Trial Discussion Thread #1 - 14.03.03-06, Day 1-4

[shane13]

Putting your hands over your ears doesn't actually stop a person hearing anything. I just tried it at home.

What'd you say?

 

[Really?]

I am still watching the "Telegraph" feed........Interesting.

 

[Trooper]

That's the impression I've got but was there a specific question that she didn't answer? I can't see anything myself, but I haven't been following in depth.

no.. she answered all questions.. she didn't answer them in the way Mr Roux wanted them answered.. this is one of the difficult parts of the job of being defence, or , indeed a prosecuting lawyer.. sometimes, and at times, all day , and all week a witness just will not say what you want them to say. That's what a witness has to put up with. People unconnected with events, bereft of an agenda, merely witnesses to something they had no say in, often don't tell the same story an accused person does..

 

[Cherwell]

What was the question?

I don't remember.

That's disappointing.

 

[minor4th]

What were the new facts and evidence?
(I haven't been following the trial in depth)

Evidence that it was Oscar screaming after the shots, and medical evidence that she couldn't have screamed after being shot in the head and suffering a very severe brain injury.

 

[zwiebel]

So is defence actually going to produce the expert study disproving so eone could have heard shots that night? I can imagine that would be very difficult to do - have to reproduce conditions, have an identical gun, same time of night, get equipment into both the apartments......they can't have tested from the witnesses apartment, I guess, or she'd have known about it.

Strange.

 

[nursebeeme]

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/0...l-who-are-state-witnesses-and-what-might-say/

wow.. there are 107 witnesses that could be called and they are not even getting thru one a day!

also folks... careful when talking about the Defense attorney: re: name calling :wink:

 

[zwiebel]

Evidence that it was Oscar screaming after the shots, and medical evidence that she couldn't have screamed after being shot in the head and suffering a very severe brain injury.

Did you notice when defence listed the shots in the wrong order and prosecution objected? He'd put the shot that rendered her unable to scream, near the beginning of the sequence instead of the end. I thought that was a little iffy.

 

[minor4th]

So it would have been okay if she'd said to Roux: "I accept that a man screaming might sound like a woman screaming to you - but since I heard 2 different voices, I don't accept that it was one person"?

I don't see any other way she could word it without adding doubt to her own testimony, and she seemed very sure about it.

No. She should have said that if it's true that medical evidence rules out Reeva screaming after the last shot and there is reliable witness testimony that it was Oscar screaming, then it's possible that it was not Reeva screaming AFTER the last shot.

I'm apparently not communicating very well, so I'm going to move on

 

[Cherwell]

Evidence that it was Oscar screaming.

There's no evidence for that at all! Has it been proved that the sounds heard even came from his house? :devil:

 

[minor4th]

Did you notice when defence listed the shots in the wrong order and prosecution objected? He'd put the shot that rendered her unable to scream, near the beginning of the sequence instead of the end. I thought that was a little iffy.

The fact remains that one of the four shots was to the brain, and she couldn't have been screaming after the shots ended.

 

[soozieqtips]

Evidence that it was Oscar screaming after the shots, and medical evidence that she couldn't have screamed after being shot in the head and suffering a very severe brain injury.

Didn't they say if the last shot to her head had been the fatal one, then she'd have been able to scream before that? Roux seemed to want to leave the order of shots out of the equation, because the correct order means it was entirely possible Reeva would still have been able to scream.

On another note:

12.06 Roux says she did not hear any argument, the witness quietly says: "yes, I did".

Why is Roux even bothering to ask questions if he's answering them himself?

EDIT: Okay. You're talking about the screaming after the fatal shot.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...671489/Oscar-Pistorius-murder-trial-live.html

 

[nursebeeme]

minor4th! Glad you are here as a verified attorney and helping us out with the bench trial stuff.. it is very different indeed

 

[minor4th]

There's no evidence for that at all! Has it been proved that the sounds heard even came from his house? :devil:

Yes. The witness after Burger testified that she thought it was a woman screaming or crying very loudly after the shots ended, but her husband told her it was Oscar because he knows Oscar well and knows his screaming voice.

 

[minor4th]

Didn't they say if the last shot to her head had been the fatal one, then she'd have been able to scream before that? Roux seemed to want to leave the order of shots out of the equation, because the correct order means it was entirely possible Reeva would still have been able to scream.

On another note:

12.06 Roux says she did not hear any argument, the witness quietly says: "yes, I did".

Why is Roux even bothering to ask questions if he's answering them himself?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...671489/Oscar-Pistorius-murder-trial-live.html

Sure, she could have screamed before the final shot, but she couldn't have screamed after it -- and Burger adamantly insisted that she heard Reeva scream after the shots ended.

 

[Trooper]

Evidence that it was Oscar screaming after the shots, and medical evidence that she couldn't have screamed after being shot in the head and suffering a very severe brain injury.

Mr Roux made a mistake..you know this.. the head shot was the last, not the first shot, that is the definitive medical evidence, that Mr Roux and Mr Pretorious have already stipulated as being a fact.. Mr Roux has not presented any 'new evidence' or 'fact's' in this particular matter. There has been no medical autopsy evidence from the Defence , so how could that off the cuff remark, for which Mr Roux was reprimanded for and backtracked from be taken as definitive and stipulated evidence and fact?? when it is not?

If Mr Pretorious and Mr Roux have in fact rejected their original stipulation of the order of the shots as fact, then where is this statement?

 

[minor4th]

So is defence actually going to produce the expert study disproving so eone could have heard shots that night? I can imagine that would be very difficult to do - have to reproduce conditions, have an identical gun, same time of night, get equipment into both the apartments......they can't have tested from the witnesses apartment, I guess, or she'd have known about it.

Strange.

I don't think anyone is really contesting that the shots could be heard at that distance. I think the question is whether cricket bat breaking door could be heard at that distance.

 

[zwiebel]

But this was only heard by the witness across the road, Burger mentioned nothing about hearing screaming this year nor any disturbances, possibly being because of the newly built up houses.

Please note the interpreter made quite a few errors and was not very clear translating. One example I have seen so far:

Roux: You couldn't hear before could you?
Interpreter says: You couldn't hear after could you?
Witness answers No.

Afrikaans is a very peculiar language and simply one error with a word can change the entire meaning of the sentence. If translation is going to continue, its bloody imperative to both sides that they get a qualified and experienced person to do the job!

If we are lucky enough to have a speaker of Afrikaans here on WS, can I please vote for you as our honorary translator? Or at least, our interpreter checker?

Thanks for pointing out the discrepancies - so important. Do you know how many people in court are likely to understand Afrikaans? Does everyone grow up multilingual there?

 

[Trooper]

a cricket bat in the bedroom.... that sounds peculiar to me. it's not the usual bedroom décor...

Cricket bats are generally made of willow.. .. Oscar wouldn't have a plastic one.. .

 

[Trooper]

a cricket bat tends to make a sort of 'thunk' sound.. its not the sort of sound a steel bar, or a plank of pine would make.. willow has a particular sound..