I don't think so.For me it hinges on the correct timeline as well as the bat marks and common sense. A lot of common sense.
Firstly, the experts did not state that the bat definitely happened after the gunshots, merely it could OR a piece of the wood was struck with the bat after the gunshots.
They also disagreed with Pistorius' version of getting prosthetics then bat.
So either the experts are right, and the bat after gunshots hinges only on them, which means Pistorius' version is incorrect (because his version he put prosthetics on).
Or the experts are wrong, and the whole timeline discussion is out the window based on forensics, the only pieces of evidence external
to forensics is the witnesses hearing Reeva scream.
Even if we accept timeline or not, that still cannot prove Pistorius' innocence, the timeline could very well correct, and you can still
safely believe Pistorius went out to kill Reeva, and the timeline would not disprove that at all.
Thats not quite right.G.bng said:Yep. Correct. That's after the first bangs by the timeline and the loud crying was at the same time as the screaming so how can that tally?
They stated sometime after 3am, they heard 4 loud bangs, then they went back to bed, shortly after they heard Oscar crying.
This doesn't really contradict the state timeline at all, its totally in line with it.
No one stated that, at best there was intermittent arguing and loud voices followed by screaming.G.bng said:But yes, if it had been my daughter that they were hearing screaming for her life for 12 minutes