Oscar Pistorius' father reveals he and his son barely speaks to him
Pistorius' father claims that Oscar was failed by the South African justice system.
Convicted murderer Oscar Pistorius' father has revealed that he has fallen out with his son because the Paralympian has 'accepted' his conviction for the death of his model girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp.
The 38-year-old double amputee, dubbed 'Blade Runner' for the prosthetics he used to compete in the Olympics and Paralympics, served nine years behind bars for shooting Steenkamp in the early hours of Valentine's Day in 2013.
Pistorius claimed he woke in the early hours thinking a burglar was breaking in, and was unaware Steenkamp was in the bathroom.
'Full of fear;
In an interview with UK talk show host Piers Morgan Uncensored last week, Pistorius's father, Henke, said he believes the Paralympian was 'full of fear' during his trial and accepted his prison sentence.
Henke claims that Pistorius was 'failed' by the justice system.
'He was forced to just accept that he's guilty and that he's a murderer, which is such a pathetic insult to the law in South Africa. But that is what happened, and he's been hurt and broken, and that's what he believes now'.
WATCH Henke Pistorius speaking to Piers Morgan
"I'm already in trouble with Oscar as I'm sitting here as I've said too much."
Henke Pistorius says his son has been "hurt and broken" into believing he is guilty of murder – but "the facts say something totally different."
Watch more👇
📺 https://t.co/VNOkw8HEeo@piersmorgan pic.twitter.com/hgqj7a9K5n — Piers Morgan Uncensored (@PiersUncensored) May 29, 2025
ALSO READ: Oscar Pistorius finds love after release from jail for murder of Reeva Steenkamp – reports
Oscar's story
Asked about what he thought happened, Henke said Oscar will have a story to tell.
'Oscar will one day tell his story. He is at the moment I am sure very sad and very sorry about what had happened. I can't speak for him, he will speak for himself
'But, what happened is not what came out in court, and I am one of hundreds of people who will say that this case will stand as a very negative example of the jurisdiction of justice in South Africa. But, I am already in trouble with Oscar as I'm sitting here and said too much,' Henke said.
Race?
Asked about whether race played a role in the trial and if he was in any way a racist, Henke said his opinion has 'nothing to do with racism.'
'What my opinion is has nothing to do with racists. It's got to do with very poor judicial representation, number one, incompetent. And number two, of dishonest behaviour of the state prosecutor… Oscar is just now in a stage where he's on parole, and he doesn't agree with me at all.
'In fact, he wouldn't talk to me about it because he disagrees with me. I just think that he will feel later, to walk away after parole as a person guilty of manslaughter versus a person guilty of murder, two vastly big things, and Oscar is not guilty of murder,' Henke said.
ALSO READ: Oscar Pistorius back at home
State got it wrong
Henke claims that he had spoken to several judges about Oscar's case, adding that the state could not prove beyond any reasonable doubt that the Paralympian wanted to kill Steenkamp.
'The firearm was part of the evidence in court. There were thirteen bullets left after Oscar used four. Why would he only use four if he wanted to kill her? It shows you the state couldn't prove murder beyond a reasonable doubt'.
Prison sentence
Oscar opened fire on Steenkamp while she was standing behind his locked bathroom door, killing her instantly with special 'dum dum' bullets – but Reeva's family have always claimed it was intentional.
Pistorius was initially sentenced to six years in jail in 2016 by North Gauteng High Court Judge Thokozile Masipa. That sentence was later overturned by the SCA in 2017 and increased to an effective 13 years and five months.
Henke admitted that his refusal to accept Oscar's guilt has caused a rift between the two.
'Oscar is out on parole now. He knows how I feel. He thinks he's guilty of murder. That's why we're stuck. He doesn't want to talk to me about this. Oscar is not guilty of murder. We last spoke at the beginning of the year'
Parole
While Pistorius is effectively a free man, he was assigned a monitoring correctional services official to work with him until his sentence expires in 2029, and he cannot move out of the Waterkloof area without notifying correctional services.
Pistorius swapped his adapted cell for his very own fortified 'Oscar cottage' on his property tycoon uncle's sprawling estate, which boasts a R47 million mega mansion, which, coincidentally, is a remodelled rectory of a former Dutch Reformed Church.
New love
In October last year, the Steenkamp family's lawyer, Tania Koen, told The Citizen the family's view has always been that Pistorius had the same rights as any other offender.
In December last year, The Citizen reported that Oscar found new love, just months after being released from prison on parole.
Oscar, who lives with his uncle in Pretoria, has apparently started a relationship with a business management consultant and a long-term family friend from Wakkerstroom in Mpumalanga.
ALSO READ: The strict parole conditions Oscar Pistorius will face once released
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
IOL News
an hour ago
- IOL News
South African woman loses R2,400 in elaborate coin scam
Private Investigator Mike Bolhuis warned against trade in money scams Image: Supplied A South African woman has come forward with a chilling account of how she lost R2,400 in a sophisticated scam involving supposed coin buyers — a case now under investigation by well-known private investigator Mike Bolhuis. According to Bolhuis, this is just one example of the growing number of scams targeting individuals who are misled into believing their ordinary coins are worth millions. In this particular case, the woman was promised a payout of R40.3 million in exchange for coins she believed to be valuable, including Mandela R5s. The scammers posed as representatives from companies claiming to buy rare and historic coins. The woman said she was asked to pay an initial registration fee of R200, which she did, thinking it was standard procedure. Soon after, she was given a choice: have the money deposited into her account or delivered in person. She opted for the deposit but was then told she needed to send her coins by post first — something she was uncomfortable doing. 'I didn't want to post the coins. What if they got lost? And they could just put a hold on the money until they said they received them,' she said. When the supposed deposit failed, she was told to pay a R350 'release fee' to activate the funds. She paid again. But still, no money came through. That's when the scammers changed their story. She was told the money would be delivered in person — but only if she paid R1,250 for the delivery. Unable to afford the full amount, the 'agent' offered to accept R650 up front and collect the remaining R600 upon delivery. She transferred the R650 and was told the agent was on the way from Cape Town to Johannesburg. The next day, he contacted her again, claiming to need another R600 for petrol to complete the trip to Nelspruit. In an effort to secure the delivery, her daughter stepped in to send the R600. But the requests didn't stop there. The agent soon messaged again, saying his vehicle had a flat tyre and needed money for repairs — first R5,000, then R1,000, and finally R450. 'At that point, I refused. It's not my responsibility to buy him a new tyre,' she said. She never received the money, the coins were never collected, and she now fears the photos of the 'agent' and the vehicle may not even be real. To date, she has paid a total of R2,400, with no payout, no collection of coins, and no proof that any of the people involved were legitimate. Private Investigator Mike Bolhuis confirmed he is investigating the case and issued a public warning. He said scammers are using increasingly elaborate stories to manipulate and deceive vulnerable individuals. Bolhuis explained how people get scammed: scammers tell people their ordinary coins, like the Mandela R5 or R2, are worth significant amounts of money. They may ask for a fee or for the seller to send the coins, promising large returns that never materialise. Fraudsters also use advance payment scams, asking people to send coins first with a promise to pay later. Once the coins are sent, the scammer disappears, and no money is received. Others pretend to be professional coin buyers or dealers, using fake names or credentials and offering high prices. Once they get the coins, they vanish without paying. Many victims are misled by misinformation — people often believe all old coins are rare or valuable. In reality, most old coins are only worth their face value or metal content, making people easy targets.
IOL News
an hour ago
- IOL News
MTN, Turkcell legal wrangle over allegations of bribery continues
Turkcell is set to oppose MTN's bid in the Constitutional Court Image: supplied Turkish mobile network operator, Turkcel, is set to oppose MTN's bid in the Constitutional Court to appeal a recent ruling that will allow allegations of bribery against MTN to be heard in South Africa. MTN, Africa's largest mobile network operator, approached the Constitutional Court arguing that South Africa doesn't have jurisdiction to hear legal bids over alleged corruption in Iran, and the matter should be heard there. In April, the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) allowed Turkcell to present evidence alleging MTN committed bribery and corruption to overturn an Iranian GSM licence award. The SCA ruling marked the first time a South African court determined whether misconduct allegations abroad could be heard locally. On Thursday, Turkcell said it was opposing MTN's application to the Constitutional Court. In a statement, it said that this was 'in Turkcell's ongoing pursuit of justice for damages estimated at over $4.2 billion, stemming from allegations that MTN paid bribes to Iranian and South African officials to overturn a public tender awarded initially to Turkcell for a multi-billion-dollar GSM telecom license in Iran'. Should Turkcell be victorious in its defence of MTN's appeal, Turkcell can take its allegations of bribery to the Johannesburg High Court. Its previous bid, two years ago, failed with a finding then by that court that South Africa was not the correct geography to hear the matter. This is the decision that has been overturned through the SCA ruling. Turkcell's legal wrangle with MTN dates back more than a decade, when it initially approached the US courts in an action it later retracted, contending that MTN secured its 49% stake in a telecommunications licence in Iran through bribery. Turkcell said that the local 'case has significant implications for South Africa's stance on international bribery and corruption'. The Turkish operator argues that MTN paid off both Iranian and South African officials to overturn a public tender, which it lost to Turkcell, for a multi-billion-dollar opportunity to run an Iranian GSM telecom licence. MTN has denied these allegations, publicly stating that it has always 'maintained that the Turkcell litigation was without merit and has expressed confidence that it would successfully defend these proceedings'. In 2012, the UK's Lord Leonard Hoffmann released a report that exonerated MTN of any shady dealings in securing the licence. In part, the report stated: 'All the allegations are a fabric of lies, distortions and inventions.' Cedric Soule, counsel for Turkcell, said that MTN's reliance on this report, which its commissioned, is improper as 'the process that MTN put together lacked the independence, rigour and transparency of a judicial proceeding'. Soule added that 'the Hoffmann Committee failed to interview key witnesses, did not independently gather or assess evidence, and did not use independent counsel; its conclusions are therefore unreliable and irrelevant to the current proceedings'. MTN, however, has said that 'these claims were the subject of a comprehensive and independent investigation led by Lord Hoffmann, the findings of which did not support the allegations'. The Constitutional Court will now decide whether to grant the request for leave to appeal filed by MTN and the other defendants. Turkcell expects a decision within three months.
The South African
2 hours ago
- The South African
Court orders RAF to pay R1.4m to undocumented Malawian
The Western Cape High Court has dismissed the Road Accident Fund's (RAF) application to rescind a R1.4 million payment awarded to an undocumented Malawian man injured in a car crash. IOL reported that, Charles Jeka Chipofya, a Malawian national, has lived in South Africa since 1994. He married a South African woman in 2008, and they have two children. Despite his long stay, he failed to secure South African citizenship due to what the court noted as widespread abuse of the system by some foreign nationals. Chipofya suffered serious injuries in a road accident in Plettenberg Bay in September 2016. He filed a claim with RAF, and in November 2022, both parties agreed to a proposed settlement of over R1.4 million. A court confirmed the order in January 2023. However, RAF later withdrew its consent, claiming it had discovered Chipofya's undocumented status only after the judgment. The RAF asked the court to rescind the order, claiming it was misled. RAF said Chipofya submitted a passport under the name 'Charles Chipeta,' raising concerns when compared to court documents identifying him as 'Charles Jeka Chipofya.' Upon investigation, RAF found that he held two passports with different names. When questioned, Chipofya claimed a data capture error caused the inconsistency. RAF rejected this explanation, calling it improbable. RAF's investigation showed that one passport had expired in 2012, and the other appeared to have been issued after the accident. Movement records did not show Chipofya legally exiting or re-entering the country. RAF argued this suggested he was either not in South Africa at the time of the accident or was staying in the country illegally. Despite these concerns, the court ruled against RAF. The judge found no evidence that the initial order was granted in error or that Chipofya acted fraudulently. The court upheld the R1.4 million award. RAF warned that allowing undocumented immigrants to claim damages would place an undue burden on the state. The court maintained that it lawfully granted the order based on the facts available at the time. Let us know by leaving a comment below, or send a WhatsApp to 060 011 021 1 Subscribe to The South African website's newsletters and follow us on WhatsApp, Facebook, X and Bluesky for the latest news.
