The Kind of Murder Committed by Pistorius - Case Study Example

HOMICIDE CASE STUDY Introduction Homicide can be defined as the killing of a person by another. It is however in a broader scope compared to murder and as such murder could qualify to be a form of homicide (Ouimet, 2012). Therefore, not all homicides may constitute acts of criminality and are thus regarded excusable or warranted. This may be due to self-defense or authorization by law. Criminal homicide may be by accident or intended murder. As such the mental state of the executor and the crime extent determine the crimes in homicide. Criminal homicides may also include the manslaughters. This paper, therefore, seeks to describe the characteristics of the criminal incident of Oscar Pistorius the amputee athlete who killed his girlfriend, Reeva Steenkamp in 2013. Further, it will discuss more about this type of crime in terms of its prevalence, trends and costs. Additionally, the paper will discuss three theories that include: rational choice theory, trait theory, social structure theory in relation to this kind of homicide incident. Finally the paper will provide a brief conclusion on the suitable theory that most explains Pistorius’ Murder, discuss the implications of the theory for criminal justice policy, and what the criminal justice system should do to try to address the kind of murder committed by Pistorius. Discussion The criminal incident of focus is that of Oscar Pistorius, the amputee athlete who killed his girlfriend, Reeva Steenkamp in 2013. Harvey (2015) espouses that, in the month of February 2013, Pistorius, shot and killed Steenkamp in a toilet cubicle that was locked in Pretoria, South Africa. According to him, he shot the 28-year-old girlfriend believing she was an intruder. He was then arrested the next day, and the legal procedure ensued. In a case classified as a homicide, on September 12, 2014, Pistorius was found guilty of culpable homicide and sentenced to a maximum of five years in prison. Smit, de Jong, & Bijleveld, (2012) discuses: culpable homicide as existing in various jurisdictions of countries in the commonwealth and involves the illegal murder of an individual either intentionally or without the intention depending on the definition of the offence by the given jurisdiction. It adds that, as a cause of premature deaths globally, the evidence around this incident are more often scarce or hampered due to the missing information that characterizes the relationship between the victim and offender. As of 2013, 13.5% of homicides that took place were committed by partners in an intimate relationship. Of this, the proportion of female homicides was six times higher than that of male homicides. About one in every seven homicides that occur globally is perpetrated by partners in an intimate relationship. They often occur in relationships that have been casualties of abuse for a long time. The homicide risks, however, can be reduced through strategies that involve an increased investment in the violence prevention by intimate partners. Rational choice theory involves or adopts the belief that a person is a reasoning actor and as such weighs the means and ends in an issue as well as its costs and benefits consequently making rational choices (Akers, 2013). The method assists in thinking to avert situational crime. With the understanding that crime is designed to meet the common place of the offender’s needs for certain things like money, status or sex among others, this method assumes that crime is, therefore, a purposive behavior meant to enable achievement of these excitement and sort of interests based on personal choices and ability. (Akers, (2013) explains that the theory holds the assumptions that the offender has an individualistic perception of them; they want to make the most of their goal, and they have self-interest. Therefore, this theory argues that individuals are rational actors with end calculations in a situation and that the behavior they chose is based on the end calculations. The calculations are thus from a cost-benefit analysis by an individual and the drive to maximize their goals. However, these choices can be controlled by a person’s understanding of the dire consequences that would follow their actions and thus a system of laws can be used by a state to maintain law and order (Roach, 2014). Therefore, the ability of the laws to control is determined by the certainty and severity of the after punishment for breaking the law. In the case of Pistorius culpable homicide, the rational choice theory is useful in determining the causality of the murder. We can use this theory to analyze the intent of Pistorius to shoot his girlfriend, the rationale for this criminal action, and his end calculations given the means. This theory therefore gives an understanding of the underlying reasons why Pistorius would kill the 28-year-old Steenkamp through explaining the deviant and conforming social phenomenon in relation to how he made his choices influenced by his interests. As such it gives the understanding on why Pistorius would case which is a social exchange could analyzed as an economic exchange to explain why killing Steenkamp was beneficial to him. Akers, (2013) discusses: Trait theory is explained by psychologist as concerning a person’s personality. These traits are measurable and form a person’s behavior, emotions as well as thoughts. This traits differ across people and are influenced their behavior. Therefore, traits can be understood as extrovert or introvert with each individual rating differently along the spectrum. A trait is that relatively stable behavior characteristic that causes a particular individual to behave like he or she is doing. A person’s trait is thus composed of broad dispositions that make them behave in certain ways. The combination of this broad trait and their interaction makes a person behave in a certain manner unique to him and as such defines his personality. The trait theory thus gives focus on identification and measuring of these traits. These traits may be grouped broadly into three which may include: cardinal traits that dominate a person’s entire life to an extent they are known for these particular traits (Akers, 2013). They are rare and only tend to develop late in a person’s life. Second are central traits that form the basic foundation of a person’s personality. They are often used by people to describe others and may include traits like shy, intelligent; jovial among others. Third are secondary traits that could sometimes be seen to relate to a person’s attitude or preferences and will only appear in certain circumstances or situations. They include cases like a person getting anxious in front of a large crowd among other traits. In the case of Pistorius culpable homicide, this theory can help us understand the offenders’ behavior and personality in a deeper manner. For example, when he says he killed his girlfriend Steenkamp because he thought she was an intruder inside the toilet cubicle, we can use his traits to understand his reactions when confronted with fear of attack. Based on understanding Pistorius’ secondary traits, we can use it to evaluate his actions towards the girlfriend. Central traits can explain to us the likelihood of him to calculate the choice to the means. Based on understanding his cardinal traits, we can know how he behave for example whether Pistorius is a fearful person and hence his action to shoot Steenkamp. The understanding of a person’s traits is important in making a decision as to why they acted in a particular manner. This is because different traits of people define how they react or respond to situations. Therefore a clear understanding of the personality traits of Steenkamp murderer, Pistorius will give a lead as to whether he intended to kill her or not. Social structure theories argue that the socially disadvantaged peoples position causes them to engage in criminality (Larry, 2000). It explains that frustrations, strains and disorganizations that these people meet are responsible for their involvement in crime. It adds that there is the likelihood of existence of more than just frustration as a factor for engagement of a person in crime. This theory focuses on the relationship between the social structure and criminal behaviors. Larry, (2000) adds that, an understanding of a person’s interactions with peers, family, and work dynamics may give a lead towards understanding why they involve in criminal activities. Existence of systemic barriers to individual’s socio-economic growth may are likely causes of the rise in crime. Ouimet, (2012) discuss that, under the social structure theory is the strain theory that talks about crime as a function between peoples needs to meet their economic goals and the calculated means towards it. Therefore the rebellion or innovative way that a person uses to get what goal they had achieved id the means and as such can be the criminal action. Social disorganization theory also relates crime rates to the neighborhood characteristics of a place. Poverty, population turnover and weak social controls come to play here. The theory of social structure may not give an explanation to the murder of Reeva Steenkamp. Both of these celebrities had a high social status. Reeva Steenkamp was a model who worked for Toyota, Zui among other companies. She was not economically disadvantaged. Pistorius, on the other hand, is a successful athlete, even though he is an amputee. He makes a lot of money fro his sporting talent. As a well-known olympian with an estimated wealth of five million dollars. Was Pistorius reacting to a disadvantaged social class? No, he was and is still rich. In my view, the trait theory most explains Pistorius Culpable murder. The implication of the trait theory for criminal justice policy is two-fold. It might lead to a criminal being acquitted, or his charges becoming lessened and as such promotes crime based on a persons trait. Secondly it has the effect of denying the victim of crime justice. Therefore criminal justice system should formulate laws that take into consideration the trait aspect and its relation to criminality (Roach, 2014). Laws that are made should not provide excuses for someones trait in crime. Reference Akers, R. L. (2013). Criminological theories: Introduction and evaluation. Routledge. Harvey, C. (2015). What’s disability got to do with it? Changing constructions of Oscar Pistorius before and after the death of Reeva Steenkamp. Disability & Society, (ahead-of-print), 1-6 Larry J. Siegel, (2000). From Criminology: Social Structure Theories See NCJ-185178. NCJRS Abstract , 3. Ouimet, M. (2012). A World of Homicides The Effect of Economic Development, Income Inequality, and Excess Infant Mortality on the Homicide Rate for 165 Countries in 2010. Homicide Studies, 16(3), 238-258. Roach, J. (2014). The Devil and the Detail. Local Analysis of Homicide for Investigators and Policy Makers. Journal of Homicide and Major Incident Investigation, 9(1), 86-102. Smit, P. R., de Jong, R. R., & Bijleveld, C. C. (2012). Homicide data in Europe: definitions, sources, and statistics. In Handbook of European homicide research (pp. 5-23). Springer New York. Read More