Wednesday, February 27, 2013

OSCAR PISTORIUS - FALLEN ICONS, GUNS AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE




The international cause celebre, at this point in time, is the forthcoming trial of the South African Olympic Star, Oscar Pistorius who is accused of killing his girlfriend, model and TV star, Reeva Steenkamp. To orientate the uninitiated, Pistorius is the first athlete from the Paralympics, for the disabled; to compete in the open Olympics and on top of that he was in contention for the finals at the open Olympics.

PISTORIUS

Pistorius is known as The Blade Runner because of his carbon fiber prosthetic legs. He was born without his lower leg bones called the fibulas and had amputations below the knees at the age of one. To cut a long story very very short he broke all sorts of world records at the Paralympics before participating in the “Open” Olympics having overcome incredible obstacles in the process. On top of that Pistorius was considered a role model. Also very few, if anyone, regarded him as anything but a thorough gentleman. He was highly regarded by famed international athletes who are finding it difficult to “process” the turn of events. Anyone who saw and listened to Piers Morgan’s interview of him on CNN had to be impressed by his humility, his charm and his acceptance of the fact that he had a responsibility to so many constituencies. He was blessed. This was no Lance Armstrong. Or so everyone believed.

In South Africa he was an icon. - a white man in post apartheid South Africa who was everyone’s hero. He was an inspiration to all and then, all of a sudden his world crashed, and he now epitomized so many of the unresolved problems within and without South Africa. Oscar Pistorius had been arrested for the premeditated murder of his girlfriend. The circumstances of the death of Pistorius’s partner were such that the topical issues of gun control, domestic violence, and icons with clay feet were once again going to be ventilated.

THE OUTLINE OF WHAT HAPPENED

That The Blade Runner had shot Ms Steenkamp was not in question. The question was, was it murder or was it a mistake. The investigating detectives and the prosecution had no doubt. You don’t just arrest Oscar Pistorius unless you have a strong prime facie case. There is also no doubt, from a legal point of view, on the basis of the facts available to all, that the irresistible inference is that Pistorius has a compelling case to answer. The Presiding Magistrate said as much at the bail hearing. The most basic question of all was why did he just shoot without as much as enquiring who was in the bathroom. If he feared being shot himself he could have stood out of the door’s pathway.

If the court believes him that he made a “mistake” he might still be guilty of culpable homicide, (manslaughter), as he would have to answer the question, that even under those circumstances, “Would a reasonable South African fire blindly through a closed door?”


There is a ton of other circumstantial evidence that needs an explanation. It is not Jay H Ell’s intention to attempt to litigate this case, as all the evidence must still be subject to cross - examination. Also the ballistic evidence needs to be thoroughly sifted through as this may well lend credence to one side or another versions of what happened that night. The strongest point in Pistorius’s favor is that burglaries and intruders are a common fear in post apartheid South Africa, particularly in certain areas. A survey indicated that 50% of South Africans were afraid of burglaries and intruders.

PUBLIC COMMENT, SENTIMENT AND THE PISTORIUS AURA

In South Africa, strictly speaking, you cannot comment on the merits of a case that is being tried. This certainly was the position prior to the institution of the new post apartheid Constitution. However the latter guarantees Freedom of Speech so the situation is not so clear anymore. It appears that every one is commenting on the merits of the case regardless of the legal position. In the social media, newspapers and in the visual and auditory media all and sundry are having their ten cents worth. Pistorius is openly conducting a campaign for support and there has to be a big machine backing his campaign, as he is among other things a highly valuable commercial entity. He has sent flowers to the Steenkamp family and he held a memorial service for her at his uncle’s home. In addition the social media is abuzz with his side of the story.

The public although divided is leaning towards Pistorius’s account. One fact that seems to be emerging in all these cause celebres is that the public, generally, cannot tolerate the thought of a hero’s image being dented. Pistorius is not only a hero he is an international icon. Even when the evidence is overwhelming the faithful hang in until the bitter end. Once the evidence becomes incontrovertible there is mourning at the loss of a beacon of hope in a world that is becoming more and more chaotic. It is as if one of the few symbols that represent some stability, “goodness”, achievement, and hope has been taken away from them and died.

Jay H. Ell’s guess is by the time of the trial sentiment will be strongly in Pistorius’s favor. In America that outcome would be bound to have an impact on the jury pool. In South Africa there are no jury trials only Bench trials that are decided by a Judge. However, Judges have to be impacted by societal views and values……

GUNS IN SOUTH AFRICA.

Like America there is a vigorous debate on the right to own guns. While there was always a gun culture, not dissimilar to the USA, it has never been easy to own a gun in South Africa even in the apartheid era. Guns were then generally owned by whites and were in much evidence with the army and police. As far as the blacks were concerned they were the objects of oppression. In response the liberation movements coveted them and obtained them.

Claire Taylor the spokesperson of the “Gun Free South Africa” said that with the advent of Mandela there was a tremendous desire to “put guns down”.  In 2000 a strict gun control act was passed by parliament. Since then violence by handguns has dropped steadily, some times by 10% a year. The criteria to own a gun are very strict. You have to be 21 or over, pass a really rigorous medical and criminal background check, do training, pass a shooting test and recertify every 10 years. However, there is an active trade in the black market on guns and several are reported stolen. The number of guns in South Africa is estimated at about 6 million for a population of 50 million. South African police confiscate a large number of “illegal” guns every day.

This episode has once evoked the issue between those who believe it is a right to own a gun versus the “Gun Free Protection Group. The former bemoaning the long wait to obtain a gun and the current backlog for licenses and the latter maintaining that yet another unnecessary death has occurred as a result of gun ownership,

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE.

 Magistrate Nair made it clear the reasons he was granting Pistorius bail. He was not considered a flight risk nor had it had been shown that he was violent. The fact that Pistorius is not violent is certainly being disputed in the social media and even by the State.  The latter maintained that there was one incidence of assault that was not prosecuted and that he once fired off a gun in a restaurant.

There are stories, even in the Press, that there had been reports of domestic abuse of the selfsame Ms Steenkamp. A police spokesperson, Denise Beukes, stated that there had been reports from that house that amounted to domestic violence. How much of this is true will be certainly sassed out by the time of the trial. There are neighbors that reported hearing a quarrel that preceded the shooting; there have to be cell phone records and all else that might emerge in the interim. A previous girlfriend made allegations in the press and then withdrew from the public scene.

Notwithstanding the merits of Pistorius case, social advocates in South Africa have used the trial to focus on the fact that not nearly enough has been done about domestic violence in the country.

UPSHOT

Oscar Pistorius’s aura will never be the same. He is pinned down to a story that on its face has holes in it. At the end of the day he was the agent in the death of an innocent woman. Jeffrey Toobin, the renowned legal commentator believes that the case may end in a plea bargain, where Pistorius pleads guilty to culpable homicide. His sponsors, who are worth $2 million to him annually, are without sentiment and have either suspended their sponsorship or called it quits. Several national and international appearances have been canceled. Whatever the outcome of the trial, his wholesome image has been shattered. The biggest losers, outside of the grieving Steenkamp family, are the public that have lost yet another icon that they could look up to and sigh that the world could not be such a bad place if it had an Oscar Pistorius

No comments:

Post a Comment