Oscar Pistorius should serve three years of house arrest and community service for the negligent killing of his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp, a social worker said yesterday at the first day of the athlete's sentencing.
In a trial that has gripped millions, the Paralympian was cleared last month of murder but convicted of culpable homicide for the shooting of the 29- year- old law graduate and model on Valentine’s Day in 2013.
Correctional services social worker Joel Maringa told the court convictions of culpable homicide often did not result in a jail term. He said Pistorius was a "co-operative" person who should be sentenced to three years of "correctional supervision", which would mean the athlete would have to spend a portion of the day at home.
“The accused will benefit from correctional supervision,” Mr Maringa said, adding that this would give him an “opportunity to restructure and modify his behaviour”.
“We are basically not saying that he should be destroyed because he will still be coming back into the community.”
Mr Maringa also said Pistorius should carry out community service, such as sweeping the streets outside museums in Pretoria. This would allow him to train and compete in athletics meetings again.
But state prosecutor Gerrie Nel, pushing for a lengthy prison sentence, described Mr Maringa's suggestions as "shockingly inappropriate" and said they would amount to "no sentence". He questioned whether Mr Maringa understood the seriousness of Pistorius's crime.
In the public gallery Steenkamp’s father Barry held his head in his hands as Mr Maringa testified, while her friends shook their heads in consternation.
Hear arguments
Judge Thokozile Masipa will hear arguments from the prosecution and the defence, and from psychological and probation experts, before deciding on sentencing.
Earlier the court heard from Pistorius’s psychologist Dr Lore Hartzenberg, who testified that she began counselling Pistorius soon after the killing.
Dr Hartzenberg said the double-amputee athlete had sometimes cried, retched, perspired and paced up and down during sessions in which she tried to assist him. “Some of the sessions were just him weeping and crying and me holding him,” she said. “His opportunity for healing was destroyed by the malevolent media reports and public comments.”
Dr Hartzenberg described the athlete as a caring, remorseful person who was suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder. “We are left with a broken man who has lost everything,” she said.
He had lost Steenkamp, his moral and professional reputation, many of his friends, his career and his financial independence, she added. “On an emotional level his self-perception and self-worth have been damaged. He is unlikely to recover from the shooting incident. Mr Pistorius experienced himself as utterly worthless.”
Dr Hartzenberg told the court Pistorius would never escape images from the night of the incident. “The flashbacks and the re-experiencing of the shooting will be mental images that he will carry with him,” she said. “[They] will be part of his life until such time that healing has taken place.”
Mr Nel criticised her findings, saying Pistorius would likely still have the chance to rebuild his life and possibly continue his career.
Still alive
“We are now dealing with a broken man, but he is still alive,” the prosecutor said. He questioned the psychologist about what she knew about Steenkamp. “Do you know anything about her dreams, what she wanted to do in life?”
Mr Nel also asked the psychologist about Steenkamp’s family. “Would you not expect a broken family?” he asked, saying Steenkamp’s father, Barry, had suffered a stroke as a result of the killing of his daughter, and Steenkamp’s mother had collapsed when she learned of her daughter’s death.
Mr Nel is due to call at least two of his own witnesses, as the state pushes for a jail sentence that could be up to 15 years.
Judge Masipa ruled last month that prosecutors had failed to prove Pistorius’s intent to kill when he fired four 9mm bullets through the door of a toilet at his home in what he said was the mistaken belief an intruder was hiding behind it.
A murder conviction would have almost certainly carried a jail sentence. Culpable homicide, equivalent to manslaughter, can be punished by anything from 15 years in jail to a suspended sentence or community service.
A non-custodial sentence would be likely to spark public anger. Mildred Lekalakala, a member of the women’s league of the governing African National Congress, told Reuters: “At the end of the day a young lady was killed and someone should pay for it.”
The state could yet decide to appeal the culpable homicide verdict in pursuit of a murder conviction. – (Guardian service)