State prosecutor Gerrie Nel on Monday questioned whether paralympian Oscar Pistorius could be considered truly remorseful if he failed to admit that he murdered his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp.

Cross examining psychologist Jonathan Scholtz, who was testifying in mitigation of sentence in the North Gauteng High Court, Nel said Pistorius has never conceded in court that he intentionally fired four shots into a locked bathroom door on Valentine’s Day 2013.

Nel asked whether responsibility was not considered a vital part of true remorse.

“He conveyed to me that he took her life and should not have,” Scholtz countered. “He said he took her, he killed her, it was wrong.”

Nel then asked: “Does he understand that he committed murder?”

Scholtz ventured as far as saying, that based on his interviews with him, the disabled sprinter understood that he voluntarily fired four shots into the door and unwittingly killed Steenkamp. Pistorius has maintained that he mistook the model for an intruder.

Nel responded: “That is your view that is not his. Does he agree that he armed himself with the intention to shoot, that he knew that there was somebody behind the door and that he then intentionally fired four shots into that door?

The witness said this was the case, to which Nel responded: “He didn’t say so to this court.”

He said Pistorius never during his trial admitted that he fired with intention, memorably claiming that the shots were fired involuntarily in a state of extreme fear. He added that it was disappointing that the court had to accept Scholtz’s word for it as Pistorius had refused to take the stand.

“That is his first admission through you, and I am not accepting it because I would like to test it. In cross-examining a witness, I put it to you, that is the first version of intentionally shooting that we have had in this court…,”

Nel added, alluding to his contention that Pistorius shot Steenkamp after a lover’s row: “I think that he perhaps intended more.”

The trial court has to sentence Pistorius for murder, after its initial conviction of culpable homicide — for which it imposed a five-year jail term — was overturned by the Supreme Court of Appeal, which delivered a finding of murder.

Nel also questioned the psychologist’s claim that the Steenkamp family had forgiven Pistorius for killing their daughter.

He submitted that “forgiveness is a wide word” and said Reeva’s mother June Steenkamp wrote in a book she penned on her daughter’s death, that she her Christian faith instructed her to forgive her daughter’s killer.

“She has forgiven him for her sake, not for his sake,” he said.

Scholtz earlier told the court that Pistorius was in too fragile a psychological state to testify this week.