Moller's chart shows precisely when there is a cellular data connection (which he labels GPRS) in place and the duration. So, yes, it is indisputable that the phone had no cellular data connection for that period. It is theoretically possible that it had a Wi-Fi connection which dipped out occasionally or the phone lost signal due to moving around the house. Proving that OP did not have Wi-Fi is therefore critical. Moller states to both Nel and Roux that the GPRS activity implies some unknown app activity. This is simply incorrect.
Having WiFi doesn't change anything re antenna activation
The handset will prefer WiFi when available, and fall back on an available cellular data if there is one (depending on settings).
However that does not mean it can initiate a new tower connection if antenna has been switched off.
The whole point of Airplane mode is that apps cannot initiate connections.
The feature would be pointless is unknown apps could switch on your antenna while you in on board a plane for example.
A possible consideration is that if the iPad has its own GPRS - maybe OP tethered via the iPad on Reeva's iPhone hotspot for the cousin Binge chat?
it would be interesting to know if there was a blackspot in the house
Again the problem is that I can believe a blackspot with no data. But I cannot believe a blackspot with not even a voice connection?
At our country place sometimes I lose my data signal on my phone but voice is pretty much always available
I certainly never go dark on the tower for 90mins at a time - whereas I can lose my data connection for 5 or 6 hrs depending on weather
I always think the best way to approach these things is to explore the opposite view and assume it to be true. If we assume OP has Wi-Fi but occasionally the Wi-Fi signal in his house is a bit flaky could this explain everything? Forget Airplane mode as this would not be necessary in this scenario.
What doesn't fit?
Reeva obviously doesn't use his Wi-Fi as she has contiguous GPRS connections throughout the day, including when at OP's. It could be that OP hasn't shared his Wi-Fi key with her. Is this likely? If we assume this is the case though is it really that much of a stretch?
More thoughts on Wi-Fi or not.
It would be considered normal for someone of OP's age to have Wi-Fi in his home. He has a number of laptops and Apple devices which would benefit from a connection to the network at speeds higher than 3G cellular data connectivity can offer (e.g. for software updates, transferring larger filesetc.). He probably also has cable TV. This could certainly also deliver broadband. Wi-Fi is then simply the next logical step.
It explains the Binge WhatsApp messages without any corresponding GPRS connectivity between 20:10-20:25. OP can then use WhatsApp on his iPhone (where the app is normally to be found) rather than via some other device for exchanging the messages.
It explains all the lengthy GPRS dips. Looked at the other way round, the GPRS activations are merely dips in his Wi-Fi signal due to the phone moving or just a flaky Wi-Fi signal in the home.
Reeva's phone never connects to Wi-Fi as she has a series of contiguous GPRS signals covering the entire day (except 24 seconds). This could simply be because OP hasn't told her his Wi-Fi key.
Other notes
1. Is there any evidence of a landline connection at the house? If not that excludes ADSL?
2. His TV is likely satellite not cable
3. If there was an ADSL Router in the house - i think evidence would have been led about data activity
When I proposed to Moller that OP might use Airplane mode to become incognito he told me he had forwarded my email to Nel, proposed to discuss it with him, and asked for my early usage tables. Why?
GPRS dips and activations seem to occur at interesting times: off when with Reeva (except occasionally when OP changes / bathes upstairs), on between 22:30 and 01:48 (x3) when Reeva is either downstairs working or asleep, off at 03:22 after Baba calls him back and OP is flustered, on briefly at 03:31 when OP is left alone while Stipp and Carice join in the Netcare call and on briefly at 03:53 when OP goes upstairs for Reeva's bag. Some times are approximate. Does this prove anything either way?
OK - but here is the issue.
Personally when I am connected to my home Wifi i leave my cellular data on. My phone prefers the Wifi and i allow it to fall back on 3G if it needs to - so I have continuous coverage,
But let us say I decide to turn off my mobile data because I want to ration my data.
Nevertheless I am still connected to the cell tower for voice and SMS?
So if I want to be using wifi on my handset but not be connected to the tower, I would have to enter airplane mode.
This is why i wonder about the exact meaning of "no network signal"
does it mean "phone not present" or does it mean "no data" but voice and SMS available?
My guess is that OP turns on airplane so that he is not bothered by Chats/SMS/Voice or perhaps even more likely, he did not want to receive that stuff with Reeva there.
It would be fascinating to see his data from an evening when she was not there.
My Theory link is reinstated below with, what I hope is a suitable Notice added at the beginning of the document. Still a couple of bits to be added to the core timeframe but comments, alternatives, enhancements etc. welcome.
Phone usage charts
Theory
Timeline (13 Feb)
Witness locations (aerial)
Witness locations (graphic)
Witness testimony analysis
Thank you, Mr Fossil!!!!!
When I read your theory, I got goose bumps all over. It is very similar to what I thought happened that night. Sounds like you are in the camp that OP was on his legs both when he used the bat AND when he fired the shots?
Thank you for your brilliant sleuthing, and sharing it with us.
Sorry, the term 'no network signal' was coined by me to mean no GPRS cellular data signal in the cell tower column. I was plotting the GPRS connectivity that Moller showed. That said, there is always a GPRS connection in place spanning the duration of every call that is made as well as at other times when no call is being made. If using Wi-Fi this would not be necessary. Or is it a quirk of the way Vodacom report things? This would be the normal state of affairs if Airplane Mode was being used to drop all signals (to be pedantic it is possible to switch Wi-Fi back on whilst in Airplane Mode).
ETA If it was a quirk, and the GPRS connection is shown from the moment the call is dialling, it still wouldn't explain longer periods such as at 03:54-ish when GPRS stays up for 405 seconds covering a call of 123 seconds.
ETA2 For the sake of clarity I have changed the term 'No network signal' to read 'No GPRS connection'
Don't take my word for this, but I seem to recall much, much earlier in the thread a discussion about whether Pistorius had a land line and wifi in his house - and some SA contributors suggested that he probably didn't. It is quite normal over there not to, as I understand it because the infrastructure is not always in place.
So my impression has always been that he had no wifi. But, of course, that could be wrong.
One assertion isn't false. In his judgment, Maluleke said: “While it is correct that the role of drugs was clearly established as well as the direct role this played in the conduct of the appellants, this in our view eliminates the conditions of dolus eventualis (direct intention).”
He said the pair had no foresight of the fatal accident. Maluleke, however, did not excuse their behaviour.
“Their conduct cut short the lives of four innocent schoolchildren and completely confined two others to a life of care.”
http://www.iol.co.za/news/crime-courts/state-may-appeal-jub-jub-verdict-1.1762191#.VDZ-oixxnBw
Yes, I recall this too. I can certainly believe he didn't have a landline as he's away so much and contacting him on it would be hopeless. He has two mobile phones (business and personal) which suggests this is his preferred method of communication. But did he have cable TV for instance? Perhaps that gave him broadband and, in turn, he had Wi-Fi connected to that? I'm playing devil's advocate here because it's important to resolve this as conclusively as we can if we're to understand the phone usage records correctly.
I tend to think he did not have ADSL or cable internet.
That is why Reeva worked on her laptop using her mobile hotspot
Similarly, his iPads probably are 3G iPads
In NZ it is also reasonably common to have mobile internet as often the landline infrastructure is so poor
You make a lot of assertions here:
-You say it is trite law that murder dolus eventualis requires direct intention to harm.
-You say the court in OPs case made a finding of fact that he did not intend to harm anybody.*
-You say it was on this ground that the court said in OPs case it could not find him guilty of murder dolus eventualis.
-You say the court correctly applied the principles of law in determining and explaining the subjective intention of OP and therefore its findings cannot be overturned.
-You say Jub Jub's murder conviction was overturned on the ground that he did not have direct intention to harm anybody.
-You say Rudi Visagies admission of the facts as you state them is sufficient to safely convict on murder.
In my view, respectfully, every single one of those assertions is false.
(*If you think about it, you must be claiming the court found OP was just firing warning shots, and screamed like a banshee breaking down the door because he thought he must have given Reeva a bit of a fright. The court made some daft findings, but this was not one of them.)
In his judgment, Maluleke said: “While it is correct that the role of drugs was clearly established as well as the direct role this played in the conduct of the appellants, this in our view eliminates the conditions of dolus eventualis [legal intention].”
http://www.citypress.co.za/news/jub-jub-ruling-appealed/