Pretoria - Oscar Pistorius is still grieving for his girlfriend, Reeva Steenkamp, and has lost his sense of self - and he may never recover.
This was according to his personal psychologist, who took the stand during his sentencing proceedings in the High Court on Monday.
Pistorius was convicted of the culpable homicide of Reeva Steenkamp in September, after he shot and killed her through a locked bathroom door at his Pretoria home on a housing estate on Valentine's Day in 2013.
The arguments that will help Judge Thokozile Masipa decide on Pistorius's sentence for the crime began on Monday.
The defence has indicated it will call four witnesses, including a member of the Department of Correctional Services, with the State claiming it may also have more than one witness set to testify.
Defence advocate Barry Roux called Pistorius's personal psychologist, Dr Löre Hartzenberg, to begin his argument in mitigation.
She told the court that at the outset of the trial, she did not want to get involved in the merits of the trial because she was Pistorius's therapist. However, she said she was recently approached by the defence to write a report regarding her observations.
She met Pistorius on February 23, 2013, some days after Steenkamp's death, and has treated him ever since, sometimes daily, weekly or monthly.
Initially, the sessions were very difficult because the athlete was so emotional.
In her report, Hartzenberg said her work in trauma therapy was what brought Pistorius to her.
Pistorius and Hartzenberg had an agreement from the outset she would not be part of the trial, but he later gave consent for her to give her professional observations in public.
Initially, Pistorius suffered from an acute stress reaction, post-traumatic stress disorder and depression. She referred him to a psychiatrist as well.
Pistorius presented feelings of remorse and guilt that would overwhelm him in some sessions, and would sometimes lead to weeping, perspiring and retching. He was particularly upset at not being able to attend Steenkamp's funeral and memorial, which could have acted as some closure for him.
She described Pistorius's healing process as incomplete, and he would loop back in the stages of grief because he was deprived of the opportunity to properly mourn Steenkamp.
Hartzenberg said his anxiety had an impact on his day-to-day functioning, including eating and sleeping.
He was distressed he couldn't make contact with the Steenkamp family because they opted not to meet with him.
She said the extreme media coverage of the case and experts often portraying him in a negative light were accompanied by abuse on social networks. This affected his self-confidence and ability to heal emotionally and his own “identity of self”, according to the doctor.
When he lost his mutual friends he had with Steenkamp when he needed support most, this was a huge blow to him.
He felt “utterly worthless, devastated and guilt-ridden”.
As a athlete and celebrity, he had the opportunity to affect and inspire other disabled people, but now feels he has lost his voice.
She said she had never found Pistorius to be anything other than respectful and polite, though occasionally showing irritation and frustration at his situation.
She said he was sometimes suspicious and hypervigilant, but this was normal in someone suffering from post traumatic stress disorder. According to Hartzenberg, without his family, friends and deep faith in God, he would not have been able to cope with his very public ordeal.
She said he was “a broken man who has lost everything”, his friends, career and self-worth. She added he was unlikely to ever fully recover.
In his cross-examination, Prosecutor Gerrie Nel told Hartzenberg that even though Pistorius had been broken, the Steenkamp family were more so.
He said that Steenkamp's mother, June, was prone to fits of crying and her father, Barry had a stroke because of the ordeal.
He said Pistorius still had the opportunity to take his life forward and continue his career, unlike Steenkamp.
However, the doctor disagreed, saying Pistorius's career was irreparably damaged.
Nel asked if Pistorius had ever mentioned continuing his career in their sessions. Hartzenberg said this was not what was discussed, but could not explain why, as a trauma counsellor, she had not discussed his future to give him hope.
Nel argued that Pistorius had begun training again, but Hartzenberg said for Pistorius, he hadn't been able to visualise his career as an athlete.
He had, at some point, expressed a desire to help the children at his uncle's school in Mozambique, but generally did not talk about his career.
Nel then attacked the psychologist's analysis that Pistorius had “lost” his love relationship, saying that because the athlete was still alive, he could one day love again.
He said her report should have been more balanced and taken into account how society would feel about Pistorius's fate.
He also attacked Hartzenberg's failure as a professional to study Judge Masipa's judgment prior to writing her report.
She responded by saying she was not on the stand to make comments on the merits of the case but rather to provide her impressions of Pistorius.
She admitted to discussing the judgment with Pistorius during one of her recent sessions, but said they never discussed whether Pistorius believed he fired on Steenkamp intentionally or not.
Hartzenberg said Pistorius's version of events has never changed in all the time she had been treating him.
Nel asked about Pistorius'srelationship with his ex-girlfriend and State witness, Samantha Taylor.
But Hartzenberg said while she knew of the relationship, they never really discussed it.
Nel said Taylor and her mother had claimed they told the athlete at some point in the relationship to get psychological help, but Hartzenberg was unaware of this.
He then asked why Pistorius had chosen to go out with his friends to a nightclub in recent months, despite his numerous disorders and how he thought the public perceived him.
Hartzenberg said this could have been a sort of escape or an impulsive decision because of his PTSD, and wasn't necessarily abnormal.
However, Nel argued that with a therapist and his family closely watching over him, it was odd that he would make such a choice.
Nel asked Hartzenberg if Pistorius was already involved in another relationship, as some media reports had indicated.
But the psychologist said she wasn't aware of this.
Nel argued it was very odd that the athlete's therapist had not taken an interest in his possible future relationships. She said that at no point had Pistorius brought up a new relationship, and she could only discuss issues that he himself wanted to discuss.
She did admit that if a new partner had helped with his emotional development, it would be important to discuss it, but that it never came up despite the fact she had seen the media reports indicating the alleged relationship.
Nel accused Hartzenberg of avoiding questions about why she hadn't acknowledged something so important in her patient's life.
He then moved onto an incident where Pistorius became highly emotional on the stand during his testimony and that she too began crying in court.
He asked about Hartzenberg's qualifications as an educational psychologist, and whether any "learning or development" had taken place with the Pistorius case.
However, Hartzenberg pre-empted a question about whether she was appropriate for the job of counseling the athlete by saying she had earned her doctorate through the study of trauma.
Nel did say, however, that while she had been a trauma and grief counselor, this was not the focus of her training as an educational psychologist.
The Star