Oscar Pistorius trial: Murder verdicts ruled out The judge in the Oscar Pistorius trial has ruled out all murder charges, but says he may still be guilty of culpable homicide (manslaughter). Judge Thokozile Masipa said the prosecution had failed to prove the Olympic athlete killed his girlfriend deliberately in the toilet after a row, prompting tears from Mr Pistorius. He cannot have foreseen killing whoever was behind the toilet door, she said. She added he was an evasive witness but this did not mean he was guilty. The South African Olympic sprinter denies murdering Reeva Steenkamp on Valentines Day last year, saying he thought there was an intruder. Mr Pistorius, 27, has pleaded not guilty to all the charges he faces, including two counts of shooting a firearm in public and the illegal possession of ammunition. Facts wrong Judge Masipa began by detailing the charges against the athlete and repeating extracts of his testimony, reading in a slow, measured way. She then moved on to a summary of the trial. A tense-looking Mr Pistorius looked on from the dock, and wept several times during the proceedings. The judge questioned the reliability of several witnesses who apparently heard screams and gunshots at the time of the incident, saying most of those who said they had heard the incident had got facts wrong. The prosecution had used these witnesses to try to prove that Mr Pistorius had killed Ms Steenkamp with premeditation after an argument. Later in her judgement, Judge Masipa concluded that the prosecution had failed in this. The state has not proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty of premeditated murder, she said. There are just not enough facts to support such a finding. The judge added that the accused believed his life was in danger and therefore could not be found guilty of a lesser charge of murder. Judge: He did not subjectively foresee as a possibility that he would kill the person behind the door, let alone the deceased, as he thought she was in the bedroom How could the accused reasonably have foreseen that the shot he fired would kill the deceased? she said. Clearly he did not subjectively foresee this as a possibility, that he would kill the person behind the door, let alone the deceased as he thought she was in the bedroom at the time. But Judge Masipa then adjourned for lunch without ruling out culpable homicide, which suggests negligence without intention to kill and which could still mean a jail sentence. The BBCs Andrew Harding says the court is witnessing Judge Masipas logic and style - gentle, tolerant of error from witnesses, but razor sharp. Correspondents say the judge appeared to be moving much more quickly than expected through the evidence, in a process which had been expected take more than a few hours or even days
Posted on: Thu, 11 Sep 2014 12:44:53 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015