REEVA Steenkamp's cousin has told the hearing for the sentencing of Oscar Pistorius that the athlete must "pay for what he's done" and she did not believe the sincerity of his courtroom apology to the family of the woman he killed.
Kim Martin, giving testimony on the impact of Ms Steenkamp's death on her family, said they are not seeking revenge for the fatal shooting, but Pistorius needs sufficient punishment.
At the court in Pretoria, Judge Thokozile Masipa has been listening to testimony from witnesses before deciding what punishment the double-amputee Olympian must serve after convicting him of culpable homicide for shooting Ms Steenkamp at his home last year.
Defence lawyers for Pistorius argued for a sentence of three years' house arrest. Prosecutors say the athlete and Paralympic champion should be sent to jail.
Ms Martin told the court: "We just feel, to take somebody's life, to shoot somebody behind the door who is unarmed needs sufficient punishment."
Pistorius was acquitted of murder for the killing, but found guilty of the lesser crime of negligent killing. Judge Masipa could order a suspended sentence and a fine, house arrest, or send him to jail for up to 15 years.
Defence lawyers have argued for a sentence of three years of house arrest with community service.
They called a psychologist and social workers, who said Pistorius should not go to prison because of his ongoing emotional suffering.
They said his disability as a double amputee who needs prosthetic legs would leave him vulnerable in jail.
Chief prosecutor Gerrie Nel has called suggestions of a house arrest sentence "shockingly inappropriate".
Ms Martin said many people had suffered because of Pistorius, including his own family, and a sentence that excludes jail time would encourage the athlete to "feel within himself that what he's done is all right".
The hearing continues.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article