One of the scariest parts of the Oscar Pistorius murder trial was the cross-examination of neighbours who had heard Reeva Steenkamp scream. Pistorius’s advocate Barry Roux did his best to discredit the state witnesses who testified that they heard a woman’s "terrible screams". Roux questioned the witnesses on the screams they claimed they heard, whether they could be sure they came from a woman or a man, and how they could tell that the person screaming was frightened. He argued that the evidence of Dr Johan Stipp could not be relied on because he said in the witness box that the screams were fearful and emotional but his initial statement to police did not mention this. The defence strategy was enough to make you think twice about doing your civic duty and reporting such things to the police. Having to testify under oath and being subjected to cross-examination must be one of the most nerve-wracking things a person can endure. The inquiry into state capture has had riveting days of...

BL Premium

This article is reserved for our subscribers.

A subscription helps you enjoy the best of our business content every day along with benefits such as exclusive Financial Times articles, ProfileData financial data, and digital access to the Sunday Times and Sunday Times Daily.

Already subscribed? Simply sign in below.

Questions or problems? Email or call 0860 52 52 00. Got a subscription voucher? Redeem it now