Two courts in South Africa are now debating Judge Thokozile Masipa’s verdict so far in the Oscar Pistorius trial – the court of public opinion and that of legal experts.
Legal experts say she followed the law impeccably, by looking at the evidence before her and then evaluating whether the state had proven its case.
But others have been unsettled by her ruling that Mr Pistorius was not guilty of murder, though she has yet to reveal her verdict on the lesser charge of culpable homicide.
While the law makes provisions for how criminal matters should be handled, judges, as custodians of the law, ultimately use their discretion.
Judge Masipa took the view that the state had failed to prove Mr Pistorius had intended to kill someone, so he could not be convicted of murder.
“The evidence failed to prove the accused had intention [to kill],” she said. “The accused had the intention to shoot at the person behind the door, not to kill.”
Respected veteran judge Willem Heath says Judge Masipa could only base her verdict on the evidence before her and the facts of the case.
“She went to the crux of the evidence. On the evidence presented, I am in agreement with her there is just not evidence that he had intention to kill,” he says. “She had to analyse the evidence and apply the law to that.”
Lawyer Mannie Witz agrees, saying: “The minute you knock out intention, it can’t be murder.” Read more BBC.COM
