I added an ETA
ETA here: Do you not recall there was 1 narrow panel that hsd a bullet hole in it--from Vermeulen testimony?
'The doors'
- Thread starter Harmony 2
- Start date
I added an ETA
ETA here: Do you not recall there was 1 narrow panel that hsd a bullet hole in it--from Vermeulen testimony?
TorisMom003
New Member
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2009
- Messages
- 4,386
- Reaction score
- 7
D is the one that the crack goes through. The others, A B and C, did not have any cracks going through them. The same gun was used for all four shots, same bullets.
That is a very interesting observation ,Well spotted Not sure what it means but you can't help but think there must be a reason for it .
I know this is the shot that Nel discussed during redirection of Bat man/Vermeulen but apart from that I got nothing
Will give it some more thought though .
Viper
New Member
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2014
- Messages
- 1,812
- Reaction score
- 1
Best guess? It is probably just an indication of left to right, a marker placed for visual reference in case a photo was printed in reverse and presented to him he would immediately see a problem. Second guess? He ran out of red arrows and red tipped rods too. LOL!!!!
That is a very interesting observation ,Well spotted Not sure what it means but you can't help but think there must be a reason for it .
I know this is the shot that Nel discussed during redirection of Bat man/Vermeulen but apart from that I got nothing
Will give it some more thought though .
Is D the one that Vermuelan said was made prior to the bat, because the bullet hole had stopped the crack becoming longer?
Sorry only the crack where the D is was made by the bat. The large opening was made by OP's hand I think.
If B is the shot that missed, then A C D hit RS. That looks to me like a deliberate change of direction, from the wide gap from A to C and D.
Yes under redirection from Nel Vermeulen conceded that the crack through bullet hole D must have been after the shot but it could have been done when the bat was inserted into the gap alongside which was very close to prize out the first panel before he ripped the others out with his hands .
So basically the door could have been hit first enough to create the hole right through ( which OP has testified to ) then shot and then the crack through D could have been done as above .
I think Vermeulen's testimony was a bit strained due to language difficulties .i sometimes forget that these people are speaking in a second language. Also I think he was very nervous. I would like to think he wouldn't have been given the job to inspect the door if he wasn't experienced but can't be sure on this .
Hope I have explained OK .
Originally Posted by Murphys_Law View Post
Is there any significance, reasoning or logic to the colour coding of the ballistic rods as seen in the attached 2 photos. On the outside face of the door to the toilette, the holes A,B, and C are marked with red tags, while hole D has a green tag. Likewise, on the inside face of the door the rods corresponding to holes A, B, C are red coated, while the rod associated with hole D is unmarked. I assume hole D differs in some meaningful way to the other holes.
Fellow sleuthers, do you have any ideas on the observation?
For example: a different size of hole, inferring different ammunition, and thus a different gun.
I think its the states way of allowing an appeal just in case the judge doesn't believe all the other evidence was tampered with.............it goes deep seemingly
Is there any significance, reasoning or logic to the colour coding of the ballistic rods as seen in the attached 2 photos. On the outside face of the door to the toilette, the holes A,B, and C are marked with red tags, while hole D has a green tag. Likewise, on the inside face of the door the rods corresponding to holes A, B, C are red coated, while the rod associated with hole D is unmarked. I assume hole D differs in some meaningful way to the other holes.
Fellow sleuthers, do you have any ideas on the observation?
For example: a different size of hole, inferring different ammunition, and thus a different gun.
I think its the states way of allowing an appeal just in case the judge doesn't believe all the other evidence was tampered with.............it goes deep seemingly
Murphys_Law
New Member
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2013
- Messages
- 174
- Reaction score
- 0
Yes, I totally agree PatCee...its a wide gap from A to C and D. Further, if we look at the over head photo of the rods, neither C nor D seem to be directed close enough to the toilette and its lid. Recall Vander Nest stated that her head had to be in the vicinity of the lid in order to leave the spread of tissue debris, bone fragments and broken hair on the lid.
I also think that Mangena's treatment of bullet holes C and D was a bit sketchy in comparison to his analysis of A and B....purposely so. He more or less skipped directly to describing her defensive position as she took the last bullets. Perhaps, I am reading to much into what is not said. That said, at this point in time I remain somewhat sceptical eye about bullet holes C and D.
Attachments
Yes, regards C and D bullet holes, we're back to the magazine rack discussion again. If RS fell backwards on to it, so she was high enough for C and D to hit her arm and head, in what position was the rack in the bathroom at the time of the shooting.
Re magazine rack....Dixon said it was at an angle, from the the edge of the toilet bowl (right side, facing) to the wall on the right side of the bowl. He pointed out where the foot of the rack had marked the blood stain in front of the bowl. IIRC OP said it was in the middle against the wall?
Would this have enabled the height for C and D looking at the angle of the bullet through the door? Difficult to judge from the overhead photo, as it does look as though the rack is too far back.
ETA: Homegirl's pics on Defense thread, post 254 shows her suggestion of RS body over the toilet bowl, but it's difficult to tell how the height of bullet trajectory through the door fits.
Would this have enabled the height for C and D looking at the angle of the bullet through the door? Difficult to judge from the overhead photo, as it does look as though the rack is too far back.
ETA: Homegirl's pics on Defense thread, post 254 shows her suggestion of RS body over the toilet bowl, but it's difficult to tell how the height of bullet trajectory through the door fits.
IIRC Vermeulen agreed on redirect by Nel, that the bat could have come first. I think Vermeulen was wrong about when and how the lower crack was formed. I think that I made a good case that it was made when OP threw the plank against the wall, causing the small piece with bullet hole D through it to break away. See my post #77 on this thread.
Murphys Law, good question. I wonder too about the color coding.
PatCee, The graphic at post #254 is the final position only of the recreation that I did depicting the prosecution version.
I did do a full Prosecution sequence too, using Mangena's testimony, but haven't posted it. It still needs a little finishing work, and I don't really know where to post it. Maybe this thread would be ok. It is much different than the Defense recreation. I was able to get the figure into the bullet trajectories, and in much the same position as Mangena suggested she was in. I think he got it spot on. I could create a realistic animation which fits with the evidence. I would not be able to do that using the defense version.
I agree that it is hard to judge from above. I had a hard time with the bullet trajectories from that viewpoint and deciding on the starting position when doing both recreations.
I think that the magazine rack was very near where the police found it, but flat against the wall and that Reeva's lower body was resting on it, as Mangena said. The magazine rack is quite near the toilet, and it fits the evidence that Reeva,s lower body was resting on it. IMO
IIRC Mangena testified that bullet A hit Reeva in the hip. Bullet hole B missed, giving her time to fall backwards onto the magazine rack. She continued to fall to the right and a little forwards.This motion would put her into the path of the last two bullets. She was hit with the final two bullets as she was falling. The head shot caused her to be end up with her head on the bowl. He said that he could not say with certainty which of bullets C or D hit her in the arm or head, but he believed that the head shot was last. He demonstrated defensive the position that she was in as she fell. He deduced the positions from the wounds to the body, and from his ballistic analysis. I am very impressed with the work that he did.
BBM
I agree, and of course it would depend upon how fast her falling motion was. The head shot would need to have hit her as she was falling if I understand correctly. The head on the bowl would have been her final position after the head shot.
Cymbaline
Legal Intuologist
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2013
- Messages
- 354
- Reaction score
- 0
I've been looking at the bullet holes in the toilet door and the bullet holes in the door that Dixon got from OP's house and used to conduct his tests and they look different. The holes in the door from the crime scene are much cleaner.
Crime Scene:
http://media4.s-nbcnews.com/i/MSNBC...-140325-pistorius-toilet-door-bullet-hole.jpg
Dixon:
http://juror13lw.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/test-bullets-entry.png
Crime Scene:
http://media4.s-nbcnews.com/i/MSNBC...-140325-pistorius-toilet-door-bullet-hole.jpg
Dixon:
http://juror13lw.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/test-bullets-entry.png
Ncl1968
welsh wizzard
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2014
- Messages
- 203
- Reaction score
- 0
Dixon's pic looks like the rear of the door.. IE the inside. Crime scene pic looks like the front
Cymbaline
Legal Intuologist
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2013
- Messages
- 354
- Reaction score
- 0
Ncl1968
welsh wizzard
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2014
- Messages
- 203
- Reaction score
- 0
Oh yes but the bullets Dixon used was not black tallon so experiment null and void