If you’ve been anywhere near a TV over the past few days, you’ve probably seen Channel Seven spruiking their “world exclusive” video of Oscar Pistorius for a story on their flagship Sunday Night program. The show aired the story last night, and almost instantly the uproar was heard.
The piece contained a video showing Pistorius reenact the events that occurred on the night that he shot and killed his girlfriend, Reeva Steenkamp. Filmed in a relatives house and with Pistorius’ sister acting as a stand-in, the footage shows Oscar walking on his stumps, carrying the “body” and holding out an imaginary gun. The video was shot to help a US-based company known as The Evidence Room compile an animated re-enactment of the incident.
Lawyers for Pistorius’ defence team have been scathing in their reaction, claiming the footage was obtained illegally. In a statement, they said, “We wish to make it very clear that the material that has been aired was obtained illegally and in breach of the non-disclosure agreement with The Evidence Room.”
“Its usage also constitutes a breach of privilege as this material was produced for trial purposes on the instructions of a commissioner, and the ownership of the copyright vests in the commissioner. No permission for the disclosure thereof has been given.”
“For the family, the airing of this footage constitutes a staggering breach of trust and an invasion of the family’s privacy.“
But beyond simply airing footage that might have been illegally obtained, Channel Seven also trod on some bad moral ground during the story, after they aired a straw poll that invited viewers to vote on Pistorius’ guilt. The vote was graphic was splashed across the screen and placed on their website. The web poll is still accessible as of time of writing, the “voting lines have now closed.”
This is shockingly gratuitous broadcasting that is at best irresponsible, and at worst potentially prejudicial to an open murder trial. It’s tabloid journalism at its worst.
Whether Channel Seven feels any repercussions or not, the story certainly has drummed up a lot of attention for a topic that’s fallen stagnant for months. So in that regard, it’s certainly mission accomplished. But, ultimately, is the juice worth the squeeze? We’re inclined to suggest no.
Photo: Jerome Delay via Getty Images.
