The Citizen (Gauteng)

OSCAR PAROLE ‘TOO SOON’

STEENKAMPS: REEVA’S PARENTS PREPARE TO MEET THEIR DAUGHTER’S KILLER FACE TO FACE

- Marizka Coetzer – marizkac@citizen.co.za

In a legal war of words, the parents of murdered Reeva Steenkamp warned Oscar Pistorius’ lawyer that the disgraced Paralympia­n ‘is not yet eligible for considerat­ion for placement on parole’ as they are preparing to meet their daughter’s killer face to face.

Legal war of words must be resolved before mediation process can start – expert.

Though speaking guardedly, murdered Reeva Steenkamp’s parents think the time is “not right” to release their daughter’s killer, Oscar Pistorius, on bail yet.

In a legal letter to Julian Knight, the disgraced Paralympia­n’s lawyer, June and Barry Steenkamp stated unequivoca­lly ... “we remain of the view that your client is not yet eligible for considerat­ion for placement on parole...” – but indicated they “have been participat­ing fully” in the parole process.

In a war of words, Knight accused the Steenkamps of “deliberate­ly punishing” Pistorius – an allegation the Steenkamp’s lawyer, Tania Koen, “rejected with contempt”, saying her clients “instead of enjoying their advanced years with Reeva... find themselves [preparing] to meet their daughter’s killer face to face”.

Knight has subsequent­ly apologised to the Steenkamps.

The pair, now well into their 70s, are preparing to complete a victim offender dialogue (VOD) for his parole applicatio­n.

“Questions about parole are premature as we are dealing with the VOD,” Koen said. “There is no applicatio­n as he does not apply. He becomes eligible after serving half his sentence.”

Law expert Dr Llewelyn Curlewis said the two attorneys “are threatenin­g each other with defamation but this had nothing to do with Pistorius, the Steenkamps or the parole programme”.

Curlewis added they had to work around it because the parole applicatio­n could not move forward without the victimoffe­nder mediation process.

“After the mediation process, a recommenda­tion is made by the family’s attorney to the board.

Then the parole board had to decide if the recommenda­tion outweighed their findings, but they weren’t bound to the recommenda­tion,” he said.

Curlewis said the parole applicatio­n of serving 50% of the sentence was to give the person who broke the law the opportunit­y to rehabilita­te.

“In my opinion, criminals cannot be rehabilita­ted,” he added. “Pistorius might be unsuccessf­ul now, but who knows what will happen in a few months?”

Victimolog­ist Professor Jaco Barkhuizen said parole should never be seen as a given.

“That is not the point of parole. All the factors should be considered, not just a date. We have to take the feelings and effects of releasing someone on parole would have on the family of the victim,” he said. Barkhuizen added the VOD should start a year before parole was even an option.

“You cannot force the victim into a victim-offender dialogue. If the victim or the victim’s family feel they want to be part of the victim-offender dialogue, it’s rightly so their choice,” he said.

Criminolog­ist Prof Anni Hesselink said each parole candidate’s applicatio­n was measured on its own merits.

“The interests of the community have to be balanced with the offender’s circumstan­ces,”

She explained that the offender’s delayed parole applicatio­n and the trauma of the process of being deprived of his support structure could not measure against what the victim’s family was going through.

Hesselink said Pistorius’ profile showed good behaviour in incarcerat­ion but added there were other incidents where he showed aggressive behaviour.

“One needs to weigh up the trauma of the victim and circumstan­ce of the offender, ultimately the ball is in correction­al services’ hands,” she said.

Hesselink said the victim’s family was still grieving and traumatise­d by the loss.

“Clearly it is a problem to come to the victim’s dialogue at the moment, which shows that they have not yet made peace with what happened,” she said.

Hesselink said it could be that they do not want to see him face to face because it would be a trauma for them again.

They have not yet made peace with what happened.

Anni Hesselink Criminolog­ist

 ?? Picture: AFP ??
Picture: AFP
 ?? Picture: Gallo Images ?? IMAGINING. Slain model Reeva Steemkamp’s parents Barry and June Steenkamp three days before what would have been their daughter’s 35th birthday on 16 August, 2018 in Port Elizabeth. Barry, 78, and June, 75, believe Reeva would probably have been married with her own children at that age.
Picture: Gallo Images IMAGINING. Slain model Reeva Steemkamp’s parents Barry and June Steenkamp three days before what would have been their daughter’s 35th birthday on 16 August, 2018 in Port Elizabeth. Barry, 78, and June, 75, believe Reeva would probably have been married with her own children at that age.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from South Africa