Pistorius verdict has scholars and critics thumbing Latin dictionary

It is a little-known legal concept with a Latin name, and South Africans and millions more around the world intrigued by the Oscar Pistorius verdict have been feverishly trying to get their heads around it: dolus eventualis.

The state had accused the double-amputee Olympic and Paralympic track star of the cold-blooded murder of his model girlfriend, Reeva Steenkamp, on Valentine's Day last year.

Pistorius - who was finally convicted of culpable homicide, or negligent killing - maintained it was a tragic accident, and that he had fired a gun in the mistaken belief he was defending himself from an intruder lurking in the toilet cubicle.

In her verdict, Judge Thokozile Masipa said prosecutors had in fact failed to prove Pistorius, 27, had intended to kill the person behind the door, let alone Steenkamp, when he fired his four 9mm rounds.

Masipa's rejection of premeditation was largely expected: there were only two witnesses to the shooting, one of whom was killed, leaving the state to rely on circumstantial evidence and the testimony of neighbours that Masipa rejected as conflicting and unreliable.

However, she also absolved Pistorius of a lesser charge of non-premeditated murder on grounds that the state had failed to prove intent or dolus eventualis, a legal concept that centres on a person being held responsible for the foreseeable consequences of his actions.

"The evidence failed to prove the accused had intention" to kill, she said. "The accused had the intention to shoot at the person behind the door, not to kill."