Oscar Pistorius gets verdict on mansalughter today

The judge in the Oscar Pistorius trial has cleared him of murder, but has left it to today to announce whether the athlete is guilty of culpable homicide or not.

According to a BBC report, Judge Thokozile Masipa said prosecutors had not proved he meant to kill his girlfriend, Reeva Steenkamp, prompting tears from the Olympic sprinter.

But she said he acted hastily and had been negligent. Pistorius had claimed that he thought an intruder was in the toilet.

Adjourning the trial, the judge said a reasonable person would not have fired.

However, the judge is expected to deliver a verdict of culpable homicide (manslaughter) but has not yet spelled it out.

Earlier, Judge Masipa described Pistorius as an evasive witness but said this did not mean he was guilty.

Clearing him of murder charges, she said he could not have foreseen killing whoever was behind the toilet door.

The South African Olympic and Paralympic sprinter had denied murdering Steenkamp after a row on Valentine's Day last year, saying he shot her by mistake.

Pistorius, 27, pleaded not guilty to all the charges he faced, including two counts of shooting a firearm in public and the illegal possession of ammunition.

While finding Pistorius not guilty of murder, Judge Masipa appeared to be leaning towards the lesser charge of manslaughter, known in South Africa as culpable homicide.

Minutes after the lunch break, she seemed to be on the verge of announcing her verdict, only to stop abruptly and adjourned until today - leading to sighs and gasps in the overflowing court room.

Judge Masipa didn't mince words when she said the athlete, who has a good knowledge of guns, acted negligently by firing four shots into a confined space.

She questioned why he did not phone for help or run to the balcony instead of confronting the apparent danger - questions that have plagued many.

Following a long trial that has gripped people around the world, Judge Masipa seems to want to give a detailed account before announcing her verdict.

South Africa's legal system has also been on trial and many believe the athlete is getting off lightly, possibly because of his fame.

But legal experts have argued that the judge merely followed the law and the evidence before her. The onus was on the state to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, which the judge said it had failed to do.