Let's get more from legal analyst dan abrams. And the defense lawyers, dan, have a pretty hard job here. The standard quite high. They have to come up with exceptional reason why pistorius should be... See More
Let's get more from legal analyst dan abrams. And the defense lawyers, dan, have a pretty hard job here. The standard quite high. They have to come up with exceptional reason why pistorius should be free. That's based on the initial ruling by the court. But I think a lot has changed since that initial ruling. I think it's clear from the court's questions that the court may not apply that really high standard. And may in effect say, after hearing all of the evidence, i don't think that there is sufficient evidence to say there's premeditation at this point. As a result, apply a lower standard which would basically force the prosecution to prove why he should remain locked up. Even though that was the original findings. There was premeditation. Correct. Let's look at what happened in the courtroom in these final arguments. So much focus on the disability of pistorius. I thought that was very interesting. What the defense is saying, where is he going to go? How is he going to get away? This is a guy who needs constant medical attention. He has prosthesis on his legs. They're saying there's no chance he could just flee. The prosecution saying, wait a second. We have to treat him like any other defendant in this case. But it did seem based on the questions from the court, that the court was somewhat sympathetic to that position, as well. This investigator, removed as lead investigator, mr. Botha. But he still has to go up on the stand. He's going to be a witness in this case. Just because they take him off the lead, he was still at the scene. He's going to be called as a key witness in the trial. And that's going to be a problem for the prosecution, once this case goes to trial. Dan abrams, thanks very much.
This transcript has been automatically generated and may not be 100% accurate.