OP's claim is not that he was in imminent danger but that he thought he was in imminent danger. There's obviously a big difference.
And there is much testimony as to why he believed that - it was not simply that he heard a noise in the toilet.
Regarding the change in his defense - like I said, it was clarified that his defense remains putative self defense. If you believe otherwise, then we'll see what Roux argues in his summation. I would bet money that Roux is not going to argue involuntary action and will indeed argue putative self defense.
BBM
He allegedly thought he was in imminent danger. That is his subjective claim.
Upon what objective evidence does he base this claim? What occurred on the morning that he fired 4 rounds through the toilet door that justifies his belief that he was in imminent danger at that time?
His claims of being the victim of previous crimes are not supported by evidence (no police reports of crimes against him, except for the assault that was settled by the Hawks, but I suspect he played more of a role in that incident than he's let on, otherwise he wouldn't have been so keen to settle it without pressing charges against his assailant, especially since he has a history of bringing charges when he believes he's been wronged). His claims of being security conscious due to a fear of burglars are not supported by evidence (ladders left outside, unsure as to the status of his security alarm sensors, etc.).
I don't believe his claim that he was convinced there was a dangerous intruder in his toilet room about to come out and attack him, because that claim isn't supported by evidence, either. It's only supported by his alleged belief.
When one alleges something, if one wants others to believe the allegation, one must provide evidence of that allegation, otherwise one's claim will be met with skepticism or downright disbelief.
OP has provided no evidence to support his alleged belief in a dangerous intruder on the morning he shot & killed Reeva.
If OP's defense is still putative self defense, I think his Defense team still have a tough row to hoe to prove that claim.
BTW - for anyone who might be wondering what 'putative' means (not you, Minor, as I'm sure you know what it means): supposed, assumed, alleged, reputed.