gun under pillow. Her children were not "soothed" and developed anxiety, she said.
Vorster described Pistorius's emotional reactions as "genuine". The athlete has cried, retched and vomited during the trial, in which he is accused of murdering his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp on Valentine's Day last year.
"If one had to feign retching one would develop a hoarse voice, red in the face. He was pale and sweating," said Vorster. "This is difficult to feign."
The psychiatrist said that Pistorius's reaction to the "perceived threat" on the night of the shooting "should be considered in light of his physical disability and his anxiety disorder".
State prosecutor Gerrie Nel argued the defendant's mental health should be examined more fully at a state hospital – a move that could delay the trial for up to a month, reports Sky News.
However, the defence has said it would oppose the application, arguing that the diagnosis of generalised anxiety disorder did not mean Pistorius was incapable of distinguishing right from wrong.
Vorster also talked about the flight/fight response, saying Pistorius was more likely to respond to any threat with "fight" rather than "flight" because his capacity for flight is limited.
In a statement that may later prove difficult for the defence, Vorster agreed with the prosecution that by arming himself and approaching the danger Pistorius must have foreseen the possibility of shooting.
The defence team was due to wrap up its case on Tuesday, but is now likely to go on until the end of the week, as the prosecution has taken longer than planned to cross-examine witnesses.
Oscar Pistorius: Reeva's last moments disputed in court
9 May
A BALLISTICS expert testifying at the trial of Oscar Pistorius has cast doubt on the prosecution’s account of Reeva Steenkamp’s final moments.
Tom "Wollie" Wolmarans, a former police forensics expert and witness for the defence, faced an aggressive cross-examination from prosecutor Gerrie Nel today, reports The Guardian.
The state maintains that Pistorius shot his girlfriend Steenkamp following an argument, while the Paralympian says he mistook her for a dangerous intruder.
Today Wolmarans said he believes Steenkamp was standing close behind the toilet door when the first two bullets hit her hip and arm. He believes she was falling as she was hit by a subsequent bullet that caused her fatal head wound.
His version of events differs to that given by Captain Christiaan Mangena, a ballistics expert for the prosecution. Mangena said Steenkamp was standing in the toilet cubicle when she was hit in the right hip, but believed she fell to the floor and was then hit in the arm and head as she crossed her arms over her head to protect herself.
The prosecution’s account would suggest that Pistorius paused between the shots and may have heard Steenkamp scream before firing the final, fatal bullet – whereas Wolmarans claims the shots were fired in quick succession.
In a dramatic exchange, Nel asked Wolmarans if he had changed details of his report after discussing the case with Roger Dixon, another defence witness who testified before the Easter break. Wolmarans admitted that he and Dixon had gone for a beer together but said he would not have altered his own report on Dixon's advice because Dixon was not a ballistics expert. "I never lied to a court," he told the judge.
Wolmarans, who at one point stepped inside the court’s reconstructed toilet cubicle to demonstrate Steenkamp’s position, said the state’s explanation for an injury on the victim’s back also "does not make sense". The prosecution claims the injury was caused by a ricochet bullet, but Wolmarans says it would have occurred when she fell backwards onto a wooden magazine rack.
No comments:
Post a Comment