Olympic and Paralympic athlete Oscar Pistorius will find out next month if he is has been found guilty of murdering his model girlfriend, after the lead prosecutor in the case urged him to "face the consequences".
The South African sprinter will be brought back to the courtroom in Pretoria on September 11, where judge Thokozile Masipa and her two assistants will announced whether he was responsible for the cold-blooded killing of Reeva Steenkamp on Valentine's Day last year.
Pistorius's fate is in the hands of only the country's second black high court judge since the end of apartheid.
Ms Masipa has four weeks to pore over 4,000 pages of evidence before delivering her verdict in front of the world's media.
The fallen sporting hero, nicknamed the Blade Runner, has denied murdering Ms Steenkamp at his mansion in a gated village in Pretoria.
Pistorius claims he mistook her for an intruder when he fired a gun through a locked toilet door in self-defence.
State prosecutor Gerrie Nel, known as "the pit-bull" for his aggressive cross-examination of witnesses - including Pistorius, who was reduced to tears - portrayed the sportsman as a gun-obsessed hothead.
He concluded his summing up by reiterating his claim that the athlete deliberately shot the 29-year-old four times as she was taking refuge in the toilet after an argument.
Mr Nel said: "He knew there was a human being in the toilet. That's his evidence. His intention was to kill a human being. He's fired indiscriminately into that toilet. Then m'lady, he is guilty of murder. There must be consequences."
Earlier this week, Mr Nel accused Pistorius of telling "a snowball of lies" and had called for the runner to be convicted of intentional murder, a crime that can attract a life sentence.
Under South African law, culpable homicide carries a possible sentence of about 15 years.
Barry Roux, for the defence, said evidence had proven the track star had a heightened fight response because of his disability and was in a terrified and vulnerable state when he shot Ms Steenkamp.
Mr Roux added: "You're standing at that door. You're vulnerable. You're anxious. You're trained as an athlete to react. Take all those factors into account,"
He argued that Pistorius felt exposed because he was standing on the stumps of his legs.
"He stands with his finger on the trigger, ready to fire when ready. In some instances a person will fire reflexively," he continued. "That is your primal instinct."
Mr Roux also argued that prosecutors had only called witnesses who supported their argument and not other key people, including police officers, who he said would have undermined their case.
Pistorius also faces three separate charges, including two counts of discharging firearms in public and possession of illegal ammunition, all of which he denies.
Mr Roux said the trial should only ever have been on the charge of culpable homicide, because he said Pistorius had clearly shot Ms Steenkamp by mistake.
Closing arguments centred on evidence from witnesses who say they heard a woman scream before a volley of shots, supporting the prosecution's position that the couple had an argument before Ms Steenkamp was killed.
Mr Roux went through the early morning of the shooting minute by minute during his wrapping-up, arguing that the witnesses were confused and contradictory about the sounds they heard.
He also spent time analysing photos he said proved the police had moved items in the couple's bedroom, countering a key claim by Mr Nel that images of the room proved Pistorius's version of the events was impossible.
However, Pistorius's chief accuser said his evidence was "devoid of any truth" and that the athlete contradicted himself when he said during cross-examination that he fired both accidentally and deliberately.
In the absence of a jury, Ms Masipa will either accept or reject his version of events.
The fathers of both Pistorius and Ms Steenkamp have been in court this week. The athlete's aunt embraced Mr Steenkamp before the trial resumed yesterday.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article