Ukraine in Arabic | South Africa waits for a punishment for Pistorius
KYIV/Ukraine in Arabic/ Oscar Pistorius is a “broken man” after killing his girlfriend because he lost the woman he loved as well as his reputation, friends, income and sense of self-worth, a psychologist has told his sentencing hearing.
It was the trial that had everything: a love story, a sporting hero who overcame disability to star at the Olympics, a photogenic model girlfriend and a shocking Valentine’s Day killing.
Millions of South Africans will tune in on Monday to see whether Oscar Pistorius will be jailed after his conviction for culpable homicide. The athlete faces a sentence of up to 15 years, although as a first-time offender who the court accepted showed genuine remorse after shooting Reeva Steenkamp, he could be treated leniently by Judge Thokozile Masipa.
Masipa caused an outcry last month when she found the athlete not guilty of murder for shooting his girlfriend four times through a locked bathroom door, and an impact statement from her parents, expected to be read out at the four-day hearing, is likely to inflame emotions.
The “trial of the century”, which began in March, dominated the media, with Pistorius, prosecutor Gerrie Nel and defense counsel Barry Roux knocking President Jacob Zuma and even a general election off the front pages. It was obsession that cut across class, gender and race.
“I’m amazed it’s become a cultural reference point,” said Justice Malala, a political broadcaster and columnist. “You don’t need an explainer when you talk about Oscar. You say, ‘I put it to you’ and people know you mean Barry Roux. They know who Gerrie Nel is.”
The flames were fanned when a judge ruled that, for the first time, the trial could be broadcast live on television, although witnesses could choose to remain off camera so only their voices were heard. Tiny cameras in unobtrusive white cases were installed in the wood-paneled court in Pretoria at great expense.
One South African broadcaster launched a 24-hour TV channel offering gavel-to-gavel coverage, replays and studio analysis. It was the brainchild of producer George Mazarakis. “It was just such momentous story and a story and a story on so many levels,” he explained. “Here’s this titan of a human being, part man, part machine, almost a mythical being, and then he has this fall from grace. She was this gorgeous creature. It came across to me this is a Greek tragedy playing out with two lives indelibly damaged. It was irresistible.”
Mazarakis said the channel was hugely popular, although he was unwilling to disclose viewing figures, and lack of advertising meant it did not make money. “Advertisers didn’t want to be part of something negative like a murder trial but they missed the point of the social glue this was creating. It appealed to all South Africans: it hasn’t been a particular sector at all. Everyone had an opinion and found it fascinating across the board. He represented us as a country and we mustn’t forget that. We felt this was a tragedy that affected us as a nation.”
For many the trial became irresistible viewing at home or in the office. Roger Dixon, a defense witness, recalled: “Some people were glued morning, noon and night. It came close to the lure of a soap opera or Big Brother or MasterChef – what’s going to happen next? It’s people living vicariously. They don’t have much going on in their own lives so they watch others.”
Dixon said the cameras were intrusive and led to him being publicly ridiculed.
At the end of his case, Roux said a number of witnesses simply refused to testify because “they didn’t want their voices all over the world,” – paving the way for a possible appeal. A source close to Pistorius complained that it had been a media trial: “You’ve got to be a halfwit to think it’s a fair trial.”
But defenders of the TV coverage argue that it opened South Africa’s courts to the public as never before. Millions who had never before experienced a criminal trial learned about the workings of the judicial system and what it takes to be a witness. Young people may have been inspired to study law. It was perhaps the ultimate exercise in transparent justice.
Education or entertainment, or both? Mazarakis insisted: “I don’t think it was voyeuristic at all. Most South Africans didn’t know how the legal system worked and hadn’t been in a court. They learned all of that. In fact universities have had to up the pass rate for admissions to law school because there has been such an upsurge of applications.”
Johan Burger, a former police officer, now a senior researcher at the Institute for Security Studies in Pretoria, said: “On the one hand, there’s always a danger of a trial such as this becoming a circus in that everybody performs for the media. It’s less about the case than how I as a person am seen. After what happened with the O J Simpson trial in the US, I was worried we would see a repeat.
“But at the same time it’s educational. There are legal terms that ordinary people are completely unfamiliar with. There are the ways a court functions. People are now a lot more aware of the difficulties of prosecuting someone, and in future if they witness a crime they may be aware of what they’re observing, bearing in mind what questions the witnesses were asked.”
Many comparisons have been made to the 1995 Simpson trial, but there was one crucial difference: social media. From the moment Pistorius walked into court to apply for bail in February last year, Twitter went wild. Journalist Barry Bateman gained 139,000 followers in a week and is co-authoring a book about the case.
Emma Sadleir, a media law consultant, had a slot on the 24-hour trial channel answering viewer’ questions via social media. She reflected: “People asked the most rudimentary questions: where’s the jury? Who is that sitting next to the judge? For me it was incredible to see people’s reactions to what was going on, to see justice being done. Before this they’d only see it in Hollywood movies.”
Juries were abolished in South Africa in the 1960s and so there was no risk of jurors being swayed by the cacophony of voices. Instead it was a free-for-all for journalists, pundits and anyone with an opinion and internet connection. There was plenty of humor, with spoof Twitter accounts and rap songs featuring Nel and Roux. There were also the “Pistorians”, an international, mainly female group who fiercely champion the athlete and often lash out at his critics.
Sadleir, co-author of Don’t Film Yourself Having Sex and Other Legal Advice For the Age of Social Media, was among those who felt their wrath. “The trial has been an illustration of everything good about social media and an illustration of everything bad about social media,” she said. “It was one of the most seminal moments in our legal history. As an educational thing it has been absolutely brilliant. It is a natural extension of open justice and will set a precedent.”
Twenty years after apartheid, South Africa remains a notoriously racialized society, not least on the sports field: football is still dominated by black people, whereas rugby is primarily white. The Pistorius case, however, appears to transcend demographics, as compelling as the sensational murder trials that thrilled Victorian newspaper readers.
Cassandra Fani, 24, a black former athlete who trained with Pistorius and supported him in court, said: “Everyone was talking about it. My friends, most of whom are black, were talking about it. He’s a public figure who did well at the Olympics, so everyone is involved. It wasn’t just the white part of South Africa but South Africa as a whole.”
Most perpetrators and victims of crime in South Africa are black. The Pistorius trial inverted this, which might be one reason for its morbid fascination, according to Eusebius McKaiser, an author and radio talk show host. “The unlikely victim and unlikely accused is an element,” he said. “Many black South Africans were probably bemused that here you have a white boy who went to Pretoria boy’s high school, came from a middle-class family, was a goody two-shoes and he killed his girlfriend, something we usually associate with a black thug in a township. It’s very unexpected and so there’s a voyeurism there.”
