Oscar Pistorius trial: Murder verdicts ruled out

The judge in the Oscar Pistorius trial has ruled out murder charges, but has left it to Friday to announce whether he is guilty of culpable homicide.

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.

But she said he acted too hastily and his conduct was clearly negligent.

Adjourning the trial, she said a reasonable person would not have fired.

Judge Masipa had earlier described Mr Pistorius as an evasive witness but said this did not mean he was guilty.

Clearing him of murder charges, she said

he could not have foreseen killing whoever was behind the toilet door.

The South African Olympic sprinter had denied murdering Reeva Steenkamp on Valentine's 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.

And with that - we're adjourned for the day. So clearly, culpable homicide will be the sentence, but she hasn't spelled it out yet.

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.

"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 before moving on to the charge of culpable homicide, or manslaughter, which suggests negligence without intention to kill and which could still mean a jail sentence.

Her decision to adjourn for the day took many by surprise.

The BBC's Andrew Harding says the court witnessed Judge Masipa's 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.

Premeditated murder

Intended and planned to unlawfully kill Reeva Steenkamp, or an intruder

Mandatory life term - 25 years before parole

Common-law murder

Unlawfully intended to kill in the heat of the moment but without "malice aforethought". Either: Shot door intending to kill, or knew someone might be killed and still fired gun

Minimum of 15 years up to 20 years, at judge's discretion

Culpable homicide (manslaughter)

No intention to kill. Takes into account disability, but actions negligent and not in keeping with a reasonable person

Maximum of 15 years, possibly between seven and 10 years

Discharging a firearm in public

Two counts for allegedly firing a gun through a car sunroof and discharging a gun at a restaurant

A fine or up to five years - for each charge

Illegal possession of ammunition

In possession of .38 bullets for which he has no licence

A fine or up to 15 years

Most of the trial, which began on 3 March 2014, has been televised and attracted worldwide attention.

Before the fatal shooting, the 27-year-old athlete was feted in South Africa and known as the "blade runner".

He had won gold at the London 2012 Paralympic Games and also competed at the Olympics.

The judgement at his trial is likely to be well over 100 pages. The judge went through each charge, summing up the prosecution and defence cases and analysing the evidence.

Ms Steenkamp, a 29-year-old model and law graduate, was hit three times by bullets shot through a toilet door by Mr Pistorius at his home in the capital, Pretoria, in the early hours of 14 February 2013.

He denies the prosecution's allegation that the couple - who had been dating for three months - had rowed.

The athlete said he thought she was still in the bedroom when he heard a noise in the bathroom, which he believed to be an intruder.

The prosecution have tried to characterise Mr Pistorius as a "hothead", while his defence team have portrayed him as having a heightened response to perceived danger because of his disability and background.

In July, a psychiatric report requested by the judge said Mr Pistorius had post-traumatic stress disorder but no mental illness that could prevent him being held criminally responsible for his actions.

BBC