Oscar Pistorius: An analysis

The tragic events that unfurled in South Africa in an executive gated community in the early hours of
February 14th 2013 have generated acres of newsprint. Oscar Pistorius the blade runner lived his
life under public scrutiny and polarised opinion. To some he is a great example of how someone can
overcome adversity, to others he is seen as smug, arrogant and over confident. In reality both of
these opinions have some base in reality. Prior to the incident Pistorius appears to have courted the
media and presented with all the trappings of a celebrity lifestyle, the sports cars, bling jewellery and
watches and the beautiful model girlfriend. However there is no doubt that behind this faade is the
determined and gifted athlete who singlehandedly did much to raise the profile of disability sport.
In this article Ryan Mann and I will look at Pistorius as he presented during his trial through analysis
of his words and behaviour. It should be noted that neither of us know Pistorius and so our views are
observed through the lens of the TV and camera and are therefore limited. However there is much
pre incident material widely available to provide a view which is based on evidence rather than mere
perspective.

The words
On the 22nd February 2013 Oscar Pistorius appeared in court in Johannesburg to apply for bail having
being charged with murdering his Girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp. He submitted a written affidavit to
the court to support his application for bail the following analysis by Ryan Mann is based on this
document.
When conducting a forensic statement analysis, one of the most important aspects is to suspend any
biases that may exist. This is harder to do than most expect. The concept behind Word Choice
Analysis is that it employs psychological principles to the investigation of the words chosen by the
user. The words used can be very revealing. There are many other underlying principles that are
associated with conducting the analysis including avoiding inferring any meaning to any word
spoken/written. This concept is important, as it assists in eliminating personal biases and makes the
analysis consistent.
For example; if I were to ask you to describe what comes to your mind when you hear the word
dog, you may conjure up an image of a poodle, a German shepherd or a Rottweiler. Regardless of
the type of dog that came to mind, it would likely be different from the image conjured up by many
other people. The point here is that, how you interpret specific concepts likely differs from how I do,
and the words you choose to describe those concepts will also be different from those that I do.

Copyright body language learning 06/09/2014

Copyright Word choice Analysis Ryan Mann

Therefore, as in any scientific research, we must account for the confounding variables. In this case,
the confounding variable is the specific meaning of a word to the reader.
In conducting a review of Pistorius statement, there are several items of concern. In this article, I
will list a few and discuss them. In WCA , every word of every sentence is analyzed. This overview
does not represent the full depth of an analysis, but does serve to introduce the core concepts and
to highlight the findings of Pistorius statement.
In the prologue portion of the statement, Pistorius does little to relay useful information. He
engages in convincing language at considerable length. I have the prologue as the following portion:
"On the 13th of February 2013 Reeva would have gone out with her friends and I with my friends.
Reeva then called me and asked that we rather spend the evening at home. I agreed and we were
content to have a quiet dinner together at home.
By about 2200hrs on 13 February 2013 we were in our bedroom. She was doing her yoga exercises
and I was in bed watching television. My prosthetic legs were off. We were deeply in love and I could
not be happier. I know she felt the same way. She had given me a present for Valentine's Day but
asked me only to open it the next day.
After Reeva nished her yoga exercises she got into bed and we both fell asleep. I am acutely aware
of violent crime being committed by intruders entering homes with a view to commit crime,
including violent crime. I have received death threats before. I have also been a victim of violence
and of burglaries before. For that reason I kept my rearm, a 9 mm Parabellum, underneath my
bed when I went to bed at night.
"During the early morning hours of 14 February 2013, I woke up, went onto the balcony to bring the
fan in and closed the sliding doors, the blinds and the curtains.
While there are many other indicators present in the prologue, I will point out an important one
here. The prologue consists of 221 words. At a minimum, 99 of those words construct convincing
portions of the statement (45%). Attempts to convince are known as assurances. The assurances
are in bold. In WCA , a high level of assurances in the prologue is known as Setting the stage.
Psychologically, this can occur when the speaker/writer intends to use the information to justify
later actions.
Within the statement, Pistorius attempts to justify his fear of burglaries and death threats. He
justifies having a firearm. However, when we look at the last sentence of the prologue, Pistorius
does not display the psychology of a fearful person. It is inconsistent for a person to be afraid of
death threats and burglars to leave balcony doors and blinds open.
Pistorius curiously uses the word both when describing he and Reeva going to sleep. This word is
unnecessary and appears to be convincing in nature. Better would be we went to sleep. Extra
words are often an attempt to sound more convincing, but instead tend to reveal an insecure
mindset. Also, keep in mind as well, that Pistorius does not state that he heard the noise in the
bathroom until after he returned from the balcony. A logical follow-up question would be about the
specific timing of the noise that Pistorius describes in the subsequent portion.
Now, lets take a look at the next portion:
I heard a noise in the bathroom and realised that someone was in the bathroom. I felt a sense of
terror rushing over me. There are no burglar bars across the bathroom window and I knew that
Copyright body language learning 06/09/2014

Copyright Word choice Analysis Ryan Mann

contractors who worked at my house had left the ladders outside. Although I did not have my
prosthetic legs on I have mobility on my stumps. I believed that someone had entered my house. I
was too scared to switch a light on. I grabbed my 9mm pistol from underneath my bed."
Here, again, there are many problems. The underlined portions of the statement are areas of
concern.
-

noise is vague. What noise could have caused such alarm?

someone is vague. Again, the noise would have to describe how Pistorius knew it was a
person, and how would this noise justify his subsequent course of action?
I felt a sense of terror rushing over me. This sentence is out of place. Typically emotions
are described at the end of an event, not in the middle. Most honest statements state the
action taken and then the emotion. When a person is telling a story that is not coming from
memory, they will often inject emotion into the story where they feel it justifies the story.
However, because this emotion was never truly felt, they will make errors regarding where
they inject the emotion. Also, Pistorius may be going overboard here. Terror is an extreme
fear, and would not logically belong at this point in the story. I would expect concern or
some alarm. When terrified, we are evolutionarily programmed to take defensive action,
such as scream or panic. Pistorius does not consider these actions, because he was not
terrified.
There are no burglar bars is more convincing words (setting the stage).
Although I did not have my prosthetic legs on, I still have mobility in my stumps Is a
discounting statement. These are often meant to overcome an objection before the
objection is raised. Pistorius knows that the fact that he did not put his prosthetics on will be
questioned. Additionally, this is problematic when going back to the statement in his
prologue about going outside get the fan and close the doors and blinds.
I believed that someone had entered my house. Here, Pistorius uses the term believed,
which does not fit. The term thought is more declarative, believe is soft tone. Also,
had entered is similarly soft in tone and is not declarative. Better would be I thought
someone was in my house. Also, believed is an intensity mismatch with the earlier
emotion, terror.
I was too scared to switch a light on. Again, the emotion doesnt fit. Earlier, Pistorius felt
terror, but now his fear is downgraded to scared. Fear, like all emotions, has varying
degrees of intensity. Emotions are felt in response to an external stimuli. In this statement,
Pistorius does not justify the de-escalation of the level of fear felt, as he does not describe
the external stimuli that would have down-graded the intensity of his fear. This is a
consequence of having not actually felt the emotion.
I grabbed my 9mm pistol from underneath my bed. This action is out of place. If Pistorius
was terrified, scared, or even concerned, he should have alerted Reeva at this point.
Additionally, he is at the bed (retrieving the pistol), it stands to reason, depending on the
lighting conditions, he could have seen that Reeva was not in the bed. If it was completely
dark, he still would have been close enough to rouse her from sleep in order to warn her of
the possible danger.
Pistorius now uses the term pistol to describe his gun versus the earlier firearm. This is
known as a shift in personal coding. While pistol and firearm are similar, they are not
synonyms. This indicates a change in reality for Pistorius. This change can be justified,
however. When the gun is under the bed and not in use, he may consider it a firearm.
However, when in his hands and in use, he may consider it a pistol.

Copyright body language learning 06/09/2014

Copyright Word choice Analysis Ryan Mann

Throughout the statement, Pistorius continues his dubious account of the incident. When removing
all of the excess words and looking at the bones of the statement, you essentially have the following
account:
-

Reeva went over to Pistorius house.

They had dinner and went to bed.
Pistorius woke up in the middle of the night to get a fan from the balcony.
He heard a noise.
The noise terrified him.
He retrieved his gun from under the bed.
He shot through the door.
He then realized he shot Reeva.

Again, there are many technical and psychological cues in this statement that render Pistorius story
not credible. The underlying problem, however, is that he did not justify his action of shooting
through the door at the point in which he did. Hearing a noise in the bathroom would not cause a
reasonable person to retrieve a pistol and shoot through a door without first accounting for the
whereabouts of the person with you. The missing description of the noise indicates that there was
no noise, or that any noise heard did not really cause Pistorius to experience the level of fear
necessary for such extreme reactions.
As with all analyses, this analysis is based solely on the statement included, and does not take into
account any other extraneous factors that could potentially change the meaning of the statement.
In analyzing only the words provided by this statement, Pistorius account is likely deceptive.
Additionally, the indicators included in forming the conclusion have not been addressed here. Only
a few items have been pointed out for discussion purposes. The WCA system is a step-by-step
process that scrutinizes every aspect of a statement.

The Behaviour
In analysing his pre incident and in court behaviours the change from a confident powerful individual
typified by the way he dominates the environment around him to the bowed headed turtled bodied
individual seen in court cannot be more marked.
Field dependency is a theory developed by Herman Witkin (1977) which focuses on the interaction
between an individual and the environment in which he is placed. In his natural environment, his
field, be it on the track, in the nightclub or red carpet Pistorius oozes confidence and power.

Copyright body language learning 06/09/2014

Copyright Word choice Analysis Ryan Mann

The images above evidence Pistoriuss perceived power and confidence, from the wide armed thin
mouthed racer to the lopsided inner smile of the winners podium.
However move on to the court room, a quite different field and Pistorius behaviour and presence
changes dramatically. Dressed in an almost funeral like black suit, white shirt and black tie, head
bowed he exudes an almost childish and vulnerable persona.

It has to be considered and accepted that the change in environment could cause a change of
behaviour emasculating an individual. However both the track and the court room are high stake win
or lose situations, one of which Pistorius appears to revel in. Therefore the question has to be asked
why the dramatic change? It is accepted the circumstances are different Pistorius has much to lose
rather than win and the personal nature of his attachment to the incident under examination.
However it cannot be discounted that Pistoriuss performance in both arenas have been carefully
managed and coached.
The study of non-verbal behaviour is to some extent a non-exact science. However the higher the
stakes the harder it is to contain your inner feelings and emotions and identifiable leakage of hidden
emotion will occur. Natural behaviour requires no effort it just happens. However controlled
behaviour requires physical and mental effort and the mask will slip. This can present as over
exaggerated behavioural cues playing to the intended audience. It is acknowledged that the faking of
grief and sadness is something even professional actors find difficult for an individual in a high stakes
situation maintaining such a faade requires super human effort. Grief is an inward facing emotion
something men in particular try to mask or control. Pistorius image as an archetype alpha male
appears out of kilter to the dramatic, some may say over dramatic, physical show of grief and
sadness presented within the court room.

Copyright body language learning 06/09/2014

Copyright Word choice Analysis Ryan Mann

Oscar Pistorius let out a gratuitous howl, his face turned red and his sobs were loud and
mechanical, like the cries of an animal gnawing its bloodied leg from a snare. Tears welled in my
eyes. Wrote Theresa Taylor of the Johannesburg Daily Star recalling Pistoriuss behaviour during his
testimony when describing finding out he had shot his girlfriend. Such behaviour as previously stated
would be hard to fake the only question is what is prompting it? Is it the fact he shot the Love of his
life or that he simply shot and killed another human being? This is the crux of the matter there is no
doubt that anyone who lived through the incident will have been affected by it the question really is
what is actually affecting him?
The fact is whatever is behind it Pistorius has to present to the court in the right way this may
account for his exaggerated non-verbal behaviour. The fact he is conscious or has been informed
that he needs to sell his feelings could also account for his behaviour which on occasions has been
extreme. It is not usual for a defendant to be viewed retching into a bucket once let alone on several
occasions during a trial.
Pistorius out of his natural field looks and acts lost and bewildered and whereas his disability was
always something he fought against, this is the man who campaigned to be able to run in able
bodied races, in court it appears to be promoted in a bid to gain sympathy.

Copyright body language learning 06/09/2014

Copyright Word choice Analysis Ryan Mann

Remarkably there has been limited opportunities to observe Pistoriuss face the area where
emotional leakage is most likely to be observed. Pistorius tends to sit with his hand bowed and
during times when emotions would be expected he uses hand to face gestures which obscure the
view. Initially he was bought into the court room out of view but as the trial progressed he has been
seen. In such circumstances some of his natural power returns as he adopts a poker face and fixed
jaw and a confident open posture. A marked difference to the submissive closed persona seen
inside.

It has been a fascinating experience observing how things have unfolded in court and reading the
mass of newsprint dedicated to reading his behaviour. I have to sit on the fence looking at this not
from an evidential point of view put from an unbiased behavioural perspective. There are many cues
and behaviours that I find odd but all humans are different and so what seems odd to me may seem
natural to others. What is obvious to me though is that unconsciously or consciously, by nature or
design Pistoriuss has undertaken a performance in court but then when you are fighting for your
liberty is that something we should expect?

Conclusion
Drawing conclusions based on incomplete information is risky even in this instance where it has
been played out in public we can only work with what we know.
What is safe to say is there appears to be serious discrepancies which needed to be aired in a court
of law relating to the events that happened on the night of the 13 th February 2013. Ultimately it is
the court that will decide innocence or guilt followed It could be assumed by appeals should the
verdict go against Pistorius. All we have tried to do in this report is present a view based on the
information as we know it.

This document was prepared on Saturday 6th August 2014 by Bob Pointer (UK) and Ryan
Mann (USA) of Body Language Learning.
Body Language Learning provide professional development opportunities in the UK, USA,
Africa and India in relation to all aspects of human relationships.

Copyright body language learning 06/09/2014

Copyright Word choice Analysis Ryan Mann