I still think there is confusion over what premeditation actually means in this case.
Nel explained - "knew there was a person behind the door, pointed the gun and shot".
It does NOT mean that OP spent any time thinking, "Right, I'm going to kill Reeva". I, for one, don't think he did. I think he lost control for a matter of seconds and shot. He probably picked it up in the first place to scare her.
So all this hoo ha about whether theirs was abusive is somewhat beside the point. Anyone can see red and lose it. But a dead woman in a toilet is rather more likely to happen when you have an irresponsible, emotionally immature gun nut involved. That's why the texts matter. They tell us a little about who OP is - more relevant in some respects than what his relationship with Reeva was like.
That has been one of my two pet theories all along... a tiff, turned tantrum, turned argument, turned rage with a bat, a gun, and a door between! I am not even definitively convinced OP meant (in a conscious not a legal way) to kill Reeva either, just get into that f****** toilet and/or bully and/or scare her.
I also have still not been able to discard that OP did think there was an intruder either, (for many here unlikely, but he just might be mad, trigger happy and irresponsible and I worry there may not be enough hard evidence for the judge to determine BARD he intentionally killed Reeva anyway so I like to keep options open) but from my understanding of SA Criminal law a mistake would not acquit OP anyway, so imo he will either be convicted of:
1. Murder by way of the direct and intentional killing of Reeva (under SA criminal law "intentional" does mean OP had to consciously "intend" to kill Reeva, but that death was a foreseeable consequence of his actions which counts as intentionality... same as in the UK, more or less),
2. Murder by way of "transferred intent", i.e. that he intended to kill an intruder/burglar but killed Reeva instead (same as UK again).
3. Culpable homicide
Between options "1" and "2" I have yet to decide which imo is more likely once OP testifies but I consider either more likely than option "3". And I absolutely refuse to contemplate an acquittal because, a) whatever happened, black or white, people absolutely cannot be allowed to go around shooting at doors with human beings behind; b) because I think it would indicate special treatment not conducive to proving racial equality in a nascent democracy; c) it would create a dangerous precedent for others to follow contributing to a culture of gun violence SA already has an excess of.