Hello, a long time lurker here, decided to join to express my thoughts.
I think the outcome has been foreshadowed since the beginning of the trial. I remember Roux called State witness lying, and we heard nothing from Masipa. But when it's Nel turn to call Oscar a liar, Masipa reprimanded him. I have always found that bizarre. Why is it okay for Roux to call others lying, but it's not okay for Nel to do the same? The answer is obvious now - from the very beginning, Masipa has never believed in anyone's testimony other than Oscar's. That's why she is okay with calling others lying, but when it comes to Oscar, it's not okay.
Which brings me to my next point - so many people here had criticized Nel for not doing more - but really, if Masipa had already intended to throw away anything State was going to present, no matter what Nel did, it would not change her mind. The same way with those who believed in Oscar's innocent, no amount of logic, common sense, debate is going to change their perspective.
The saddest thing about this case is that, it is supposed to be about Reeva's death. However, her words were ignored, her screams were silenced, her presence was only an afterthought replaced by Oscar's tears, screams and puking.