Reeva Steenkamp's mother wants to ask Oscar Pistorius why he killed her daughter June Steenkamp says she is prepared to meet Oscar Pistorius face to face But she is adamant an apology for shooting her daughter is 'not enough' Prosecutors have announced intention to appeal his verdict and sentence June Steenkamp (pictured) says an apology from Pistorius is 'not enough' but she hopes to one day ask him to his face why he killed her daughter Reeva June Steenkamp has revealed she and her husband are willing to one day meet Oscar Pistorius and ask him face to face why he shot dead their daughter. The couple have never actually met Pistorius, who was last month jailed for five years for killing their daughter Reeva, but Mrs Steenkamp is steeling herself for the inevitable day they finally meet and have the opportunity to ask him why he pulled the trigger. During his trial, Pistorius stood before the court and issued a tearful public apology to the Steenkamps - an act she said she was completely unmoved by - and he has also made a request to meet them in person. But this request came too soon after the harrowing ordeal of losing their daughter and at that time they were not yet ready to speak to him. What can he say? Sorry is not enough,' she told the Guardian. What can he say and what would we want to talk to him about? I don't know. But one day that confrontation will come. Altercation? Maybe. Violence? No, I don't think so. But that day has to come. Following a seven month trial, on October 21 Pistorius was acquitted of murder and found guilty of the lesser charge of culpable homicide in a ruling and interpretation of the law which was heavily criticised for being too lenient. Under the current terms, the Paralympian is eligible for release after 10 months and would then complete his sentence under house arrest. Mrs Steenkamp's belief that she and her husband will one day meet with Pistorius follows her claims her daughter never had sex with him during their three-month relationship and was about to leave the disgraced athlete on the night he shot her dead. Pistorius previously told his murder trial that the couple were planning a life together, but she said she has 'no doubt in her mind' that her daughter wanted to end their romance and believed it was only a matter of time before he killed somebody. She also said the model refused to sleep with the Paralympian because she had 'nagging doubts about their compatibility', the Times Magazine reported. In Judge Masipa's judgment explaining why she could only convict Pistorius on culpable homicide, or manslaughter, the 67 year-old judge acknowledged that a 'reasonable' person with Pistorius's disabilities would have foreseen that shooting into the door may have killed the person inside. June and Barry Steenkamp (pictured) are steeling themselves for the day they meet Pistorius face to face Left, Mrs Steenkamp pictured listening to evidence in court during the Pistorius trial, and right, her daughter Reeva Steenkamp, who Pistorius said he mistook for a burglar when he shot her through a bathroom door However, she said South African legal precedents warned against automatically assuming that because a perpetrator 'should have' foreseen the consequences of his actions that he actually did. She said that the prosecution had failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the double amputee foresaw the fatal consequences of his actions when he shot at the door, meaning she could not convict him on a murder charge. But South African prosecutors have confirmed they will appeal the manslaughter verdict and five-year prison sentence after failing to secure the murder conviction. Prosecution spokesman Nathi Mncube said the next step would be to file papers in court. June and Barry Steenkamp (pictured) sat through often graphic and bloody forensic evidence detailing the killing of their daughter Reeva Steenkamp pictured with Pistorius in early 2013. The two had been seeing each other for three months before the shooting It came amid reports the runner had spent £1million in legal fees during the trial - with nearly half that amount still unpaid - raising questions how the athlete would fund a second defence. Last week, prosecutors admitted they had 'an appetite' for an appeal, with chief lawyer Gerrie Nel holding urgent meetings with the country's most senior legal experts to build a case. Professor James Grant, who was one of the first to be consulted, said it would not be straightforward process. The high-profile nature of the Blade Runner's trial had raised questionable legal precedents that academics argued against for years, he added. A ruling on a case heard before South Africa's Supreme Court of Appeal more than 30 years ago set a precedent that now limits the state's right of appeal. In order for the verdict in Pistorius's case to be challenged, the earlier case would also have to be appealed.