Oscar Pistorius still faces a charge of culpable homicide in the trial for killing girlfriend Reva Steenkamp.
Judge Thokozile Masipa ruled on Thursday against a murder conviction but will deliver the second part of the verdict on Friday.
Culpable homicide is the South African equivalent of Britain’s manslaughter, notes The Star. It has been defined in South Africa as “the unlawful negligent killing of a human being.” The key difference between culpable homicide and premeditated murder is that the latter requires planning.
While Pistorius could have gotten up to life in prison for the murder conviction, the culpable homicide charge carries a maximum penalty of 15 years in jail with no minimum sentence.
Masipa said on Thursday that while the prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Pistorius was guilty of premeditated murder, key elements of the culpable homicide charge were satisfied.
“I am of the view that the accused acted too hastily and used excessive force. It is clear that his conduct was negligent,” she told the packed courtroom before adjourning until Friday. She also said he had not acted “reasonably.”
“The accused therefore cannot be found guilty of murder dolus eventualis... that however is not the end of the matter as culpable homicide is a competent verdict,” she had said earlier.
Judge Thokozile Masipa reads notes as she delivers her verdict in the Oscar Pistorius murder trial, in Pretoria, South Africa, Thursday, Sept. 11 2014. (AP Photo/Phil Magakoe, Pool)
Pistorius, the world-famous athlete, has acknowledged firing shots through the toilet door in his home, hitting Steenkamp in the head, arm and hip area with hollow-point bullets from his 9 mm pistol. He said he mistook her for an intruder and denied murder, but the judge said Pistorius still could have taken other action, like calling the police or security at his housing estate.
“Did the accused fail to take steps he should have taken? Yes,” Masipa said. “He failed to take any steps to avoid the death.”
At the start of the judgment hearing, Masipa told Pistorius, 27, that he should remain seated on the bench while she read her findings out and until she asked him to stand for the verdict.
In her hours-long assessment of witness evidence, she called Pistorius a “very poor witness” who had lost his composure on the stand and was at times “evasive.” But Masipa emphasized that did not mean he was guilty of murder.
The 66-year-old judge also cast doubt on witness accounts of hearing a woman’s screams, a key part of the prosecution’s case. The defense had argued that it was Pistorius who was screaming in a high-pitched voice after discovering he had fatally shot Steenkamp.
Masipa also cited testimony of an acoustics expert called by the defense, saying it cast “serious doubt” on whether witnesses who were hundreds of meters (yards) away in their homes — as some state witnesses were — could have differentiated between the screams of a man or a woman.
At one point, Masipa said: “I continue to explain why most witnesses got their facts wrong.”
Masipa also said she was disregarding text messages between Steenkamp and Pistorius that had been entered as evidence. Prosecutors had submitted text messages that showed tension between them while the defense submitted messages that indicated mutual affection. That evidence, the judge said, doesn’t prove anything.
“Normal relationships are dynamic and unpredictable most of the time, while human beings are fickle,” she said.
If Pistorius is convicted on any charge, the case will be postponed until a later sentencing hearing.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
