WINDHOEK – Many Namibians took to the social media to express their disgust or approval of Judge Thokozile Masipa’s sentence for Oscar Pistorius known as the “Blade Runner”.
Pistorius was charged with the murder of his girlfriend on Valentine’s Day last year and went on trial in March 2014.
In September he was not convicted of murder, but was found guilty of culpable homicide.
The trial was aired live on television and many followed the happenings in court. After the judge sentenced the Paralympian to only five years in jail outpourings of disappointment and cries of “this is what happens when you have money” abound.
But there are also some who believe Masipa was right in her judgement and sentence.
These were however far in the minority with almost 85 percent saying the verdict was wrong and the subsequent sentence too lenient.
Lawyer Milton Engelbrecht said that according to law Pistorius should have been convicted of murder with intent.
He based his opinion on the fact that Pistorius fired four shots into the toilet cubicle knowing someone was inside.
“He had the intent to kill because he knew there was a person in that toilet, whether he knew it was Reeva or suspected a burglar,” Engelbrecht said, adding that the judge made a mistake when she ignored that key factor.
On the sentence he said if the “correct” verdict was delivered a suitable sentence would have followed.
A local judge, who did not wish to be named as it would “be unethical” for him to comment on a fellow judge’s ruling, said he lost interest in the case when the judgment was delivered.
“I followed her facts and reasoning, but cannot see why she moved away from murder with intent to culpable homicide,” the judge remarked.
He did not want to elaborate, but said he would not be surprised if the South African National Prosecuting Authority appeals the judgement by Masipa.
Prominent human rights lawyer Norman Tjombe was also of the opinion Judge Masipa delivered the wrong verdict.
While he remained on the cautious side saying he could not give an opinion as he had not studied the court record, he did say that from what he knew of the trial it looked unreal.
On the sentence he said it is line with the verdict, but that it seems rather low since Pistorius was “negligent”.
The athlete could have shot into the ceiling or the wall to scare off whoever was in the toilet he said, adding that a 10-year sentence would have been more realistic.
Another lawyer, who also wished to remain anonymous, told New Era the whole saga reminded him of the Lazarus Shaduka trial where Shaduka was also initially cleared of murder, but he was later convicted of murder in the Supreme Court.
Shaduka remains a fugitive after he escaped into Angola just hours after his conviction.