Roux will start his closing arguments today.
Judge Masipa and the assessors decide that court will go an extra 30 minutes if needs be
Roux asks if court can start earlier or go later tomorrow.
Roux notes that Nel doesn't have the right of reply, but that it's up to the court.
Nel says his conclusion is based on objective facts and that a murder conviction is inevitable.
Nel lays out the following as ways in which he says Pistorius pre-planned the murder:
-He remembered where he kept his gun
-He retrieved it, readied it
-He had to walk with his gun aimed and ready
-He fired a "good grouping" of four shots
Nel now refers to "pre-planning"
Nel says a reasonable man would not fire without cause. Nel says there's no cause in this case - no one came out of the door.
Nel says that because Pistorius fired four shots with black talon ammunition into a small cubicle, he must've foreseen that he would hit and kill the person on the other side of the door. Even if he thought it was an intruder, it's still murder, Nel says.
Nel says that when they drew up the indictment, they specified that Pistorius intended to kill a human being - in this case Reeva Steenkamp.
Nel says that even if the court accepts that Pistorius thought there was an intruder, he cannot escape the murder charge
Nel says a murder conviction is inevitable.
Nel refers to his relay race metaphor. Nel says Pistorius stumbled, fell and dropped the "baton of truth"
Nel moves on to the conclusion.
Nel says he the legislation is clear - you can't have that ammunition without a permit.
Judge Masipa asks if Nel needs to prove that Pistorius had animus (intent)
Pistorius said the ammunition belonged to his dad, who is in court for the first time today.
Pistorius admitted that the illegal ammunition was in his safe and he didn't have a license for it.
Nel says Pistorius took gun competency tests and knew what ammunition he was allowed to have.
Count four - possessing illegal ammunition.
Nel says Pistorius is incapable of taking responsibility for his actions.
Pistorius testified that the gun "went off" and that he didn't remember pulling the trigger. However, Captain Mangena testified that the gun cannot fire without the trigger being pulled.
The next count deals with the Tasha's incident. Nel says there's very little in dispute - Pistorius admits the gun went off when he was holding it.
Nel says the contradictions actually provide proof of truthfulness.
Nel says Taylor and Fresco could differ because they testified so long after the incident.
Nel points out that Pistorius left his gun exposed on the car seat and on the boat.
Nel notes the times they agreed with each other.
Nel says they agree about the most important part of what happened.
Nel says he won't argue that there aren't contradictions in Samantha Taylor and Darren Fresco's evidence.
Nel moves on to the other charges. He says he won't spend too much time on then as he'd rather spend more time on the conclusion.
Masipa says that relationships are dynamic. Nel agrees. But, he says, Steenkamp was unhappy in the weeks leading up to her death.
Judge Masipa asks if Nel can really rely on the WhatsApp messages to make an inference one way or another.
Nel reads a portion of the WhatsApp messaged.
Nel suggests that Greyvenstein's testimony wouldn't have supported Pistorius' case
From inside the courtroom:
Nel references an email Pistorius sent to ex-girlfriend Samantha Taylor:
Nel says the timeline of the arguments show that nothing improved leading up to Steenkamp's death.
Nel says that even though only a small number of messages show the couple fighting, they are relevant and important.
Nel moves on to the relationship between Pistorius and Steenkamp.
Nel "takes a step back" and runs through the timeline of when Steenkamp ate. He also says this concludes that the alarm wasn't on and "destroys" Pistorius' version.
Nel says that the defense witness didn't take into account that enzymes continue to digest food post mortem.