The examples and perspective in this article may not represent a worldwide view of the subject. Please improve this article and discuss the issue on the talk page. (December 2010)

Traditionally, bail is some form of property deposited or pledged to a court to persuade it to release a suspect from jail, on the understanding that the suspect will return for trial or forfeit the bail (and possibly be brought up on charges of the crime of failure to appear). In some cases bail money may be returned at the end of the trial, if all court appearances are made, regardless of whether the person is found guilty or not guilty of the crime accused. If a bondsman is used and a surety bond has been obtained, the fee for that bond is the fee for the insurance policy purchased and is not refundable.

In some countries granting bail is common. Even in such countries, however, bail may not be offered by some courts under some circumstances; for instance, if the accused is considered likely not to appear for trial regardless of bail. Legislatures may also set out certain crimes to be not bailable, such as capital crimes.

Canada[link]

Persons charged with a criminal offence in Canada have a constitutional right to reasonable bail unless there is some compelling reason to deny it. These reasons can be related to the accused's likelihood to skip bail, or to public danger resulting from the accused being at large. In stark contrast to the United States and many other jurisdictions granting a constitutional right to bail, in Canada the accused may even be denied bail because the public confidence in the administration of justice may be disturbed by letting the individual, still legally innocent, go free pending the completion of the trial or passing of sentence (Criminal Code, s. 515 (10)(c)). Sureties and deposits can be imposed, but are optional.

England and Wales[link]

History[link]

Preceptors of Roman emperors, charged with upholding laws or institutions were called Bajulus (or bearers). Bajulus later evolved in Italy to mean Protector.

In medieval England, the sheriffs originally possessed the sovereign authority to release or hold suspected criminals. Some sheriffs would exploit the bail for their own gain. The Statute of Westminster (1275) limited the discretion of sheriffs with respect to the bail. Although sheriffs still had the authority to fix the amount of bail required, the statute stipulates which crimes are bailable and which are not.

In the early 17th century, King Charles I ordered noblemen to issue him loans. Those who refused were imprisoned. Five of the prisoners filed a habeas corpus petition arguing that they should not be held indefinitely without trial or bail. In the Petition of Right (1628) Parliament argued that the King had flouted Magna Carta by imprisoning people without just cause.

The Habeas Corpus Act 1679 states, "A Magistrate shall discharge prisoners from their Imprisonment taking their Recognizance, with one or more Surety or Sureties, in any Sum according to the Magistrate's discretion, unless it shall appear that the Party is committed for such Matter or offences for which by law the Prisoner is not bailable." The English Bill of Rights (1689) states that "excessive bail hath been required of persons committed in criminal cases, to elude the benefit of the laws made for the liberty of the subjects. Excessive bail ought not to be required." This was a precursor of the Eighth Amendment to the US Constitution.

Forms[link]

In the UK there are three types of bail that can be given:^[1]

• Police bail where a suspect is released without being charged but must return to the police station at a given time.
• Police to court where having been charged a suspect is given bail but must attend his first court hearing at the date and Court given
• Court bail where having already been in court a suspect is granted bail pending further investigation or while the case continues

By police before charge[link]

Under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, the police have power to release a person, who has not been charged, on bail. This is deemed to be a release on bail in accordance with sections 3, 3A, 5 and 5A of the Bail Act 1976.^[2]

By police after charge[link]

After a person has been charged, he must ordinarily be released, on bail or without bail.^[3] Unless the accused has a previous conviction (or equivalents in cases of insanity) for certain specified homicide or sexual offences,^[4] the accused must be released either on bail or without bail unless:^[3]

(a) If the person arrested is not an arrested juvenile

(i) His name or address cannot be ascertained or the custody officer has reasonable grounds for doubting whether a name or address furnished by him as his name or address is his real name or address;

(ii) The custody officer has reasonable grounds for believing that the person arrested will fail to appear in court to answer to bail;

(iii) In the case of a person arrested for an imprisonable offence, the custody officer has reasonable grounds for believing that the detention of the person arrested is necessary to prevent him from committing an offence;

(iiia) In the case of a person who has attained the age of 18, the custody officer has reasonable grounds for believing that the detention of the person is necessary to enable a sample to be taken from him under section 63B below;

(iv) In the case of a person arrested for an offence that is not an imprisonable offence, the custody officer has reasonable grounds for believing that the detention of the person arrested is necessary to prevent him from causing physical injury to any other person or from causing loss of or damage to property;

(v) The custody officer has reasonable grounds for believing that the detention of the person arrested is necessary to prevent him from interfering with the administration of justice or with the investigation of offences or of a particular offence;

(vi) The custody officer has reasonable grounds for believing that the detention of the person arrested is necessary for his own protection;

(b) If he is an arrested juvenile

(i) Any of the requirements of paragraph (a) above is satisfied;

(ii) The custody officer has reasonable grounds for believing that he ought to be detained in his own interests;

If he is granted bail it will be bail to appear at a Magistrates' Court at the next available sitting.^[2]

By a court[link]

Rights[link]

Under current law, a defendant has an absolute right to bail if the custody time limits have expired and otherwise ordinarily a right to bail unless there is sufficient reason not to grant it,^[5]

Any person accused of committing a crime is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Therefore a person charged with a crime should not be denied freedom unless there is a good reason.

The main reasons for refusing bail are that the defendant is accused of an imprisonable offence and there are substantial grounds for believing that the defendant would:

1. Abscond
2. Commit further offences while on bail
3. Interfere with witnesses^[5]

The court should take into account the:

1. Nature and seriousness of the offence or default (and the probable method of dealing with the defendant for it)
2. Character, antecedents, associations and community ties of the defendant,
3. Defendant's bail record, and
4. Strength of the evidence^[5]

The court may also refuse bail:

• For the defendant's own protection
• Where the defendant is already serving a custodial sentence for another offence
• Where the court is satisfied that it has not been practicable to obtain sufficient information
• Where the defendant has already absconded in the present proceedings
• Where the defendant has been convicted but the court is awaiting a pre-sentence report, other report or inquiry and it would be impracticable to complete the inquiries or make the report without keeping the defendant in custody
• Where the defendant is charged with a non-imprisonable offence, has already been released on bail for the offence with which he is now accused, and has been arrested for absconding or breaching bail^[5]

Where the accused has previous convictions for certain homicide or sexual offences, the burden of proof is on the defendant to rebut a presumption against bail.^[6]

The Criminal Justice Act 2003 amended the Bail Act 1976 restricting the right to bail for adults who tested positive for a Class A drug and refused to be assessed or refused to participate in recommended treatment.^[7]

Where a defendant is charged with treason, bail may only be granted by a High Court judge or by the Secretary of State.^[8] Section 115 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 prohibits magistrates' courts from granting bail in murder cases.^[9]

Conditions[link]

Conditions may be applied to the grant of bail, such as living at a particular address or having someone act as surety, if the court considers that this is necessary:

• To prevent the defendant absconding
• To prevent the defendant committing further offences while on bail
• To prevent the defendant interfering with witnesses
• For the defendant's own protection (or if he is a child or young person, for his own welfare or in his own interests)^[5]

Failure to comply[link]

Failing to attend court on time as required is an offence, for which the maximum sentence in a magistrates' court is three months' imprisonment, or twelve months in the Crown Court.^[10] (Sentences are usually much shorter than the maximum, but are often custody.) In addition to imposing punishment for this offence, courts will often revoke bail as they may not trust the defendant again. The amended Consolidated Criminal Practice Direction states (at paragraph 1.13.5) that "the sentence for the breach of bail should usually be custodial and consecutive to any other custodial sentence".^[11]

Failing to comply with bail conditions is not an offence, but may lead to the defendant being arrested and brought back to court, where they will be remanded into custody unless the court is satisfied that they will comply with their conditions in future.

Scotland[link]

Under Scots law, no deposit or pledge of property is asked for; bail is only granted where the court is satisfied the accused will turn up for trial.

United States[link]

In pre-independence America, bail law was based on English law. Some of the colonies simply guaranteed their subjects the protections of that law. In 1776, after the Declaration of Independence, those that had not already done so enacted their own versions of bail law.

Section 9 of Virginia's 1776 Constitution states "excessive bail ought not to be required..." In 1785, the following was added, "Those shall be let to bail who are apprehended for any crime not punishable in life or limb...But if a crime be punishable by life or limb, or if it be manslaughter and there be good cause to believe the party guilty thereof, he shall not be admitted to bail." Section 29 of the Pennsylvania Constitution of 1776 states that "Excessive bail shall not be exacted for bailable offences: And all fines shall be moderate."

The prohibition against excessive bail in the Eighth Amendment is derived from the Virginia Constitution, on which Samuel Livermore commented, "The clause seems to have no meaning to it, I do not think it necessary. What is meant by the term excessive bail...?" The Supreme Court has never decided whether the constitutional prohibition on excessive bail applies to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment.^[12]

The Sixth Amendment to the Constitution, like the English Habeas Corpus Act of 1679, requires that a suspect must "be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation" and thus enabling a suspect to demand bail if accused of a bailable offense.

Judiciary Act of 1789[link]

In 1789, the same year that the United States Bill of Rights was introduced, Congress passed the Judiciary Act of 1789. This specified which types of crimes were bailable and set bounds on a judge's discretion in setting bail. The Act states that all non-capital crimes are bailable and that in capital cases the decision to detain a suspect, prior to trial, was to be left to the judge.

The Judiciary Act states, "Upon all arrests in criminal cases, bail shall be admitted, except where punishment may be by death, in which cases it shall not be admitted but by the supreme or a circuit court, or by a justice of the supreme court, or a judge of a district court, who shall exercise their discretion therein."

Bail Reform Act of 1966[link]

In 1966, Congress enacted the Bail Reform Act of 1966, which states that a non-capital defendant is to be released, pending trial, on his personal recognizance or on personal bond, unless the judicial officer determines that such incentives will not adequately assure his appearance at trial. In that case, the judge must select an alternative from a list of conditions, such as restrictions on travel. Individuals charged with a capital crime, or who have been convicted and are awaiting sentencing or appeal, are to be released unless the judicial officer has reason to believe that no conditions will reasonably assure that the person will not flee or pose a danger. In non-capital cases, the Act does not permit a judge to consider a suspect's danger to the community, only in capital cases or after conviction is the judge authorized to do so.

The 1966 Act was particularly criticized within the District of Columbia,^{[by whom?]} where all crimes formerly fell under Federal bail law. In a number of instances, persons accused of violent crimes committed additional crimes when released on their personal recognizance. These individuals were often released yet again.^{[citation needed]}

The Judicial Council committee recommended that, even in non-capital cases, a person's dangerousness should be considered in determining conditions for release. The District of Columbia Court Reform and Criminal Procedure Act of 1970 allowed judges to consider dangerousness and risk of flight when setting bail in noncapital cases.

Current federal law[link]

In 1984 Congress replaced the Bail Reform Act of 1966 with new bail law, codified at United States Code, Title 18, Sections 3141-3150. The main innovation of the new law is that it allows pre-trial detention of individuals based upon their danger to the community; under prior law and traditional bail statutes in the U.S., pre-trial detention was to be based solely upon the risk of flight.

18 U.S.C. § 3142(f) provides that only persons who fit into certain categories are subject to detention without bail: persons charged with a crime of violence, an offense for which the maximum sentence is life imprisonment or death, certain drug offenses for which the maximum offense is greater than 10 years, repeat felony offenders, or if the defendant poses a serious risk of flight, obstruction of justice, or witness tampering. There is a special hearing held to determine whether the defendant fits within these categories; anyone not within them must be admitted to bail.

The Supreme Court upheld the 1984 Act's provision providing for pretrial detention based on community-danger in United States v. Salerno.

State laws[link]

Bail laws vary somewhat from state to state, as is typical of U.S. jurisprudence. Generally, a person charged with a non-capital crime is presumptively entitled to be granted bail. Recently, some states have enacted statutes modelled on federal law that permit pretrial detention of persons charged with serious violent offenses, if it can be demonstrated that the defendant is a flight risk or a danger to the community.

Some states have very strict guidelines for judges to follow; these are usually provided in the form of a published bail schedule.^[13] These schedules list every single crime defined by state law and prescribe a presumptive dollar value of bail for each one. Judges who wish to depart from the schedule must state specific reasons on the record for doing so. Some states go so far as to require certain forfeitures, bail, and fines for certain crimes.^[14]

In Texas, bail is automatically granted after conviction if an appeal is lodged, but only if the sentence is fifteen years imprisonment or less. In Tennessee, all offenses are bailable, but bail may be denied to those accused of capital crimes.^[15]

Forms[link]

In the United States there are several forms of bail used, these vary from jurisdiction, but the common forms of bail include:

1. Recognizance - when an accused is released on recognizance, he or she promises to the court to attend all required judicial proceedings and will not engage in illegal activity or other prohibited conduct as set by the court. Typically a monetary amount is set by the court, but is not paid by the defendant unless the court orders it forfeited. This is called an unsecured appearance bond or release on one's own recognizance.^[16]
2. Citation Release also known as Cite Out - This procedure involves the issuance of a citation by the arresting officer to the arrestee, informing the arrestee that he or she must appear at an appointed court date. Cite Outs usually occur immediately after an individual is arrested and no financial security is taken.^[16]
3. Surety Bond - by a surety bond, a third party agrees to be responsible for the debt or obligation of the defendant. In many jurisdictions this service is provided commercially by a bail bondsman, where the agent will receive 10% of the bail amount up front and will keep that amount regardless of whether the defendant appears in court. The court in many jurisdictions, especially jurisdictions that prohibit bail bondsmen, may demand a certain amount of the total bail (typically 10%) be given to the court, which, unlike with bail bondsmen, is returned if the defendant does not violate the conditions of bail. This is also known as surety on the bond. The bail agent guarantees to the court that they will pay the forfeited bond if a defendant fails to appear for their scheduled court appearances, so the third party must have adequate assets to satisfy the face value of the bond. In turn, the Bond Agency charges a premium for this service and usually requires collateral from a guarantor. The bail agent then posts a bond for the amount of the bail, to guarantee the arrestee's return to court.^[16]
4. Property Bond - the accused or a person acting on his behalf pledges real property having a value at least equal to the amount of the bail. If the principal fails to appear for trial the state can levy or institute foreclosure proceedings against the property to recover the bail. Used in rare cases and in certain jurisdictions. Often, the equity of the property must be twice the amount of the bail set.^[16]
5. Immigration Bond - used when the defendant that been arrested is an illegal alien. This is a federal bond and not a state bond. The defendant deals directly with either the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) or the Bureau of Immigration and Custom Enforcement (ICE). The typical cost associated with this specialty bond is often fifteen to twenty percent of the original bond amount.^[17]
6. Cash - typically "cash-only," where the only form of bail that the Court will accept is cash. Court-ordered cash bonds require the total amount of bail to be posted in cash. The court holds this money until the case is concluded. Cash bonds are typically ordered by the Court for the following reasons: when the Court believes the defendant is a flight risk, when the Court issues a warrant for unpaid fines, and when a defendant has failed to appear for a prior hearing. Cash bonds provide a powerful incentive for defendants to appear for their hearings. If the defendant does not appear as instructed, the cash bond is forfeited and a bench warrant is issued. If the defendant shows up for their scheduled court appearances, the cash is returned to the person who posted the bond. Anyone including the defendant can post a cash bond. If the defendant posts his own bond, the Court will deduct fines and costs from the bond before returning any balance.^[18]
7. Combinations - courts often allow defendants to post cash bail or surety bond, and then impose further conditions, as mentioned below, to protect the community or ensure attendance.

• Conditions of release - many varied non-monetary conditions and restrictions on liberty can be imposed by a court to ensure that a person released into the community will appear in court and not commit any more crimes. Common examples include: mandatory calls to the police, surrendering passports, home detention, electronic monitoring, drug testing, alcohol counseling, surrendering firearms.
• Protective order also called an 'order of protection'- one very common feature of any conditional release, whether on bail, bond or condition, is a court order requiring the defendant to refrain from criminal activity against the alleged crime victim, or stay away from and have no contact with the alleged crime victim. The former is a limited order, the latter a full order. Violation of the order can subject the defendant to automatic forfeiture of bail and further fine or imprisonment.

Controversy[link]

A series of reports by National Public Radio in January 2010 criticized practices in many jurisdictions, which limit funding for pre-trial release programs and result in many poor defendants being held in jail because they cannot afford bail. The series reports that because of the cost differential between pre-trial release (using house arrest, ankle monitor, periodic check-ins, or without monitoring) and detention in jail, this results in billions of dollars of spending and jail overcrowding, which does not significantly increase the chances of a defendant appearing for trial. It also attributed the constriction of resources for what supporters feel are cost-effective pre-trial release programs to lobbyists for bail bondsmen. The series also reported that bondsmen benefit from laws or practices that do not require them to pay the government a substantial fraction of the actual bail forfeited when defendants fail to show, creating a lack of incentive for bondsmen to compel their customers to appear in court. The series also documented cases where the inability to make bail pressured detainees to plead guilty, and had a negative impact on their economic circumstances, compared with those detainees who could afford bail.^[19]

There has been a response to the argument that poor defendants cannot get out of jail on bail because they cannot afford it. In the state of New Jersey, like many states throughout the country, a defendant can secure a bail bond by agreeing to pay the fee, which is normally ten percent of the bond amount over time. Throughout the industry this is commonly referred to as a payment plan. In theory, this may seem like a good idea; however, if a defendant fails to make a payment, the bail bond company does not have the right to revoke the bail that was set by a judge. This allows a defendant to be released on bail without ever paying the premium owed to the bail bond company.

See also[link]

• Bail bondsman
• Bounty hunters
• Mainprise

References[link]

Logobi GT is a popular Logobi musical act in France, and one of the pioneers in making this genre of music from Africa popular in continental Europe. The group is signed to Five Music label and features Sisi-K on vocals with 6 dancers all originating from Africa and the Caribbean.

Members[link]

Logobi GT is composed of:^[1]

• Sisi-K - vocals - Central African Republic
• Cézar - dancer - Congo
• Gabana - dancer - Côte d'Ivoire
• Jojo - dancer - Cape Verde
• Lyas - dancer - Cape Verde
• Norton - dancer - Congo
• Sylja - dancer - Guadeloupe

Discography[link]

Albums[link]

Singles[link]

References[link]

External links[link]

• Facebook
• YouTube
• Skyrock

This article about a French band or other musical ensemble is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. v t e

Oscar Pistorius

Pistorius taking part in the Landsmót ungmennafélags Íslands in Kópavogur, Iceland, the largest sporting event in the country, on 8 July 2007
Personal information
Nickname(s)	Blade Runner; the fastest man on no legs; "Oz" Pistorius[1]
Born	(1986-11-22) 22 November 1986 (age 25) Sandton, Johannesburg, Transvaal Province (now Gauteng Province), South Africa
Height	1.86 m (6 ft 1 1⁄4 in) in prosthetics[2]
Weight	80.5 kg (177 lb) (2007)[3]
Website	www.oscarpistorius.com
Sport
Country	South Africa
Sport	Running
Event(s)	Sprints (100, 200, 400 m)
Achievements and titles
World finals	2005 Paralympic World Cup: 100 m (T44) – Gold; 200 m (T44) – Gold
National finals	2007 South African Senior Athletics Championships: 400 m (T44) – Gold
Paralympic finals	2008 Summer Paralympics: 100 m (T44) – Gold, 200 m (T44) – Gold; 400 m (T44) – Gold 2004 Summer Paralympics: 100 m (T44) – Bronze; 200 m (T44) – Gold
Highest world ranking	100 m: 1st (2008)[4] 200 m: 1st (2008)[5] 400 m: 1st (2008)[6]
Personal best(s)	100 m (T44): 10.91 s (2007, WR) 200 m (T44): 21.41 s (2010, WR) [7] 400 m (T44): 45.07
Medal record Men's athletics Competitor for  South Africa World Championships Silver 2011 Daegu 4 × 400 m relay Paralympic Games Gold 2004 Athens 200 metres (T44) Gold 2008 Beijing 100 metres (T44) Gold 2008 Beijing 200 metres (T44) Gold 2008 Beijing 400 metres (T44) Bronze 2004 Athens 100 metres (T44)
Updated on 14 September 2008.

Oscar Leonard Carl Pistorius (born 22 November 1986) is a South African sprint runner. Known as the "Blade Runner" and "the fastest man on no legs", Pistorius, who has a double amputation, is the world record holder in the 100, 200 and 400 metres (sport class T44) events and runs with the aid of Cheetah Flex-Foot carbon fibre transtibial artificial limbs by Ossur.

In 2007, Pistorius took part in his first international competitions for able-bodied athletes. However, his artificial lower legs, while enabling him to compete, have generated claims that he has an unfair advantage over able-bodied runners. The same year, the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) amended its competition rules to ban the use of "any technical device that incorporates springs, wheels or any other element that provides a user with an advantage over another athlete not using such a device". The federation claimed that the amendment was not specifically aimed at Pistorius. After monitoring his track performances and carrying out tests, scientists took the view that Pistorius enjoyed considerable advantages over athletes without prosthetic limbs. On the strength of these findings, on 14 January 2008 the IAAF ruled him ineligible for competitions conducted under its rules, including the 2008 Summer Olympics. This decision was reversed by the Court of Arbitration for Sport on 16 May 2008, the Court ruling overall there was no evidence that Pistorius had any net advantage over able-bodied athletes.

Although eligible to compete in the 2008 Summer Olympic Games in Beijing, Pistorius did not qualify for the South African team. Despite achieving third place and a personal best time of 46.25 seconds in the 400 metres in Lucerne, Switzerland, on 16 July 2008, this was short of the Olympic qualification time of 45.55 seconds. He was also not selected by the South African Olympic Committee for the 4 × 400 metres relay team as there were four other runners who had achieved better times. At the 2008 Summer Paralympics, he took the gold medals in the 100, 200 and 400 metres (T44) sprints.

With his 400 m time of 45.07 on 19 July 2011, he achieved the "A" qualifying standard for the 2011 World Championships and 2012 Olympics. He participated in the 400m sprint and 4x400m relay, being eliminated in the semi-final of the 400m sprint (finishing last with a time of 46.19secs) and being part of South Africa's silver medal winning relay team, making him the first amputee to win an able-bodied world track medal, although he was not selected for the final.

Early years and education[link]

Oscar Pistorius was born to Henke and Sheila Pistorius on 22 November 1986 in Sandton, Johannesburg, in what was then Transvaal Province (now Gauteng Province) of South Africa,^[1] with congenital absence of the fibula in both legs. When he was 11 months old, his legs were amputated halfway between his knees and ankles.^[3] He attended Constantia Kloof Primary^[8] and Pretoria Boys High School^[1][9] where, between the ages of 11 and 13, he played rugby union in the school's third XV team, water polo and tennis. He also played water polo and tennis at provincial level. In addition, Pistorius took part in club Olympic wrestling.^[2][10][11] After a serious rugby knee injury in June 2003, he was introduced to running in January 2004 while undergoing rehabilitation, and "never looked back".^[10]

Pistorius is studying for a Bachelor of Commerce (B.Com.)^[12] in business management with sports science at the University of Pretoria;^[2][10] in a June 2008 interview for his University's website, he joked: "I won't graduate soon. With all the training I have had to cut down on my subjects. Hopefully I'll finish by the time I'm 30!"^[12] His sporting motto is: "You're not disabled by the disabilities you have, you are able by the abilities you have."^[10]

Sporting career[link]

Known as the "Blade Runner"^[13] and "the fastest man on no legs",^[14][15] he took part in the 2004 Summer Paralympics in Athens and came third overall in the T44 (one leg amputated below the knee)^[11] 100-metre event.^[16] Despite falling in the preliminary round for the 200 metres, he qualified for the final.^[17] He went on to win the final with a world record time of 21.97 seconds, beating American runners with a single amputation Marlon Shirley and Brian Frasure.^[16]

In 2005, Pistorius finished sixth in the able-bodied South African Championships over 400 metres with a world-record time of 47.34 seconds,^[11] and at the Paralympic World Cup in the same year he won gold in the 100 metres and 200 metres, beating his previous 200-metre world record.^[18][19] At the 2006 Paralympic Athletics World Championships, Pistorius won gold in the 100, 200 and 400-metre events, breaking the world record over 200 metres.^[20] On 17 March 2007, he set a disability sports world record for the 400 metres (46.56 seconds) at the South African Senior Athletics Championships in Durban,^[21] and at the Nedbank Championships for the Physically Disabled held in Johannesburg in April 2007, he became the world record holder of the 100 and 200-metre events with times of 10.91 and 21.58 seconds respectively.^[22][23]

Pistorius was invited by the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) to take part in what would have been his first international able-bodied event, the 400-metre race at the IAAF Grand Prix in Helsinki, Finland, in July 2005. He was unable to attend, however, because of school commitments.^[24] On 13 July 2007, Pistorius ran in the 400-metre race at Rome's Golden Gala and finished second in run B with a time of 46.90 seconds, behind Stefano Braciola who ran 46.72 seconds.^[25] This was a warm-up for his appearance at the 400 metres at the Norwich Union British Grand Prix at the Don Valley Stadium in Sheffield on 15 July 2007.^[26] As American Olympic champion Jeremy Wariner stumbled at the start of the race and stopped running, Pistorius took seventh place in a field of eight in wet conditions with a time of 47.65 seconds. However, he was later disqualified for running outside his lane. The race was won by American Angelo Taylor with a time of 45.25 seconds.^[27][28] Pistorius has ambitions of competing in other able-bodied events. In particular, he had set his sights on competing at the 2008 Summer Olympics in Beijing, China,^[29] but was ultimately not selected by the South African Olympic Committee (see below).

Pistorius's autobiography, Dream Runner, was published in Italian in 2008 by Gianni Merlo, a journalist with La Gazzetta dello Sport.^[30] An English version entitled Blade Runner was released in 2009.^[31]

Dispute over prosthetics[link]

The South African newspaper The Citizen announcing the IAAF's decision to bar Pistorius from its competitions – photographed in Johannesburg on 16 January 2008.

Pistorius has been the subject of criticism because of claims that his artificial limbs give him an advantage over runners with natural ankles and feet. He runs with J-shaped carbon-fibre prosthetics called the "Cheetah Flex-Foot" manufactured by Icelandic company Ossur.^[11]

On 26 March 2007, the IAAF amended its competition rules to include a ban on the use of "any technical device that incorporates springs, wheels or any other element that provides a user with an advantage over another athlete not using such a device".^[32] It claimed that the amendment was not specifically aimed at Pistorius. To decide if he is running with an unfair advantage, the IAAF monitored his track performances using high-definition cameras to film his race against Italian club runners in Rome on 13 July, and his 400 metres in Sheffield on 15 July 2007,^[14][33] at which he placed last.^[28]

In November 2007, Oscar was invited to take part in a series of scientific tests at the Cologne Sports University under the guidance of Professor of Biomechanics Dr Peter Brüggemann in conjunction with Mr Elio Locatelli, who was responsible with the IAAF of all technical issues. After two days of tests Brüggemann reported on his findings on behalf of the IAAF. The report claimed that Pistorius's limbs used 25% less energy than runners with complete natural legs to run at the same speed, and that they led to less vertical motion combined with 30% less mechanical work for lifting the body.^[34] In December, Brüggemann told Die Welt newspaper that Pistorius "has considerable advantages over athletes without prosthetic limbs who were tested by us. It was more than just a few percentage points. I did not expect it to be so clear."^[35] Based on these findings, on 14 January 2008 the IAAF ruled Pistorius's prostheses ineligible for use in competitions conducted under the IAAF rules, including the 2008 Summer Olympics.^[36] Pistorius called the decision "premature and highly subjective" and pledged to continue fighting for his dream. His manager Peet van Zyl said his appeal would be based on advice from United States experts who had said that the report "did not take enough variables into consideration".^[37]

In February 2008, Pistorius employed the services of law firm Dewey & LeBoeuf to challenge the ruling via an appeal and later that month, travelled to America to take part in a series of further tests carried out at Rice University in Houston by a team of scientists including Hugh Herr, PhD and Rodger Kram, PhD

Pistorius subsequently appealed against the adverse decision to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) in Lausanne, Switzerland, and appeared before the tribunal at the end of April 2008.^[38]

After a two day hearing, on 16 May 2008 the Court of Arbitration for Sport upheld Oscar’s appeal and the IAAF council decision was revoked with immediate effect. The CAS panel unanimously determined that Dr. Brüggemann only tested Oscar’s biomechanics at full-speed when he was running in a straight line (unlike a real 400m race), that the report did not consider the disadvantages that Oscar suffers at the start and acceleration phases of the race, that Dr. Brüggemann did not consider disadvantages that Oscar suffers, and that overall there was no evidence that Oscar had any net advantage over able-bodied athletes.^[39] In response to the announcement, Pistorius said: "My focus throughout this appeal has been to ensure that disabled athletes be given the chance to compete and compete fairly with able-bodied athletes. I look forward to continuing my quest to qualify for the Olympics."^[40]

Attempts to qualify for 2008 Summer Olympics[link]

To have a chance of representing South Africa at the 2008 Summer Olympics in Beijing in the individual 400-metre race, Pistorius had to attain the Olympic "A" standard time of 45.55 seconds; the "B" qualifying time of 45.95 seconds if no other athlete from his country achieved the faster time did not apply. Each national athletics federation is permitted to enter three athletes in an event if the "A" standard is met, and only one athlete if the "B" standard is met.^[41] However, he was eligible for selection as a member of the relay squad without qualifying.^[42] His best chance was to try for a time of close to 46 seconds to make the 4 × 400-metre relay team. However, he said: "If I make the team I don't want to be the reserve for the relay, I want to be in the top four. I want to bring something to the race and make the relay stronger." To give him a chance of making the South African Olympic team, selectors delayed naming the team until 17 July.^[43]

On 2 July 2008, Pistorius competed in the 400 metres in the B race of the Notturna International in Milan but was "disappointed"^[43][44] when he failed to achieve the minimum Olympic qualification time, completing the race in fourth place in 47.78 seconds.^[43][45] His performance on 11 July 2008 at the Rome Golden Gala was an improvement of more than a second, though his sixth-place time of 46.62 seconds in the B race was still short of the Olympic qualification time. Nonetheless, he was pleased with his performance, commenting that he felt he could improve on it.^[46]

On 15 July 2008, IAAF general secretary Pierre Weiss commented that the world athletics body preferred that the South African Olympic Committee did not select Pistorius for its 4 × 400 metres relay team "for reasons of safety", saying that Pistorius could cause "serious damage" and risk the physical safety of himself and other athletes if he ran in the main pack of the relay.^[47] Pistorius branded this as the IAAF's "last desperate attempt" to get him not to qualify,^[48] and threatened legal action if the Federation did not confirm that it had no objections to his participation in the relay.^[49] The IAAF responded by issuing a statement saying that Pistorius was welcome to seek qualification for the Olympics and future competitions under IAAF rules: "The IAAF fully respects the recent CAS decision regarding the eligibility of Oscar Pistorius to compete in IAAF competitions, and certainly has no wish to influence the South African Olympic Committee, who has full authority to select a men's 4x400m relay team for the Beijing Olympics."^[50][51]

Despite coming third and running a personal best time of 46.25 seconds at the Spitzen Leichtathletik meeting in Lucerne on 16 July 2008, Pistorius failed in his final opportunity to qualify for the 400 metres at the 2008 Summer Olympics by 0.70 seconds. Athletics South Africa later announced that he would also not be selected for the 4 × 400 metres relay team as four other runners had better times.^[50][52] If Pistorius had been picked, he would have become the first runner with a leg amputation to participate in the Olympic Games.^[53] Asked about the possibility of the IAAF offering him a wild card to take part in the Olympics, Pistorius responded, "I do not believe that I would accept. If I have to take part in the Beijing Games I should do it because I qualified." Instead, he expressed a preference for focusing on getting into the 2012 Summer Olympics in London,^[44] noting that it was a more realistic target as "[s]printers usually reach their peak between 26 and 29. I will be 25 in London and I'll also have two, three years' preparation."^[45]

2008 Summer Paralympics[link]

Pistorius participated in the 2008 Summer Paralympics in Beijing in the 100, 200 and 400 metres (T44). On 9 September, in the heats of the 100 metres, he set a Paralympic record with his time of 11.16 seconds.^[54] Later, following a slow start, he rallied to snatch gold from the United States' Jerome Singleton in the 100 metres in a time of 11.17 seconds, 0.03 seconds ahead of the silver medallist.^[55] Four days later, on 13 September, the defending Paralympic champion in the 200 metres sprint^[56] won his second gold in the event in a time of 21.67 seconds,^[57] setting another Paralympic record.^[54] He completed a hat-trick by winning gold in the 400 metres in a world-record time of 47.49 seconds on 16 September,^[58] calling it "a memory that will stay with me for the rest of my life".^[59]

2011 and qualification for 2012 Summer Olympics[link]

Pistorius during the 2011 World Athletics Championships in Daegu.

In January 2011, a slimmer, trimmer Pistorius won three IPC Athletics World titles in New Zealand but was beaten for the first time in seven years in the 100m by American Jerome Singleton.^[60] He subsequently won the T44 400m in 47.28s and the 100m in 11.04s at the BT Paralympic World Cup in May to reassert himself as the world’s leading Paralympic sprinter.^[61]

Pistorius competed across a number of able-bodied races in the summer of 2011 and posted three times under 46 seconds but it was in Lignano, Italy, on 19 July that he set a personal best of 45.07s in the 400m, attaining the World Championships and Olympic Games ‘A’ standard qualification mark.^[62]

On 8 August 2011 it was announced that he had been included in the South African team for the World Championships in Daegu and had been selected for the 400m and the 4 × 400 metre relay squad.

To be selected for the South African team to compete at the Olympic Games in London, Oscar must again run inside the 400m ‘A’ standard of 45.25 seconds between January and June 2012.

In the heats of the 400 metre in the 2011 World Championships in Daegu, Oscar Pistorius ran a 45.39 and qualified for the semi-final. However, in the semi-final, Pistorius ran 46.19 and was eliminated.^[63] Had he run the 45.39 in the semi-final, that time would have qualified him for the final.^[64] In the heats of the 4 × 400m relay, Oscar ran the opening leg as South Africa advanced to the finals with a national record time of 2 minutes, 59.21 seconds. However, Pistorius was excluded from the finals. He still won the silver medal because he ran in the heats. Reflecting on his World Championship debut, Pistorius said: "I really enjoyed the whole experience. I ran my second fastest time ever in the heats and was really pleased to have reached the semi-finals. In the relay I was unbelievably chuffed to have broken the South African record, and hopefully my name will stay on that for a long time to come."^[65]

Medals[link]

Disability sports events[link]

Able-bodied sports events[link]

Time comparisons[link]

The following tables show comparisons between Pistorius's best times at official events and the Olympic and World record winning times as at 20 August 2009 over the same distance:

100 m[link]

200 m[link]

400 m[link]

Other awards and accolades[link]

In 2006, Pistorius was conferred the Order of Ikhamanga in Bronze (OIB) by the President of South Africa for outstanding achievement in sports.^[1] On 9 December 2007, Pistorius was awarded the BBC Sports Personality of the Year Helen Rollason Award, which is conferred for outstanding courage and achievement in the face of adversity.^[77]

In May 2008, Pistorius made the "2008 TIME 100" – Time magazine's annual list of the world's most influential people – appearing third in the "Heroes & Pioneers" section. Erik Weihenmayer, the first blind person to climb Mount Everest, wrote in an essay that Pistorius was "on the cusp of a paradigm shift in which disability becomes ability, disadvantage becomes advantage. Yet we mustn't lose sight of what makes an athlete great. It's too easy to credit Pistorius' success to technology. Through birth or circumstance, some are given certain gifts, but it's what one does with those gifts, the hours devoted to training, the desire to be the best, that is at the true heart of a champion."^[78]

In February 2012 Pistorius was awarded the Laureus World Sports Award for Sportsperson of the Year with a Disability for 2012.^[79] He is the third South African to receive this award after Ernst van Dyk in 2006 and Natalie du Toit in 2010.

Personal life[link]

Pistorius has distant Italian ancestry – his mother's grandfather was an Italian emigrant to Kenya.^[80][81] He has an elder brother, Carl, and a younger sister, Aimée.^[12][82]

Pistorius is a dedicated supporter of Italian Serie A club Lazio. This is because his best friend is Italian and also a fan of the club.^[81]

In 2008, Pistorius collaborated in the release of a music CD called Olympic Dream. Produced in Italy, it consists of disco remixes of music pieces that Pistorius finds inspirational, and two tracks written for him, "Olympic Dream" and "Run Boy Run", which he provided voiceovers for. Part of the CD's proceeds of sale will go to charity.^[83]

Notes[link]