Defense Makes Closing Arguments in Pistorius Murder Trial

The lawyer for the "blade runner" accused the prosecution of twisting the facts.
12:46 | 08/08/14

Coming up in the next {{countdown}} {{countdownlbl}}

Coming up next:

{{nextVideo.title}}

{{nextVideo.description}}

Skip to this video now

Now Playing:

{{currentVideo.title}}

More information on this video
Enhanced full screen
Explore related content
Comments
Related Extras
Related Videos
Video Transcript
Transcript for Defense Makes Closing Arguments in Pistorius Murder Trial
The last stand for the defense and Oscar stories -- tri blade runner looking on. And looking exhausted as his lawyer accused the prosecution of twisting facts against -- -- is vulnerable on an intruder was about to attack him now. It is all up to a judge. I'm -- that's -- New York with developing story. The spotlight was on the defense lawyer to day -- how vulnerable double what it felt on that not shut corporate resisting -- to death. Austin reports. -- lost out all superstore -- that's his defense attorney Barry -- delivers his final arguments. Painting the stories as scared meeting to protect themselves and not a murder now -- spanning acted tool. You vulnerable you anxious you trained as an athlete to -- -- -- -- -- adamant there was no argument that night the -- is killed his model girlfriend Revis sting camp. Maintaining the story is thought she was in the bedroom when he fired four shots to -- -- bathroom door to who he thought was an intruder. If I stand -- some of these senior Clinton had treated. And he's in a vehicle state -- make plans beyond its means is that this will fight be connected in some instances. Also accusing their -- of bungling the investigation and tampering with the evidence don't come duke cold. And -- -- -- understated scene and -- cross examined the keys as he stepped it was to see. The defense claiming screams heard by neighbors occurred -- -- those shots rang out. And that they came from this store is crying out for help and not from an argument. Four months the prosecution has pointed out inconsistencies. In the stores is testimony so many of them. One such issue appeared. But today -- striking back saying it even if -- as a reasonable possibility -- stories is telling the truth. He is entitled to the benefits of the doubts. Also reporting from London joining us now from South Africa -- -- -- ABC digital producer Tom who was in that courtroom today -- -- thanks for being with us today appreciate it. Show or one headline from that came out of the court today defense attorney -- -- compared -- -- anxiety from disability. To that of an abused woman. How did the judge respond to that -- -- Then -- you always say that as it turns anxiety. Was like this ability of women who will be -- -- your husband or continent. And then one day -- Lost or breaks the camel's back and she retaliates and -- -- May have been a very cheap electric age because judgment seat but isn't here -- -- -- don't bury hot sentences. Two men who abused the alliance who can't -- but. She doesn't want to start what exactly rubles trying to say how he would how we could complete story is -- An abused woman so -- to break it down stick on stick to moderate. And he -- Just as an abused woman will take -- usual take us back reasonable. Than the abuse. You noticed and then one day she will don't. And take action in the same way the story -- has lived -- fear and anxiety. -- -- was a school bully. And one day. All this angst came to get a -- Lynne Cheney's actions. Today the defense -- the state prosecutor of of twisting the facts of this case. Even try to cover up mistakes made by police what are some of the things that were said in court today. Well say one important thing that now -- prosecute is ignoring. Is the time line say -- single state witnesses and he's specific gene mingling them radiologist. Yarns that and -- wife had. Still they dividends to fit in with the State's case. During the trial and they went to six -- sounds. And trendy -- -- the -- -- laughs and sounds will in fact guests house. Not quartet sounds and things screens and they -- sounds. Producing this -- possibly beat like that all he says the sounds with the shops. Bring in the story -- as -- held and then the second. Funny -- sounds. Will in fact the story is trying to break down it wouldn't treat combat. Say now is completely ignored and says he's not even explain to pull them to say it sounds. Because he doesn't fit in with his timeline. The prosecution. Then saying yesterday -- now. Yet the source was a bad witness throughout this entire trust three confusing versions this is what now -- set of what it happened that. How then did his defense attorney then respond to that charge. Tell -- that wind -- -- taste of -- he was calm she overwhelmed early depression. And animals. He wants on antidepressants. And all of these things may have played her -- If he's not been in on the witness stand outs to halt that we stories tastes to find. Old cost solo swept sentinel demon he's -- application. -- -- does prosecute. You and -- now has the reputation in Africa and really say is the story was. The prosecutors -- Which may have been one of the reasons why he's editors wasn't as good as -- could have beaten the bonuses the one that store -- he acted in self defense and spent. -- -- -- -- -- -- Things aren't mutually excuse. In fact they support it and make all the same picture -- demanding scheme. Thinking that he can -- he has to take action to protect himself and he's been laden. -- leading to the strategy. Very intense back and forth in those final moments -- Tom in South Africa is a thank you for that -- brought always appreciated. Your. Oscar the story -- now has to wait until September 11 for the verdict the judge today announced that she will take five weeks to consider the case. So want to bring ABC's chief legal affairs anchor Dan Abrams to discuss the latest on this -- this has been a very long. Five month emotional trial is over. Given the fact that there has been that much testimony laid out their five weeks to deliberate is that -- appropriate lot of time to process all of that. Yet look -- remember it's not just the deliberation right we think it deliberations here we think of juries. And we think of a jury coming back after deliberating and rendering its verdict. Here the judge is -- issue a very detailed written ruling. And if you compare that to the -- judges. Issue rulings here a -- quite quick. To say that you know after hearing all of this evidence. Sometimes we see judges here take months to issue ruling so. I guess my point is that I think that five weeks make sense to me. Remember it's not just her she's got to -- sensors as well. Effectively assistants. Who are there to help primarily. With the facts of the case. And the three of them. Together are to render this verdict so five weeks makes it makes some sense to me in your opinion man who made the more compelling case the prosecutors -- the Bull Terrier. Who argues that the story is shot through that door that outrage at the couple had been fighting that night war. Isn't that double amputee the vulnerable fearing for his life he thought an intruder had broken in into that -- will look I don't think there's any question. That act as the legal matter Oscar for stories should be convicted of something here -- when I say something. I mean first of all that the firearms charges very hard for him to claim that he didn't fire. A weapon when all these witnesses you know -- depending on which -- charger talking about. Various witnesses testified. That he did exactly what he's charged with here. I don't think is any question he's going to be convicted on some or all of the firearms charges and I also think -- it's hard to figure out a scenario. Whereby he's not at least guilty of what's called culpable homicide meeting. Even if you believe him. That that's what he bought. It was still negligent. Of him at the very least grossly negligent to fire into that door there is no justification for that as a legal matter. In my view the question becomes will the judge along with these disasters. -- of murder. And yet the prosecutors put forward a pretty convincing case that his story doesn't make sense but the question isn't. Whose story makes more sense the question is has the prosecution proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt. And and that we're just gonna have to wait and see. I wanna get your thoughts on what the defense used as their technique because today Gary -- compare it distorts anxiety from his disability. To that of an abused woman. A lot of place in what he said. I understand these twins think about an abused woman. Situation. How does it applies to their kids in this case. -- and a little boy with out to me it's you experience. Daddy. That disability. And the effectiveness. Dan clumsy comparison part of that work yet I mean look -- you understand assertive philosophically. What the attorney is trying to do. But as a practical matter by the judge huge erupting him. It tells you that he should regret having made that comparison. I mean of course the judge understood what he was saying but the judges in effect saying what aren't really making this comparison. And that he tries to explain further -- yes I'm comparing him based on. The you know the vulnerability felt -- -- but it was it was a really dumb comparison to make particularly. In a case like this. In the I think it it was a mistake and I I would guess even he probably views it is a mistake now after being interrupted by the -- well less that -- -- your thoughts on another vote by the defense this suggesting several times today that his client should anything. Facing culpable homicide negligence charges not murder charges what do you make about that approach would again that goes to the point I was making a moment ago which is that that he's almost not quite. It almost conceding. That his clients -- -- be guilty of culpable homicide this lesser crime. And I think that would be a huge win. For Oscar for -- us if he were convicted of -- lesser crime of culpable homicide so so. Another option here because as -- pointed out a not guilty verdict not even negligent. In shooting into the bathroom at his own home. -- almost impossible to ask the judge to do. And so I think what you're seeing here is -- -- for a compromise to say. Convicted of the lesser crime the lesser crime there's no mandatory minimum then we can start talking sentencing. But. You know that's not an easy argument for for stories either and so we wait the five weeks find out what the -- verdict in -- will be. ABC's chief legal affairs anchor Dan Abrams at thank you so much for -- it's like OK. Of course you can stay up today. With this story in real time by doubling ABC news App Store the store works listen updates ago. For now Dan Butler New York.

This transcript has been automatically generated and may not be 100% accurate.

{"id":24909734,"title":"Defense Makes Closing Arguments in Pistorius Murder Trial","duration":"12:46","description":"The lawyer for the \"blade runner\" accused the prosecution of twisting the facts.","section":"International","mediaType":"Default"}