National 15.9.2016 04:19 pm

NPA to appeal Pistorius’ sentence

FILE PICTURE: Oscar Pistorius during his sentencing hearing at the North Gauteng High Court in Pretoria on October 21, 2014. Picture: AFP

FILE PICTURE: Oscar Pistorius during his sentencing hearing at the North Gauteng High Court in Pretoria on October 21, 2014. Picture: AFP

The NPA filed a petition with the North Gauteng High Court in Pretoria as a matter of formality and will file the application directly with the SCA on Friday.

The National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) confirmed it would petition the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) for leave to appeal against former Olympic athlete Oscar Pistorius’ six-year sentence for murdering his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp.

NPA spokesperson Luvuyo Mfaku said they had on Thursday filed a petition with the North Gauteng High Court in Pretoria as a matter of formality and would file the application directly with the SCA on Friday.

Judge Thokozile Masipa last month dismissed the state’s application for leave to appeal against the six-year jail sentence she imposed on Pistorius on July 6 after the SCA overturned Pistorius’ conviction on a charge of culpable homicide and ruled that he must be re-sentenced for murder.

Judge Thokozile Masipa is seen during the appeal against the sentence of paralympic athlete Oscar Pistorius at the High Court in Pretoria, Tuesday, 9 December 2014. Pistorius is serving a five year jail sentence for shooting his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp dead in February 2013. Picture: Kim Ludbrook/EPA/Pool

Judge Thokozile Masipa is seen during the appeal against the sentence of paralympic athlete Oscar Pistorius at the High Court in Pretoria, Tuesday, 9 December 2014.Picture: Kim Ludbrook/EPA/Pool

The state wanted to take the case to the SCA, arguing the sentence was too lenient, was an injustice, and had the potential of bringing the administration of justice into disrepute, but Judge Masipa said she did not believe another court would come to a different conclusion.

Pistorius was initially sentenced to five years’ imprisonment in terms of Section 276(1)(i) of the Criminal Procedure Act for the Valentine’s Day killing of his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp in 2013, who died after he fired four shots into the locked toilet door behind which she was standing, in the belief that he was shooting at an intruder.

ALSO READ >> State denied leave to appeal against Oscar sentence

He was released under correctional supervision after serving just under a year of his sentence, but the SCA in December referred his case back to Judge Masipa after finding him guilty of murder, and he was in July sent back to prison for another six years. The NPA maintained in its previous bid to appeal that the sentence was disproportionate to the crime of murder, had resulted in an injustice and had the potential to bring the administration of justice into disrepute.

They maintained the appeal was necessary to clarify the principles of sentencing, particularly in crime categories for which there were prescribed minimum sentences ordained by legislation, notwithstanding the fact that a judicial officer had a discretion to deviate from the prescribed sentences.

FILE PICTURE: Reeva Steenkamp was shot and killed by her famous athlete boyfriend Oscar Pistorius at his home, on Valentines Day in 2013.

FILE PICTURE: Reeva Steenkamp was shot and killed by her famous athlete boyfriend Oscar Pistorius at his home, on Valentines Day in 2013.

The state argued during the trial that Pistorius had still not accepted responsibility for what he did and asked for a 15-year jail term. Judge Masipa found that there were substantial and compelling reasons to deviate from the prescribed minimum sentence, including the athlete’s claim that he believed he was shooting at an intruder, that he was on his stumps and vulnerable at the time and the public’s incorrect public perception that an argument had preceded the shooting.

ALSO READ >> Marikana and Oscar show the two worlds we live in

The six-year sentence she imposed on Pistorius was widely criticised as shockingly light by certain sections of the legal fraternity as well as members of the public.

poll

today in print