The murder trial of Olympic track star Oscar Pistorius has been a dramatic display of emotion since the double amputee first appeared in the courtroom.

A visibly distraught Pistorius wept and vomited while listening to testimony that he shot and killed his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp through a closed bathroom door.

Now, a well known South African columnist is making accusations that Pistorius hired an acting coach before the start of his trial. Columnist Jani Allan made the accusations in an open letter to Pistorius where she ripped into the accused's lifestyle and claimed that he was coached to appear more believable during the trial.

"I have it from a reliable source that you are taking acting lessons for your days in court," Allan wrote. "Your coach has an impossible task."

In another interview, Allan went on to claim that Oscar is being coached on his court performance by a close actor friend, who is famous in South Africa.

Photos from Pistorius' cross examination showed the athlete red-faced and sobbing as he faced questioning by a prosecutor known as "the bull dog".

The media spokesperson for Pistorius denied the accusations of an acting coach "in the strongest terms" but it raises question about how much coaching and preparation defendants should receive before a trial?

Would knowledge that a defendant had used an acting coach make you question their innocence? How much 'coaching' is allowed or is ethical during a trial?

Guests:

Royal F. Oakes, partner, Barger & Wolen, LLP

Joshua Karton, trial consultant and president of Santa Monica-based Communication Arts. He teaches litigators about theater techniques.

Richard Gabriel, Trial consultant for his company Decision Analytics, Author of "Acquittal: An Insider Reveals the Stories and Strategies Behind Today's Most Infamous Vertdicts" (forthcoming)