Oscar Pistorius trial: 4 Possible Outcomes That The Judge Will Have to Decide Upon

Reporting by :Lucy Thornton
Oscar Pistorius looks on during his ongoing murder trial in Pretoria

Blade Runner Oscar Pistorius faces four possible verdicts when the judge retires to consider the charges against him.

The athlete's murder trial has now been adjourned until August 7th after the defence closed its case this morning.

It has been 39 days of tears, tantrums and buckets of vomit, broken up by weeks of psychiatric evaluations, legal wrangles, public holidays and sick assistant judges.

Now the state and defence go their separate ways to prepare their closing speeches for Judge Masipa.

The prosecution claim the superstar shot Reeva, 29, after a terrible row in the early hours of Valentine's Day 2013.

It was claimed the model ran away screaming from the athlete, locking herself in the toilet.

Pistorius has pleaded not guilty to premeditated murder ,insisting he heard a noise and believed there was an intruder and shot in fear.

Oscar told the court he thought there was "an imminent threat to Reeva and me".

He says he did not mean to pull the trigger and denies the couple had an argument that night.

After Gerrie Nel and Barry Roux pick up the cudgels again on that first Thursday in August it is understood the judge will take up a month to consider her verdict,with the help of her two assessors.

Oscar Pistorius will then learn his fate, with Judge Maspia having these possible outcomes to decide on:
Premeditated  Murder :
This is the most serious of all the verdicts the Judge will consider and the one which Pistorius is charged with.

To find him guilty of this charge the Judge has to decide the athlete had 'malice aforethought' - that he knew Reeva was in the bathroom, and had thought about killing her before grabbing the gun and pulling the trigger.

The state argue he had time to think about his actions when he went to get his gun, which was not in its usual place.

If found guilty he would be sentenced to life in prison and would only be considered for parole after serving 25 years.

Gerrie Nel argued the couple had been rowing in the hours before Reeva died. Crucial evidence came from five neighbours.

Neighbours, including Mrs Burger and Mr Charl Johnson, said they heard a woman's terrible screams then gunshots.

Pretoria High Court heard there were "blood curdling, fearful screaming and it carried on during the shots and faded away after the shots."

The defence hit back claiming Oscar "resembles a woman screaming" when anxious.

But his ex girlfriend Samantha Taylor later told the court: "That is not true, he sounds like a man" and said she had heard him scream "a few times".

Another neighbour spoke of putting a pillow over her head because of shouts coming from Oscar's home - hours before the shooting.

This was backed up by an expert who said Reeva had eaten two hours before her death - not seven hours as Oscar had claimed. The defence said stomach content analysis is an inexact science.

Prosecutor Gerrie Nel argued the woman's screams before the shots is proof Oscar knew it was Reeva he was shooting at.

Nel told him: "You fired four shots, knowing she was hiding in the toilet. You armed yourself with the sole purpose of killing her and that is what you did...your intention was to kill her."
Murder :
If Pistorius were to be convicted of murder, the judge has decided he intended to kill whoever was behind the door but there was no 'malice aforethought'.

He could have shot to kill a burglar, or Reeva, in a crime of passion.

Nel argued at the bail hearing that it does not matter if Oscar thought it was Reeva or an intruder.

He still aimed to kill and that is murder.

Kelly Phelps, a University of Cape Town Faculty of Law senior lecturer, has said: "What is clear is that crimes of passion in the heat of the moment will not be premeditation.

"It is true that as long as a clear thought is formed and executed, even in a few minutes, this could in theory be premeditation, but not if the killing happen on the spur of the moment out of rage."

If the Blade Runner is found guilty of murder, he will face 15 years in prison.
Culpable Homicide :
Of the three possible convictions, this is the least serious.

A verdict of culpable homicide would suggest negligence and not malice, if the judge decides that anxious Pistorius reacted because he was terrified of a potential burglar and wanted to protect himself and Reeva.

This would suggest that not only did Pistorius not intend to kill Steenkamp, he also didn’t realize that she was the one behind the door.

Neighbur Charl Johnson who went to Oscar's house after hearing screams told the court he found Oscar on his knees with his dying girlfriend.

He said Oscar told him: "I shot her. I thought she was a burglar and I shot her."

The court heard Oscar was terrified of crime and even went into "full combat" mode at the sound of a washing machine.

Pistorius tweeted about the incident in November 2012: "Nothing like getting home to hear the washing machine on and thinking its [sic] an intruder to go into full combat recon mode into the pantry!"

But the court also heard Pistorius knew it was illegal to shoot first and ask questions later, even if he believed a burglar was inside his home after getting good scores in a gun exam.

The sentence for this verdict would be at the discretion of the Judge, there is no minimum jail term laid down and Oscar could avoid a custodial sentence completely.
Not Guilty of all of the Above :
But there are other charges she also has to consider.

There are three firearms charges which were denied by Pistorius - allowing the state to bring in character evidence.

They painted a picture of a trigger-happy 'me, me, me' superstar who was jealous and prone to rages.

He is accused of firing a gun through a car sunroof, firing a gun under the table in a crowded restaurant.

He could face five years in prison on each of these counts.

Pistorius is also charged with storing illegal possession of ammunition at his home, which he claimed belonged to his estranged father.

If found guilty the accused could face up to 15 years for this offence.

Thanx to Lucy Thornton