Oscar Pistorius trial: Key points from Judge Thokozile Masipa's remarks

South African JudgeThokozileMasipadid not finish reading her decisionin the murder trial of OscarPistoriuson Thursday, but explainedmuch of her reasoningbehind the upcoming verdicts in the case against the double-amputeeOlympic athlete.

Pistoriusis accused of the premeditated murder of his girlfriend,ReevaSteenkamp, on Valentines Day in 2013.

Here's a look at some of thekey decisionsMasiparead to the Pretoria court on Thursday, before adjourning the court to meet again Friday.

1)Pistoriuscannot be found guilty of murder:Masipasaid the most severecharge facingPistorius premeditated murder was not proved beyond a reasonable doubt. She called the evidence purely circumstantial. "There are just not enough facts to support such a finding," she said.

She also ruled out a lesser murder charge, sayingPistoriusdid not foresee he could kill anyone the night he shot his girlfriendReevaSteenkampthrough a closedbathroom door.

"Clearly [Pistorius]did not subjectively foresee this as apossibility that he would kill the person behind the door, let alonethe deceased as he thought she was in the bedroom."

• Oscar Pistorius cleared of murder charges, finding of culpable homicide possible
• 5 lessons in 5 days of Oscar Pistorius's testimony
• DIAGRAM | State vs. Pistorius: How the accounts differ

2)Pistoriuswas "negligent" when he killedSteenkamp:Masipasaid she was "not persuaded" that a reasonable person withPistorius'sabilities would have fired the shots that killed the law graduate and model.

"I am of the view that the accused acted too hastily and withexcessive force,"Masipasaid.

The judge also called culpable homicide"a competent verdict," a decision that would could seePistoriussent to jail for a maximum of 15 years, although five years in prison is a guideline when a firearm is used.

3)Pistoriuswas a bad witness:MasipasaidPistoriuswas a "very poor," evasive witness who was "not candid" and contradicted himself under cross-examination,but she emphasized that did not mean he was guilty ofmurder.

4) There is "some doubt" as to whether a woman screamed the night of the killing:The state had arguedSteenkampscreamed during aheated row with theParalympicathlete before he deliberatelyshot her through the bathroom door.Casting doubt on witness accounts of hearing a woman's screams,Masipasaid "none of the witnesses had ever heard the accused cry or scream, let alone when he was anxious," apparently acknowledging thedefenceargument thatPistoriushad been screaming in a high-pitched voice.

Masipaalso cited testimony of an acoustics expert called by thedefence, saying it cast "serious doubt" on whether witnesses whowere hundreds of metresaway in their homesas some statewitnesses werecould have differentiated between the screams of aman or a woman.

5) Allegations of contaminated evidence were not significant:Defence claims that police contaminated evidence and removed items from the crime scene "paled into insignificance,"Masipasaid.

6)Text messages between the couple were not relevant:Prosecutors had submitted text messages that showed tension betweenPistoriusandSteenkampin an attempt to prove thatPistoriushad a motive to kill his girlfriend, while the defence submitted messages that indicated mutual affection.

That evidence, the judge said, doesn't prove anything.

"Normal relationships are dynamic and unpredictable most of the time, while human beings are fickle," she said.