Lesley and Gil Elliott have been on tenterhooks for the past year and a-half.
When yesterday at 11.20am it was finally all over, Mr and Mrs Elliott and their sons, Chris and Nick, linked arms and told waiting media the verdict was the right one.
"We're really, really pleased. It was the right decision. It's been a long 18 months for all of us and we needed justice for Sophie, for her loss of life and also for lots of other girls that may be in this position," Mrs Elliott said.
• Non-parole period the big question
She thanked everyone for their support, which had kept them going. The trial had been difficult for her.
It brought some closure, but did not take away the grief they had over the loss of Sophie.
However, it did put the "ugliness" behind them, she said.
She believed Sophie would have wanted to see the same verdict. Mrs Elliott said the family could not wait to get back home to Dunedin.
"We need to go home for a very long time now. We can't wait.
"Soph is at home. She loved that house; she loved that room. We just feel like we've been away from her for a long time. We need to go back to that and get some sort of normality, whatever that is, in our lives."
That normality was shattered when, on January 9, 2008, Clayton Weatherston murdered their daughter, stabbing her 216 times and mutilating her face and body.
Unable to make any plans since - with Weatherston's trial hanging over them - it had been very difficult to cope with ordinary life, Mrs Elliott said.
"It has been hard, really hard. Packing up and coming away for a trial was the last thing we wanted to do.
"We just wanted to be in our own home where Sophie was."
Even then, they thought the trial would last only three weeks.
The situation was made more crazy by the pressure of being forced to use what should have been private time to sit through this process, Mr Elliott said.
Mr Elliott, a scientist, had to make sure his staff were coping and the Elliotts had to use their annual and long-service leave.
"Everything is stacked against the victim or the victim's family. It's all topsy-turvey."
Their sons came over from Australia, taking leave without pay and giving up their flats.
It had been particularly tough for them, their mother said, because when they went back to Australia, life for others there carried on as normal, while they had been through severe trauma.
The trial being put off time and again also meant none of them knew when they could come or go.
They had to constantly psych themselves up and could make no plans, Mr Elliott said.
"We had this hanging over us this whole time."
Now that the trial was over, there was some relief, but that was outweighed by the loss of their daughter.
"I have absolutely no doubt tomorrow I will still have the same feeling as today in terms of our loss of Soph, but not having to constantly think about the trial will be something at least," Mrs Elliott said.
"We can make a start on thinking about whatever our lives are going to be in the future.
"We haven't thought about anything else except this trial."
It had not been easy to sit daily in court and listen, not only to graphic forensic evidence, but also to distortions and embellishments of the truth about Sophie and her life.
They had to sit and watch and hope for the best, while Weatherston was allowed to talk and pass notes to his legal team whenever he wanted.
Mr Elliott had walked out when Weatherston's lawyer, Judith Ablett-Kerr, suggested Mrs Elliott was a less than reliable witness because of the trauma she experienced when Weatherston killed her daughter while she was in the house.
"I thought `bugger this'. It was so insulting. Lesley was the most reliable witness. There were only three people there."
It also stung to hear Sophie's private diaries used against her in court.
"She said things in them that she obviously had no intention of anybody ever reading.
"I know myself, if she was here, she would be utterly mortified," her mother said.
Mrs Elliott found the insinuations during the trial about the relationship between Robert Alexander and their daughter offensive as well.
"They might have stepped over student-teacher boundaries a little bit, but Sophie had great respect for Robert.
"I find it quite offensive that they put that slant on it."
The family found it galling that Weatherston claimed he was provoked.
"It's absolute rubbish," Mr Elliott said. "It was premeditated murder and there's no doubt about it."
The case was a pivotal one because if the jury came back and said it was manslaughter "there would never be another murder case in New Zealand", he said.
"Everyone would claim provocation. People already convicted might say, 'Hey, I was provoked, and want a retrial'."
The defence argument Weatherston had special characteristics that made him extra sensitive was flawed, Mrs Elliott said.
"That still wouldn't stop him from knowing right from wrong.
"To be quite honest, the bottom line for us is 'Thou shalt not kill'."
The irony was that this far down the track, Sophie's soft nature meant she would have been telling her parents to give it a miss.
She would be saying it's too much hassle. Forget about him; move on.
"That's the sort of person she was. She did not hold a grudge. She'd have a good argument and then she'd be right."
On January 9, 2008, the Elliotts believed their daughter invited her killer into her bedroom, because she was busy packing and had thought he was coming to apologise for an earlier assault.
Neither she nor they had perceived any threat from Weatherston and even that day her daughter was not concerned about his behaviour when she briefly came downstairs to talk to her mother.
Mrs Elliott was "absolutely positive" she knew what had happened that fateful day.
"I think he was behind the door and he shut the door when she went in and she put her hands up and she shouted. I was up those stairs so fast. From then on in, she just went in to this appalling screaming and I could hear this thumping.
"Of course I went back downstairs to get the meat skewer and, unbeknown to me, I was on the phone at the same time. But that thumping went on."
There was "absolutely" no time for any discussion.
The Elliotts say they have had much support, including from many people they did not know, but because they were too tired at night to check the internet, they were not aware of the public outcry during the trial.
However, they were pleased they could now speak freely to the media.
"We did not want to do or say anything that would jeopardise the trial. On the other hand, we've also felt strongly that why shouldn't we have the opportunity to speak out."
They had never talked about Weatherston until now and believed the Weatherston family must have a story to tell as well, Mrs Elliott said.
"It is difficult for them - it's their son. They didn't ask to be put in this situation; the same as we didn't."
She noted the defence had made much during the trial of Weatherston's relationship with his mother.
"Well, he didn't think about that when he was doing Sophie in."
The Elliotts thought Weatherston was certainly a narcissist and also possessed the other personality disorders psychiatrists attributed to him in court.
"It's not like this strong-willed girl came along and he was acting outside his character. He wasn't - he was acting in his character. It was just that Sophie stood up to it," Mr Elliott said.
But his personality issues still did not excuse what he did and it was a defence they might have got away with if Weatherston had stabbed their daughter once.
"But why did he stab her 216 times? Why did he stab her in the eyes? Why did he stab her all over the place. He was actually insane really; there's no doubt about it."
They would never believe their daughter attacked Weatherston with scissors.
Weatherston was so big compared with Sophie, her father said.
He must have been able to disarm her if she had done it and anyway, they could not believe she would have gone at anyone with a weapon, even in self-defence, Mrs Elliott said.
"When I told the boys [the defence would say she went at Weatherston with scissors] they were horrified. They said Sophie would not hurt a fly. She was the softest thing out."
There were many things they missed about Sophie, including her exuberance for life, Mrs Elliott said.
"We thought this year she would be at Treasury and all the excitement that held, she would be establishing herself and have friends. I'm sure she would have made a big impression . . . We miss out on all that as well."
They had trouble understanding why it happened.
"We know murders happen in the back streets; sometimes they are domestic violence, sometimes they are P-crazed. But here was an educated man, who purports to be an A+ student, and an educated girl. How do they get into this situation?"
If she been walking through the Octagon at 2am in the morning and some P-crazed individual attacked her, I could slightly understand it. But this you can't understand. And that's what we'll never know."
They could not ask Weatherston, because he was "wired back to front", Mr Elliott said.
That was revealed in the way he had struggled with his honours degree, with working at the Treasury and displayed challenging behaviour during his time as an Otago University tutor.
Mrs Elliott acknowledged it was a difficult situation for the University of Otago because Weatherston was an employee and Sophie a student.
"Of course, nobody would have ever thought he was going to be a murderer, but I just feel that if someone had taken a stand, somebody at some stage had warned Sophie . . .
"Manslaughter was never going to be an acceptable verdict," Mrs Elliott said.
"No matter what anyone says, manslaughter to us lowers the violence, it lowers the intent. It implies accident - something less than deliberate murder."
During the trial, they were fortunate to have the unwavering support of family and friends.
"I think that's the only reason we are still standing up."
But the person they needed most, they could not have by their side.
"We miss the bright, bubbly, vivacious person that she was. She was cheeky, but she could be frustrating like anybody can be. She would have been 24 this year. She would have been well into her career. We're deprived of all that; the boys are deprived of their sister.
"There will never be a husband, never be a son-in-law, never be children and grandchildren, Mr Elliott said. And their daughter had those plans," Mrs Elliott said.
"She told me: 'Mum, by the time I'm 30, I'm going to give up economics, do photography. I'm going to have kids. Don't tell Dad'."
