Well then that sucks for OP since he killed Reeva by shooting at her four times, and now it's up to him to explain why he's not guilty of murder.
And the evidence presented is 100% conclusive. 5 witnesses testified to hearing a woman screaming, then gun shots. The defense has not presented ANY evidence to the contrary. None. Zero. Zilch.
All the defense has presented is a series of impossible explanations for why the witnesses could not have heard Reeva scream. The first incredibly stupid explanation was that the first shot was to her head. Remember that? There own expert testified the first shot was to her hip.
Then the defense tried to explain the shot shots had to come before the cricket bat hits. They didn't. The shots came before the piece of wood was pried from the door.
The defense keeps going back and forth on whether Reeva was dead when OP found her. If he shot her at 3:10, there's no explanation for arterial blood spurts 10 minutes later. She would have bled out in the bathroom.
But if he shot her at 3:17, that means the screaming was Reeva.
Just for fun, can you explain how Reeva could have been shot at 3:10, then carried downstairs 10 minutes later, and not left a huge pool of blood in the bathroom? And how there could be arterial blood splatter on the walls and the couch if she was shot and left to bleed out in the bathroom 10 minutes earlier?