Pretoria - Oscar Pistorius is also a “victim”, after losing the love of his life, being left a pauper after losing all forms of income, and being attacked by the media.
This was the basis of defence advocate Barry Roux's final arguments in Pistorius's sentencing, in a bid to convince Judge Thokozile Masipa to be lenient with his client.
Pistorius was found guilty of culpable homicide for shooting his girlfriend, Reeva Steenkamp, last year. Throughout the week, the defence has been calling for a sentence of correctional supervision, also known as house arrest.
Roux told the High Court in Pretoria on Friday morning that it was beyond any argument that the loss of human life in this case is impossible to ignore. However, he said that understanding the context of such a tragic event should help determine the consequences for Pistorius.
He wanted to assure the court that Pistorius had taken responsibility for his actions.
Roux said that on the night of the shooting, Pistorius genuinely believed an intruder had entered his home and that he and Steenkamp's lives were in danger.
He said he had no doubt the State would present numerous cases that indicated a harsh sentence as a deterrent or for reasons of retribution.
Roux noted that while the case of Molemo “Jub Jub” Maarohanye had been brought up during sentencing, it was an entirely different matter. Maarohanye was convicted of culpable homicide for killing four teenagers in a drug-fuelled street race in 2010.
He said Pistorius, unlike Maarohanye, had not acted unlawfully intentionally.
The advocate reiterated, based on the numerous psychological expert testimony, that Pistorius's actions were dominated by vulnerability and anxiety.
He brought up the concept of “ubuntu” or human kindness, and an example of a man stealing a goat from another man. By the concept of ubuntu, the man should either give the goat back or if he can't, help benefit society and the victims in some other way.
This was more representative of “restorative justice”, according to Roux.
The test of such justice is taking into account what is in the best interest of society, and that while crime hurts, justice must heal.
He acknowledged that society wanted Pistorius to be imprisoned for his negligence, but insisted this wasn't what was best for society.
He said at first there was an accused and a victim, but shortly after, Pistorius also became a victim.
Roux said that upon being arrested for pre-meditated murder, the investigating officer provided false evidence - as acknowledged by the court.
He said not a single witness refuted how Pistorius felt about his relationship with Steenkamp, and the sincere emotions he felt upon killing her.
Roux said these extreme emotions were confirmed by numerous psychologists and psychiatrists who examined the athlete.
He said at no point did Pistorius believe his girlfriend was behind the bathroom door on which he fired.
He brought up how just after the shooting, journalists and those on social media accused him falsely of crushing Steenkamp's head with a cricket bat, that he was under the influence of steroids and that he had taken acting lessons to appear more sincere on the stand, among other allegations.
He said that these accusations exacerbated his emotions after having already lost everything. For society, all that was left was an alleged “cold blooded killer”.
Roux said Pistorius has no more assets and can no longer pay for legal fees.
He went on to say that he was not trying to disregard the consequences of what happened to Steenkamp, but that when looking at other comparable cases, the courts were able to avoid handing out prison sentences.
He detailed another case where a home owner believed a robber was in his house, and fired upon his own wife. Roux said that the State and the accused came to an agreement that the perpetrator was sentenced to eight years in prison that were wholly suspended, and this was considered totally just.
He said Pistorius had been denigrated, ridiculed, wrongfully accused in terms of his behaviour and this was already some of the consequences of his crime, knowing the whole world was perpetually listening to his emotions.
In his heads of argument, Roux argued that prison sentences should be a last resort, and that there needed to be unique consequences for each varying individual involved in a crime.
He noted that even Steenkamp's parents were remaining neutral in terms of sentencing, as based on a press statement the family lawyer released earlier this week.
While Roux said he couldn't begin to understand their pain, it was also horrifying for Pistorius to realise he'd killed someone so close to him.
He said there was “permanent, excruciating pain” that would never leave the athlete's psyche.
Roux then moved onto Pistorius's extensive charity work, and how even though as a star athlete he was meant to engage in such philanthropy, the athlete's enjoyment of this work was evident and he desperately wanted to open up his own charity foundation.
He referenced the revelation this week that Pistorius had been giving monthly payments to Steenkamp's parents, saying it was not about the money, but more an act of sympathy.
“He wants to show there's compassion, there's emotion, there's hurt. He wants to make good as far as possible,” said Roux.
The lawyer said it was easy for an accused to apologise after he's been convicted, but Pistorius had shown remorse from the night of the incident and throughout the last 18 months.
He said jail would not be the best way to deal with Pistorius's post-traumatic stress disorder or his disability or anxiety.
Roux then argued against the testimony of State witness, acting director of the acting National Director of the Department of Correctional Services, Moleko Zac Modise.
He said Modise could not explain what Pistorius's exposure would be in terms of his health if placed in the hospital section in prison.
Roux believed Modise also told the court that correctional supervision processes have greatly improved, and the lawyer believed that as a punishment it was effective as it restricted the freedom of an accused.
Roux also admitted that the recommendation of one of his own witnesses of 16 hours of community service a month was clearly not enough.
Pistorius was desperate to properly apologise to the family, according to Roux, who referenced letters written by the athlete to Steenkamp's parents, Barry and June.
The Star