Oscar Pistorius case: defence rebuts key prosecution claims

Oscar Pistorius on the track

Police Pistorius fired at an angle into the toilet door.

Steenkamp's wounds suggested she was not on the toilet at the time but "hiding" in the right-hand side of the toilet room.

Defence Steenkamp's bladder was empty when she died, indicating she had indeed got up to use the toilet as usually at 3am you would not find an empty bladder. Autopsy showed no sign of defensive wounds or an assault.

Police Fatal shots were fired downwards into the door, suggesting Pistorius had his prosthetic legs on, contradicting defendant's account.

Defence No evidence that Pistorius had attached his prosthetic legs before the shooting. Under cross-examination the officer leading the inquiry accepted this fact.

Police Pistorius would have had to pass his bed to walk to the bathroom, suggesting he would have noticed whether or not Steenkamp was in bed. A holster for the gun was found on the same side of the bed as Steenkamp's overnight bag and slippers.

Defence Pistorius had a shoulder problem so he slept on the other side of the bed than usual. Steenkamp had spent the previous night there too, and had slept on her usual side that night.

Police A female witness heard an argument between two people between 2am and 3am on the night in question. Another witness reported seeing the lights on, contradicting Pistorius's account that it was dark.

Defence The witness who said she heard an argument lives in a house 600 metres from Pistorius.

Police Police had been called to Pistorius's home over a previous incident, which was later dropped. Botha also raised a number of previous incidents involving guns or threats of violence and Pistorius he said he was aware of, but it was unclear whether or not this was hearsay.

Defence The incident was now the subject of a civil case for malicious prosecution and wrongful arrest.

Police Two bottles of testosterone and needles were found at the house.

Defence It was not testosterone, but a herbal remedy. "It's not a steroid and it's not a banned substance," the defence lawyer said. The police officer admitted he did not know the name of the medication, saying he "didn't read the whole name".

Powered by Guardian.co.ukThis article was written by Paul Owen, for The Guardian on Wednesday 20th February 2013 22.54 Europe/London

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News and Media Limited 2010


image: © Chris Eason