Oscar Pistorius parole was blocked. Is that how justice should work? - Women's Agenda

Oscar Pistorius parole was blocked. Is that how justice should work?

Oscar Pistorius parole was blocked. Is that how justice should work?

The Oscar Pistorius story keeps rolling on.

Pistorius was convicted of culpable homicide, but cleared of murder, after he “accidently” shot his girlfriend, Reeva Steenkamp, four times through a locked bathroom door, just after neighbours heard someone scream for help. 

He was sentenced to a term of 5 years in prison, but was granted parole in June this year and was set to be released on August 21.

South Africa’s Minister for Justice yesterday blocked his early release, pending a review by the parole board.

The minister said the decision to grant Pistoirus’ early release was premature and without legal basis.

The BBC is reporting that this is unlikely to do more than delay his release by a few months. Despite the minister’s claim that it was without legal basis, South African law states that any prisoner convicted of this crime can be consider for release after they’ve served one sixth of their sentence.

The Pistorius trial created worldwide headlines and debate after he claimed he shot Steenkamp because he thought she was an intruder. Considerable evidence was produced during the trial about the relationship between Pistorius and Steenkamp, describing him as controlling and jealous, and pointing to the fact that she was “scared” of him and in need of “protection”.

The court found that there was not enough evidence to prove that he had intended to kill her and therefore he could not be convicted of murder.

Criminal trials of this nature are always problematic, particularly when they generate so much publicity. The very basis of an equitable justice system is a presumption of innocence, that it is better to let a guilty person go free than to punish an innocent one. A crime like this, where it is the intent of the killer that is in dispute, not the fact that a person was killed, crashes headlong into that underlying principle of presumed innocence. Without proof beyond reasonable doubt that he intended to kill his girlfriend, he could not be convicted of murder.

While we understand a justice system that does not adhere to that most basic principle is not a justice system at all, it has been very difficult for those of who are all too aware of the number of women killed by their partners, to see the outcome of this trial as a just one.

If he was telling the truth and he did kill the woman he loved by accident, then he must be suffering terribly and prison is not the right place for him. If he was not telling the truth and he did in fact meant to shoot her, justice has not been done and release into the community is not the right place for him.

The only possible way to determine this is through a criminal trial, based on the idea that his guilt and intent must be proven beyond reasonable doubt. Trial by media or public opinion has no place here.

The place for the media and the public in this is in the wider debate about domestic violence, we need to make sure that abusive or murderous partners are not ever given reason to think that their actions will be forgotten, ignored or excused.

That’s a battle we are still fighting and regardless of what happens to Pistorius, one we cannot ever give up.  

×

Stay Smart! Get Savvy!

Get Women’s Agenda in your inbox