The Oscar Pistorius’ judgement day proceedings have been going on for some hours now and watching it; the media attention together with the extensive attention to details the murder trial judge- Thokozile Masipa, the only second black woman to be appointed a high court judge in post-apartheid South Africa has given to case (analysed more than 4,000 pages of evidence before reaching her decision) brings to mind the popular O.J Simpson case…

The court has returned to continue with the reading which will finally bring us the VERDICT!

The question on people’s mind is; would justice be served? The truth this, each of us have our own idea of what justice should be and if judge- Thokozile Masipa’s verdict does not fall in line with ours, we may be tempted to say justice has been thrown out of the window.
But we must remember that, we did not look at the 4000 pages of evidence, she did…and what she thinks is justice is what really matters in this case.

So far, she seems to have a good understanding of the case and she has been consistent in her submission, noting some key elements and discarding some crucial information such as the presented whatssap conversation between Oscar and his girlfriend as irrelevant. She argued that relationships are “dynamic”. “This court refrains from making inferences one way or the other in this regard”.

Interestingly, she rejected another key evidence from the State, this time on Gastric emptying, by saying this is not “an exact science” so that evidence is “inconclusive.”

Judge- Thokozile Masipa has said that, “the state clearly has not proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty of premeditated murder. There are just not enough facts to support such a finding,”. Therefore, Oscar Pistorius has escaped the charge of premeditated murder with a mandatory prison sentence of 25 years.

It seems like he is now faced with culpable homicide or negligent killing even though this is not on the indictment.

That’s because he must be judged on whether he acted negligently in the death of his girlfriend, even if it’s found he didn’t intend to kill her.

And this charge carries a maximum of 15 years, possibly between seven and 10 years, but there is the possibility of a suspended sentence.

Lastly, he still can be ACQUITTED if the judge finds he had no intention to kill and also acted reasonably or in self-defence, considering the circumstance he found himself.

Court is on 5 minutes break.

In considering murder dolus eventualis the Judge asked the question; did the accused subjectively forsee it couldn’t be the deceased behind the door when he shot?

Judge- Thokozile Masipa said the evidence does not support this…

Also, she stated that the accused did not subjectively forsee that he will kill the person behind the door, let alone the deceased when he thought she was on the bed. “How could the accused have reasonably foreseen the shot he fired would have killed the deceased? Clearly he did not subjectively foresee this, that he would have killed the person behind the door, let alone the deceased,” says Judge Masipa.

Therefore, on the charge of murder dolus eventualis, Oscar Pistorius is NOT FOUND Guilty.

This leaves the Court with culpable homicide or negligent killing. As stated above, this charge carries a maximum of 15 years, possibly between seven and 10 years, but there is the possibility of a suspended sentence.

The court has taken an early lunch…

After the lunch break, Judge Masipa started by looking at “accused negligent in causing death of the deceased” by citing the “reasonable man” test.

She stated that, though this is an objective test, some evidence of subjectivity should be taken into consideration—and added that, the reasonable man himself evolves with time. What was reasonable some years ago cannot be expected to be reasonable today.

She noted that, it was submitted for the accused that for the purpose of the reasonable man test, the disability must be taken into consideration as his disability made him vulnerable.

The Judge mentioned that the Defence lawyers argued that the accused’s circumstances should be taken into account, adding, ‘this included the fact that Mr Pistorius grew up in a crime ridden area’.

Considering the issue of reasonableness, the Judge explained that if the accused had awoken in the middle of the night and in darkness saw a silhouette hovering next to his bed, and had in a panic shot at that figure, only to find it was the deceased, his conduct would have been understandable and perhaps excusable. In such a case, he would not have been expected to call security first, as he would have been faced with a real emergency, therefore making his action reasonable.

The Judge noted that, a reasonable person would not have shot as the accused did in her estimation. She asked, would a reasonable person same as the accused have reasonably forsee that if he shot into the door 4 times, he would have killed the person behind the door—and the judge answered YES.

Judge Masipa stated the accused was negligent of his conduct, saying “in the circumstances, it is clear that his conduct was negligent”. Here, the judge says Oscar Pistorius hastily and used excessive force, thereby acting unreasonably.

“The accused knew that there was a person behind the toilet door. He chose to use a firearm which was a lethal weapon. He was competent in the use of firearms as he had undergone some training,” the judge said.

At this stage, it is clear that that the judge will find Oscar Pistorius guilty of culpable homicide—but she has not categorically stated this yet…

The trial has been adjourned until Friday.