On the third day of his cross-examination, Mr Nel pressed the Olympic sprinter to explain the final moments leading up to the shooting.He asked why he had not checked whether Ms Steenkamp had heard his calls for her to phone the police, or why he had not taken her to safety instead of going to confront the supposed intruder.Mr Pistorius said it was his personality to confront what he believed was an intruder. The trial has been adjourned until Monday morning.


What does "personality" mean here? Is it a typo? Should it not be "responsibility"?


...Mr Pistorious said it was [in the nature of] his personality to confront what he believed was an intruder...

I believe this is what is implied, I don't think it would be a typo.


It is not a typo. What it means is that his personality led him to confront an intruder, where someone with a different personality might have investigated further, or gone for help, or made some other choice. It means his nature, and he's saying that for him to have made other choices in that situation would have required that he be a different type of person. It's his excuse for why he did what he did, not a way to claim or deny responsibility.

Full Transcript is at http://news.sky.com/story/1240765/oscar-pistorius-trial-court-transcript. Page 10, Pistorius is quoted saying he acted in his nature, and it fits the context of the article you cited.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.