Oscar Pistorius is preparing to face a South African court for judgement in the murder trial over the death of his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp. Fairfax Media journalist Lisa Davies will provide live coverage of what's been dubbed the 'trial of the century' here from 5.30pm.

Oscar Pistorius is preparing to face a South African court for judgement in the murder trial over the death of his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp. Fairfax Media journalist Lisa Davies will provide live coverage of what's been dubbed the 'trial of the century' here from 5.30pm. You can also explore full coverage of the Blade Runner's murder trial here.

It's all anyone is talking about. #OscarPistorius #OscarTrial @smh pic.twitter.com/uwuEDSU3yd — Lisa Davies (@lisazdavies) September 11, 2014

Take a look at our crime scene interactive as Lisa Davies explains the key pieces of evidence in the Pistorius trial.

Some support for #OscarPistorius outside Pretoria's high court this morning. Judgement he to begin in abt 90 mins pic.twitter.com/PEbDztQCyh — Lisa Davies (@lisazdavies) September 11, 2014

On Sunday, a South African newspaper reported that Oscar Pistorius "exploded with anger" when asked how he was doing in the lead up to the court's verdict.

#OscarPistorius is expected to be supported in court as always by his family. Reeva Steenkamp's parents and sister also likely to attend — Lisa Davies (@lisazdavies) September 11, 2014

Pictured are Reeva Steenkamp's parents, June and Barry Steenkamp, at an earlier court sitting.

Reeva Streenkamp's mum June Steenkamp has just arrived at court to hear judge's verdict on #OscarPistorius pic.twitter.com/4qB1jWLt85 — Lisa Davies (@lisazdavies) September 11, 2014

RT @OscarTrial199: Extra security seems to have been brought in to keep crowd from spilling over into the path to Court GD #oscartrial — Lisa Davies (@lisazdavies) September 11, 2014

Oscar Pistorius is now at the centre of the trial of the century, with the court's judgement on Thursday looming as one of the most watched media events in history, as it is live streamed on websites around the world.

Since his case began in the Pretoria High Court on March 3, more than 2 million tweets have used the hashtags #OscarPistorius and #OscarTrial, and the commentary should reach fever pitch on when the judgement begins.

Judge Masipa's verdict will begin in one hour. No sign of #OscarPistorius yet but June and Barry Steenkamp are here. #OscarTrial — Lisa Davies (@lisazdavies) September 11, 2014

The courtroom has been opened and we are now inside. The door through which #OscarPistorius fired those four fatal shots is no longer here. — Lisa Davies (@lisazdavies) September 11, 2014

#Pistorius Oscar's brother Carl arrives in wheelchair after recent car crash pic.twitter.com/FPe3dpkOgy — martinbrunt (@skymartinbrunt) September 11, 2014

It is an irony lost on no one that in a country with such a prominent history of racial tension, the world will be watching on Thursday as a black woman who grew up in the poor townships of South Africa sits in judgment of a white man of class, privilege, and wealth.

But that's what will happen when Judge Thokozile Matilda Masipa reveals her verdicts in the murder trial of Oscar Pistorius.

Photo gallery: Oscar Pistorius faces his fate.

As expected Carl Pistorius - the elder brother of Oscar and their younger sister Aimee - has left hospital to be at the paralympian's side today.

Sources close to the family said he nearly had to have a leg amputated following the high-speed crash last month.

Oscar's own legs were amputated at 11 months old, as he was born without fibula in both legs.

The courtroom is slowly filling. In the front row behind where the prosecution will sit is Reeva Steenkamp's parents, Barry and June Steenkamp.

Barry, who had a stroke as a result of his grief, did not attend any of the trial. He did come to court for the prosecution closing arguments a month ago.

There is a lot of security in court.

Someone has given the Steenkamp's a bunch of flowers.

Sitting near to them is Darren Fresco, who used to be one of Oscar's closest friends.

However, they are friends no more. Fresco testified against Pistorius, telling the court Pistorius once fired a gun out the sunroof of a moving vehicle.

Oscar Pistorius has just arrived in court, looking very emotional. Understandable, really. He told the court in his evidence: "I am on trial for my life."

He was embraced by a number of family members, and had a long embrace with his brother Carl, whose wheelchair is positioned next to the dock.

Oscar Pistorius has arrived to learn his fate.....total chaos #Pistorius pic.twitter.com/QJG0CuQ0py — Tom Steinfort (@tomsteinfort) September 11, 2014

So now we really are all ready. The front row of the court, behind Pistorius' legal team, is full of Oscar's family and friends.

His Uncle Arnold, his wife Lois, his sister Aimee, and a number of other family and supporters are all here.

Just to recap - Judge Thokozile Masipa is due on the bench shortly and will begin reading her judgement.

She will summarise the evidence and gradually weigh up the witnesses as she goes.

It may well be that this process, which could be rather laborious, does not finish until Friday morning, when she will pronounce her verdicts.

And now for hours of clue-hunting, as we look for indications about verdict in Judge's marathon reading session. — andrew harding (@BBCAndrewH) September 11, 2014

And here she comes... the court room rises, as Judge Masipa is walks to the bench.

Judge Masipa tells Oscar Pistorius he can remain seated, she will tell him when to rise.

Judge Masipa begins by analysing Pistorius' home in Pretoria.

She's describing what it looks like inside.

On the 13th of February 2013, the accused spent the evening in his home with Reeva Steenkamp.

"In the early hours of 14 February the accused shot and killed Ms Steenkamp, the deceased."

"At the time the deceased was shot, she was inside the locked toilet."

Judge Masipa says Pistorius was charged with murder in the hours after the shooting.

In the coming days and weeks, Pistorius was also charged with three other offences, the details of which Judge Masipa is now explaining: firing his 9mm pistol out of an open sunroof in September 2012, recklessly discharging his firearm in a restaurant, and keeping ammunition for which he did not have a licence.

Judge Masipa is dealing with the established facts of the case: "The accused shot and killed Reeva Steenkamp." #OscarPistorius — Aislinn Laing (@Simmoa) September 11, 2014

#Pistorius looks utterly, utterly miserable, understandably. Practically a quivering bottom lip — Ruth Maclean (@ruthmaclean) September 11, 2014

Am told no one but the 3 people on the podium - judge and assessors - has seen this verdict. No leaks. No hints. — andrew harding (@BBCAndrewH) September 11, 2014

Judge Masipa now moves onto Pistorius' "explanation of plea" the athlete gave at the start of the trial.

This was the second time he gave an explanation about what happened that night, the first was at his bail hearing a year earlier.

"During the early hours of the morning I brought two fans in from the balcony. I had spoken to Reeva, who was in the bed beside me.

"Unbeknown to me, Reeva must have gone to the toilet in the bathroom, at the time when I brought in the fans, closed the sliding doors and drew the curtains.

"I heard the bathroom window slide open. I believed an intruder or intruders had entered the bathroom through the bathroom window which was not fitted with security bars."

He said as he grabbed his gun and went towards the bathroom, he believed Reeva was still in bed.

As Judge Masipa reads the details of the unrelated gun charges, it's worth noting that these carry potential jail terms in themselves.

Each carries a maximum jail term of 5 years. That said, such offences are most usually dealt with by way of suspended sentences or fines.

Two witnesses - Pistorius' former best friend Darren Fresco, and ex-girlfriend Samantha Taylor - both testified that he fired his 9mm pistol out of a sunroof as it sped along a freeway one day. They were both in the car.

Judge Masipa notes that Pistorius admitted the gunshot wounds were inflicted by him.

In relation to the other offences, the judge said there were no admissions in relation to the sunroof shooting, but Pistorius has admitted the gun discharged in the Tasha's restaurant incident - however he said he had nothing to do with it, the gun "just went off".

Judge Masipa moves onto summarising the evidence, beginning with the state's witnesses. She mentions Estelle van der Merwe, who claims she heard a female voice engaging in an argument, and subsequently heard the gunshots that killed Ms Steenkamp.

She also discusses the evidence of the other witnesses.

Other witnesses, the judge said, heard bangs, screams, and cries of "help, help, help".

Judge says Pistorius denied the allegations that he killed the accused intentionally.

Four armed policemen stand at the front of the courtroom. We've not seen that before. It adds an extra chill to the proceedings. — andrew harding (@BBCAndrewH) September 11, 2014

Judge Masipa notes that the evidence shows Pistorius was very emotional immediately after the incident, and had tried to revive Ms Steenkamp.

She goes onto the issues in the case - basically, whether Pistorius had an intention to kill her.

Judge Masipa says a lot of evidence has been led and it would be serve no purpose to rehash it all.

However, she will analyse the evidence and discuss its impact.

Does this mean judgement will be concluded today?

#OscarPistorius verdict Judge is ripping through her typed notes so maybe.....verdict earlier than expected — Alex Crawford (@AlexCrawfordSky) September 11, 2014

Interestingly, Judge Masipa has issued first blow to the defence, saying the relevance of issues like police tampering and moving evidence has "faded into insignificance".

Judge Masipa says it was unfair of the defence to criticise the married witnesses for giving almost identical statements about what they heard.

She says the versions were given to a police officer who used similar words, so it is not that fault.

"I do not think that (the witnesses) were dishonest. They did not even know the accused or the deceased so they had no interest ... they did not derive any pleasure from giving evidence. They stated that they were at first reluctant to come forward and give evidence but did so because it was the right thing to do. They simply related what they thought they heard."

#OscarTrial Masipa: I do not think Burger/Johnson were dishonest. They recounted what they remembers, but were genuinely mistaken. BB — Barry Bateman (@barrybateman) September 11, 2014

The screaming evidence is crucial to the state's case that Oscar Pistorius knew who he was shooting at. Judge does not seem convinced.

But she also has to believe his actions were those of a reasonable man in order to acquit.

Long way to go.

Judge Masipa says given the horrific injuries, the "deceased would have been unable to shout or scream, at least not in the manner described by those witnesses who were adamant that they heard a woman scream repeatedly."

"The only other person who could have screamed is the accused," she says. "The question is, why did he scream."

Judge Masipa: "I continue to explain why most witnesses got their facts wrong."

She says the media attention and coverage "also did not assist".

Oscar Pistorius seems to be crying quietly as this judgement goes on.

Judge Masipa says some witnesses failed to separate what they actually heard or saw, and what they were told afterwards.

But she also puts down some errors down to the fact that it was the middle of the night, and witnesses were either in-and-out of sleep, or had just been woken by loud noises.

Judge Masipa appears to be rejecting most of the testimony of the neighbours. In doing so, it looks increasingly as though there won't be a guilty finding of premeditated murder.

"It would be unwise to rely on any evidence by the witnesses and this includes those witnesses called by the defence who gave evidence on what they heard that morning without testing it against objective evidence. Human beings are fallible and memories can change over time."

#OscarPistorius verdict There was discrepancies with witnesses' recollection and the phone records. Judge is going to rely on records — Alex Crawford (@AlexCrawfordSky) September 11, 2014

This is the timeline found by Judge Masipa, which she says "will prove useful in establishing whether the accused showed intent and premeditation."

3.12am - 3.14pm - first sounds were heard. These were gunshots.

Approx 3.14-3.15 - accused was heard shouting for help.

Approx 3.12-3.17 - screams were heard.

Approx 3.15am - accused was seen walking in the bathroom (by witnesses)

3.15am - a 16 second phone call from neighbour Johan Stipp to security

3.16am - 58 second call. Neighbour Charl Johnson called and spoke to security

3.16.36 - 44 second call to security.

3.17 - Dr Stipp attempts to call 10111

3.17 - second sounds were heard. These were cricket bat striking against the door

3.19 - 24 seconds - Pistorius called chief of security, Johan Stander

3.20 - duration was 66 seconds - Pistorius called 911

3.21.- Pistorius calls security

3.22.05 - a security guard calls the accused

3.22 - security arrives at accused's house

Approx 3.23 - dr stipp arrives at house of the accused

3.41 - ambulance arrives

3.50 - paramedics pronounce Reeva dead

3.55 - police arrive.

After a quick break, Judge Masipa is back and continues with her summation.

She says the screaming heard by neighbours after those shots could not have been the deceased because she suffered a devastating head wound.

She said there are a number of reasons why Ms Steenkamp had the telephone with her - for example, she needed to use the cellphone for lighting purposes as the light in the toilet was not working.

"To try to pick just one reason would be to delve into the river of speculation," she said.

Judge is rejecting evidence about WhatsApp messages - she says they don't prove there was an argument that night, or that the couple were in a loving relationship.

She says relationships are "dynamic and unpredictable".

Now to the matter of the stomach contents, and Judge Masipa says the evidence of gastric emptying is "not an exact science.

That's another key state argument rejected, seemingly.

Judge Masipa now moves onto the accused's version.

"His evidence is important. He is only one who can tell court what happened."

She goes through the details of his version, so often repeated.

Big question now: will judge find Oscar Pistorius guilty of murder under principle of doelus eventualis or culpable homicide? @eNCAnews — Karyn Maughan (@karynmaughan) September 11, 2014

Judge quotes Pistorius: "Before I knew it I had fired four shots" at the toilet door."

She is also recounting his version about finding his girlfriend, with her severe injuries, inside the toilet cubicle.

Judge Masipa: "On the version of the accused it was not quite clear whether he intended to shoot or not."

This was complicated by psychological evidence that suggested he may have a generalised anxiety disorder reducing his criminal culpability.

Judge Masipa reveals some of Pistorius' own evidence on the matter of the shooting:

he shot in the belief an intruder was coming to get him

he did not have time to think

he never intended to shoot anyone

he pulled the trigger when he heard the noise

he did not purposefully fire into the door

he fired shots at the door but he did not do so deliberately

he never aimed at the door

he discharged his firearm in fright

he remembered pulling the trigger in quick succession but he could not remember specifically firing four shots.

he "fired before I even had a moment to contemplate what was happening"

"When the accused was asked to explain what he meant, I quote: 'The accident was that I discharged my firearm in the belief that an intruder was coming out to attack me.'," Judge Masipa said.

If she accepts that, she could still find him guilty of murder - but of a reduced culpability to premeditated murder. Murder in the second degree, if you like.

Judge says Pistorius didn't think he'd kill anyone. But judge cites height of bullets - none fired high as potential warning shot.

She takes a small adjournment after saying Pistorius' evidence is "inconsistent" with someone who shot without thinking.

So it seems Judge Masipa was unimpressed by the state's case, and unimpressed by Pistorius' version of events.

There is now a half hour break. Pistorius talks with his lawyers and sister Aimee is also at his side.

Just while we're on a break, it's worth noting that it is widely agreed the state's case of "premeditated murder" has failed.

However, murder with a lesser culpability - basically that Pistorius is responsible for the foreseeable consequences of his actions - is still on the table.

Judge Masipa could find him guilty of murder "dolus eventualis" if she rules he fired four shots into a tiny cubicle in full knowledge and understanding that somebody - irrespective of who - was in there, and could be killed.

Also, South Africa's version of manslaughter - "culpable homicide" - is still a real possibility.

Judge Masipa says the next question is: "can the version of the accused ... reasonably possibly be true"?

It is, of course, a huge question... and we start recapping evidence on this point.

Protest outside High Court for #OscarPistorius judgement about violence against women. pic.twitter.com/yR99Bt1Buz — Laurel Irving (@laurelirving7) September 11, 2014

Judge Masipa has rejected screams heard by neighbours,food in stomach and whatsapp messages.Premeditated murder off the cards.#OscarTrial — Ulrich Roux (@ulrichroux) September 11, 2014

We're about to resume.... It's 90 minutes until the lunch break. Will we know the result by then?

#OscarTrial Sentiment amongst state team is that they're still holding out for Murder conviction on 'dolus eventualis', killing intruder. — Mandy Wiener (@MandyWiener) September 11, 2014

We're back underway at the Pistorius trial ... Judge Masipa has been flying through her judgement and her usually inaudible voice has become stronger as she's gone along.

No trouble hearing her now.

Judge Masipa said defence submitted Pistorius did not intend to shoot without a reason.

It's Oscar Pistorius' intent that will determine the difference between murder and culpable homicide.

Judge Masipa said defence submitted Pistorius did not intend to shoot without a reason.

It's Oscar Pistorius' intent that will determine the difference between murder and culpable homicide.

Judge Masipa is examining whether the accused lacked "criminal capacity" at the time of shooting. This is regarding the claims he suffered from anxiety.

Judge Masipa is now referring to Pistorius' time under psychiatric evaluation. She quotes relevant portions of that report:

"Mr Pistorius was capable of appreciating the wrongfulness of his act."

In essence, Judge Masipa says Pistorius didn’t have an anxiety disorder at time of the shooting, so could tell right from wrong.

Judge Masipa says she disagrees with the defence's submission that the accused had no control over his actions when he fired.

"It's clear from the steps that the accused took from the moment he heard the sound of the window open until the time he fired the shots.

"There was no lapse in memory ... on his own version, he froze, then decided to arm himself and go to the bathroom.

"In other words he took a conscious decision. He knew where he kept his firearm and he knew where the bathroom was. He noticed the bathroom window was open."

Judge Masipa: "This court is satisfied that at the relevant time the accused could distinguish between right and wrong and he could act in accordance with that distinction."

Judge Masipa is now dealing with "putative self defence".

So she's dismissed one of his 3 defences,that he fired involuntarily.She's now on to the putative self defence, says account "contradictory" — Aislinn Laing (@Simmoa) September 11, 2014

So Pistorius consciously shot through the door. It will now rest on whether his actions were reasonable. — Tom Peck (@tompeck) September 11, 2014

Judge says even if Oscar Pistorius armed himself with a gun because he felt vulnerable due to disability, "I do not think this is reasonable".

Judge notes the danger of examining the accused's version in isolation, says all the evidence must be examined as a whole, not pieces of it.

Judge Masipa says Oscar Pistorius clearly wanted to use his firearm. This is important, she's finding that he had intent, implies murder. — Aislinn Laing (@Simmoa) September 11, 2014

Judge Masipa describes Pistorius as a "very poor witness".

Says while in evidence in chief, he was composed and rational. But in cross-examination, it was a very different story.

"It was only under cross-examination that he contradicted himself and visibly felt uncomfortable."

Judge Masipa notes most witnesses do find giving evidence uncomfortable.

"However, what we are dealing with is the fact that the accused was amongst other things, an evasive witness.

"He failed to listen properly to questions under cross-examination ... often, a question requiring a straightforward answer turned into a point of debate about what another witness did or said."

Judge Masipa says Reeva Steenkamp was killed under very peculiar circumstances.

Why did the accused fire not once, but four shots, before he went back to the bedroom?

"These questions shall, unfortunately, remain a matter of conjecture. What is not conjecture however is that the accused armed himself with a loaded firearm when, on his own version, he suspected an intruder might be coming in through the bathroom window."

She said she finds it implausible that Pistorius would say he never intended to fire at anyone, as he had a loaded firearm in his hands.

Judge Masipa now talking law - says: "If there's any possibility of his explanation being true, then he's entitled to acquittal."

"In count one, the accused is charged with premeditated murder. In respect of this charge, the evidence is purely circumstantial.

"That evidence is, in essence, about shots, about screams and about sounds."

Judge Masipa says the evidence tips the scale in favour of the accused.

"The state has not proven beyond a reasonable doubt that there was premeditation."

"The evidence failed to establish the accused had the requisite intention to kill the deceased, let alone premeditation," she said.

After ruling that Pistorius will be acquitted of "premeditated murder" of Reeva Steenkamp, Judge Masipa takes a five minute break.

She will now moved to rule on it being an unplanned murder - intention to fire, intention to kill.

The tension in the courtroom is extraordinary. It is hot and airless, but nobody is going anywhere.

With the judge still on her break, Oscar Pistorius sits alone in the dock. He knows he won't be going to jail for a premeditated killing of his girlfriend, but will Judge Masipa still find him guilty of killing a human being?

Judge using A B and C to describe scenarios and possible verdicts... — andrew harding (@BBCAndrewH) September 11, 2014

This bit is going to get tricky. The Judge explaining the law: what constitutes murder, and the difference with culpable homicide.

Using caselaw, she notes the identity of the individual killed is not relevant for a finding of murder, if there was intention to kill.

Judge Masipa says we are clearly dealing with the fact that the shots were intended for the person behind the door.

"The blows struck and killed the person behind the door. The fact that the person behind the door turned out to be the deceased ... is irrelevant."

Now we're back to intention - did he have the intention to kill the person behind the door?

"The accused had intention to shoot the person - but states he never intended to kill."

Another crucial question: "Would a reasonable man in the position of the accused have acted in the same way?"

We are going to find out the answers soon, Judge Masipa is referring to caselaw in revealing these key questions.

"In the present case, the accused is the only person who can say what his state of mind was at the time he shot and killed the deceased."

"The accused has not admitted that he had the intention to shoot or kill the deceased or anyone else.

"On the contrary... but he court is entitled to look at the evidence as a whole."

Judge Masipa: "There's no doubt that when the accused fired the shots he acted unlawfully. There was no intruder. Instead, the person who was behind the door was the deceased."

We move to "dolus eventualis" - did the accused forsee he could kill someone? And not withstanding the foresight, did he shoot anyway?

Judge says murder - dolus eventualis, not supported by prosecution case.

Looks like we go to culpable homicide ...

Judge Masipa says Oscar Pistorius did not foresee possibilty he would kill person behind door let alone realise it was the deceased.

Judge Masipa says Oscar Pistorius is NOT GUILTY OF MURDER ... as she takes a break, he is doubled over, sobbing, comforted by lawyers and family.

This must be a huge relief. At worst, he can be convicted of culpable homicide - the equivalent of manslaughter in Australia.

#PistoriusTrial judge says OP could not have foreseen possibility that Reeva was behind the door. — martinbrunt (@skymartinbrunt) September 11, 2014

That all happened amid a frenzy of great quotes from the judge. I'll recap...

Judge Masipa finds that Pistorius genuinely believed there was an intruder. He gave this version to witnesses immediately after the killing.

From the time he heard the noise in the bathroom, every time he fired, he believed the deceased was in the bedroom.

#OscarPistorius Judge: The question is did the accused foresee the possiblity of resulting death? The answer has to be no. — Laurel Irving (@laurelirving7) September 11, 2014

Judge Masipa said to find anything other than Pistorius believed there was an intruder would be to say the accused's reaction was "faked" that he was  "play acting" for onlookers at the time.

Judge Masipa: "The accused's erroneous belief that his life was under threat excludes murder by dolus eventualis." (intentional killing of anyone)

Just before the lunchbreak, Judge Masipa said "culpable homicide is a competent verdict".

That doesn't mean that is what she will find, but it's likely. She earlier said his actions were unlawful, so has to convict him of something.

Manslaughter has no set minimum jail term....it is possible #Pistorius will not serve a day behind bars, even if convicted on that charge — Tom Steinfort (@tomsteinfort) September 11, 2014

#PistoriusTrial Culpable homicide still carries the possib of a long jail term but there's no minimum + variety of options includ probation — Alex Crawford (@AlexCrawfordSky) September 11, 2014

No lawyers in the court yet, as we await Judge Masipa's return.

Pistorius is sitting quietly, head bowed, possibly in prayer.

Ok, looks like we're ready to resume. Not sure what the delay was about.

Prosecutor Gerrie Nel does not appear to be in court, although Pistorius' lawyers are.

Okay, so Nel reappeared and spoke to his opposing counsel Barry Roux, and they both left the court. Possibly to see the judge?

Prosecution and defence lawyers called to Judge's chambers... a question of timings, or of substance, or something else? — andrew harding (@BBCAndrewH) September 11, 2014

Sorry folks, can't work out what the hold-up might be.

To recap: Judge Masipa has already found the prosecution's case of premeditated murder has failed.

The state had also argued that if that charge failed, he could still be convicted of murder, arguing he intentionally fired to kill someone, even if he didn't know it was Reeva.

Judge Masipa rejected that argument, also, shortly before the lunch break.

She noted she intended to discuss the next option, culpable homicide - which has always been the most likely for a guilty verdict.

Before the break, she described culpable homicide as a "competent verdict".

Ok, looks like we're back on, and no explanation for the delay.

Judge Masipa says she is turning to the negligent killing charge, culpable homicide.

Judge Masipa says she has used the "reasonable man" test.

Basically, could a reasonable person have forseen a reasonable possibility of the consequence of his actions, including those actions being unlawful?

As Judge Masipa explains, it's not just a 'reasonable man' test. It's also did he have any other option?

That is, could he have fired just ONE shot rather than four.

Judge Masipa says his disability must be taken into account - but notes once more that there are millions who are disabled. Would they have acted that way?

Interestingly, she notes the high level of security he had at his house. Says many people who are disabled would not have the same level of security.

"He could have run to the balcony and screamed in the same way he screamed after the incident," she says.

"All the accused had to do was use his cell phone to call security", she said, which may have taken less time than the firing of the shots.

Judge Masipa: "I agree that the conduct of the accused may be better understood by looking at his background. However, the explanation of the conduct of the accused is just that - an explanation. It does not excuse the conduct of the accused.

"Many people in this country experience crime or the affects thereof, directly or indirectly ... many have been victims of violent crime but they have not resorted to keeping firearms under their pillows."

Public outside I spoke to - said 'not surprised' with verdicts so far! #Pistorius pic.twitter.com/7qqMvloSXB — lucy thornton (@lucethornton) September 11, 2014

For those catching up, here's the raw vision of Judge Masipa's ruling that Pistorius did not murder Reeva Steenkamp, or anyone, intentionally.

As we wait for the lunch break to end, let's take a look at some of the scenes from inside the courtroom.

The brother of Oscar Pistorius, Carl, parked his wheelchair next to the dock as the judgment was read. He was recently in a near-fatal car crash but left hospital today to be at his brother's side.

Oscar Pistorius reacting as the judgment is read.

In the row behind the prosecution, Reeva Steenkamp's parents, Barry and June, watch on.

Oscar's sister Aimee, centre, sits in court with the Pistorius family.

All eyes were on Judge Thokozile Masipa as she reads notes, delivering her verdict.

Here's a shot from earlier on, as Pistorius walked through a massive media contingent to court.

It's not just the media gathered outside court, locals are also hoping for a glimpse of Oscar Pistorius.

Lois Pistorius and Arnold Pistorius, the aunt and uncle of Oscar Pistorius, leave North Gauteng High Court during the lunch break.

Emotional scenes inside court before the lunch break, as Oscar's father Henke Pistorius kisses his daighter Aimee's hand.

Judge Masipa: "The accused had reasonable time to reflect. On the facts of this case I am not persuaded that a reasonable person with the accused's disabilities in the same circumstances would have fired four shots into the small toilet cubicle.

"Having regard to the size of the toilet and the calibre of the ammunition, a reasonable person with the accused's disability would have foreseen that to fire a shot at the door, the person inside the toilet might be struck and might die as a result."

Judge Masipa says she is of the belief that the accused acted too hastily, and used excessive force.

This seems to be a confirmation that he will be found guilty of culpable homicide. But she has now adjourned until tomorrow!!

So with that extraordinary cessation, Judge Masipa has adjourned to tomorrow morning, 9.30am (5.30pm AEST).

It seems there is no other legal option other than to find him guilty of culpable homicide, as she said his actions were negligent.

However, she perhaps stopped short of pronouncing the verdict because she still has the three unrelated gun charges to examine.

Maybe it's done all at once?

#PistoriusTrial Judge says OP should have realised he could hit and kill someone behind the door when he fired four shots at it. — martinbrunt (@skymartinbrunt) September 11, 2014

Oscar is still sitting in a corner of the courtroom talking to his aunt. His sister is sitting on the arm of his chair stroking his head. — Mandy Wiener (@MandyWiener) September 11, 2014

Somewhere in there is #OscarPistorius ... mayhem outside the court pic.twitter.com/ihK2ddDGE0 — Lisa Davies (@lisazdavies) September 11, 2014

Oscar Pistorius has left court for the day; we're due back in court at 9.30am local time, 5.30pm AEST on Friday.