They say the law is an ass. In the murder trial of Oscar Pistorius, it proved to be a very obstinate ass.
At the risk of boring repetition let me rehash the facts as I understood them.
Oscar heard a sound while on the balcony. He then went to his bed to get a gun loaded with soft tipped 'zombie-stopper' bullets.
Zombie stopper bullets are designed to disintegrate into hundreds of fragments upon impact with flesh, tearing a huge hole out of the victim's internals. They are rarely survivable. Any gun enthusiast knows that. Oscar seems to have been an above average gun enthusiast.
Oscar then went to to the bathroom. He stood at the door shouting at whoever was inside that he had a gun. He then claims that, while having made his way from the balcony, it was only when he was standing at the bathroom door that he got such a fright that he accidentally fired his gun, not once, but four times into the bathroom. He definitely was not startled by the door opening because it was locked from inside.
According to the judge all of Oscar's movements were an accident. Even the keeping of a gun loaded with zombie-stopper bullets was an accident. That alone signals an intention to kill whoever he fired his gun at long before there was a reason to fire at anyone.
Moreover, why did he not get a fright while he was at the balcony or by the bed? Why did he not fire warning shots while at the bed?
Oscar knew there was someone in the bathroom. Oscar knew his gun was loaded with zombie-stopper bullets. Oscar knew that those bullets are not survivable. He had fired them at water melons, with much delight at the result. Oscar's set up, long before he fired into the bathroom, long before he had a victim, signals an intention to kill.
I think there are only three facts that swayed the judge in this case. They are called retch, sob and vomit. Those are the facts that went straight to the judge's heart, not necessarily her mind.
I am not saying Oscar was acting. However he sure made a sorry sight sitting all alone in the dock with a green bucket next to him crying bucket-loads of tears. Any soft hearted person would have wanted to give him a smooch, slap him on the wrist and tell him not to be a naughty boy again.
He is lucky I was not sitting behind that bench. With my heart made of Mutoko granite, I would have abandoned all court decorum, got up, went over, gave him some nice treatment that would have left his ears ringing, before telling him to shut the what-what up in a voice loud enough to be heard in my home town of Chivhu.
Needless to say, it is my firmly held opinion that this pathetic display had more to do with feeling sorry for oneself than regret.
Then comes the little speech by Oscar's uncle after the verdict. The family, he said, were very grateful to Judge Masipa. Carefully note that he did not mention South Africa's justice system, but the judge personally. On that score he is right. It was not the justice system that saved Oscar from a murder verdict, but the judge.
He then added that the family would like to show their gratitude to the judge. May I ask, how? I ask because such language is also used in corrupt situations. Such as when offering a palm greaser type of gratitude.
Corrupt people do not say, I am going to pay you a bribe. They use seemingly benign language like, I am going to thank you. I will show you my gratitude. We can work together on this. Perhaps the most popular in South Africa being, let's make a plan.
I do not know about other people, but in my mind Oscar's uncle's language immediately raised a huge red banner. Why that choice of language? He is the best person to explain, but the picture it created in my mind is surely not a good one for him. After using such language, 'clever' is not one of the words I would tick if asked to describe him.
I just hope, someone is going to flog this obstinate ass and get it to move in the right direction. A justice system is primarily supposed to protect and reassure society that the truth and fairness will prevail in the long run.
In this case there were suggestions that domestic violence was involved. It also happened in the same month that a brute, or set of brutes, disembowelled a woman, Anene Booysens, in the Western cape.
I do not think the verdict is particularly consoling for victims of domestic violence. It might even be an encouragement rather than a deterrent to potential offenders.
The state's case was that Oscar was abusing Reeva when he killed her. His acquittal on all charges that involved intent, may be interpreted by some as meaning that he was clever enough to get away with it. Others might try to be clever too and get away with, excuse the pun, murder.
No comments:
Post a Comment