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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
zwiebel said:
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.
Click to expand...

And same weather conditions. Almost impossible to do but Roux will have cobbled something up. I get the impression he cannot bear to be wrong or outwitted. To me, this is why he spent so long trying to break Michell Burger's testimony.
 
minor4th said:
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.
Click to expand...

I have a cricket player in my home, and a bat and an old door. I'd love to experiment. But I don't have any weapons to compare the noise to.

I might still try though, just to find out what the noise sounds like.
 
Trooper said:
What I think has happened here , is there is some confusion about 'new facts and evidence' as opposed to what is merely Mr Roux opinion, or hope, or whatever.... I checked back with the transcript and at no part of it does Mr Roux, under oath , present new facts, or / and evidence to the court in the matter of Mr Pretorious.
Click to expand...

At the very beginning several documents were admitted in evidence by agreement of both lawyers. One of those was the autopsy report, and it apparently contains a conclusion about the nature of the brain injury. This trial is also following different procedures that we do in the US - the lawyers are apparently allowed to present witnesses with other evidence and witness statements even before that other witness has testified.
 
zwiebel said:
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?
Click to expand...

Thank you but I really struggle with Afrikaans, I have an Afrikaans colleague who confirmed for me so will decline lol, but when I see or hear about discrepancies among SA who are following, will definitely point them out for you all.. Afrikaans is not currently a "popular" language here, we have 11 official languages, I would be surprised if the judge herself is fluent and would surmise that there are many in court not able to keep up!
 
minor4th said:
At the very beginning several documents were admitted in evidence by agreement of both lawyers. One of those was the autopsy report, and it apparently contains a conclusion about the nature of the brain injury. This trial is also following different procedures that we do in the US - the lawyers are apparently allowed to present witnesses with other evidence and witness statements even before that other witness has testified.
Click to expand...

SA law follows, in general, the process of British law, which my own country does, also. So the procedure is familiar and transparent to me. Not different. Mr Roux did not present Ms Burger with 'new evidence'. He expressed his opinion on the matter of her testimony.. He presented no affidavits, no sworn testimony from any other witness, he merely expressed an opinion he held that she was mistaken.. this is where I think your confusion begins.

Mr Pretorius and his legal team have stipulated, a term which you are familiar with, as to the autopsy report which gives clear evidence of the order of the shots. .. that is, Mr Pretorius has AGREED to the order of the shots fired by him into Ms Steenkamps body. Head shot last.

so again.. what new evidence and facts did Mr Roux present to Ms Burger to which , in your opinion, she should have absorbed and redacted her testimony?
 
zwiebel said:
I have a cricket player in my home, and a bat and an old door. I'd love to experiment. But I don't have any weapons to compare the noise to.

I might still try though, just to find out what the noise sounds like.
Click to expand...


Gunshots usually echo. A bat hitting my door doesn't.

--Lived in Kentucky for 27 years
--My dad loved guns.....
--Bats are ugly....
 
Excuse my typing, I've hurt my hand. See photos.

My (most unscientific) experiment was a failure but also a small success.

Failed because
I couldn't find the bat or the cricketer so used a heavy lump of wood myself.
And could barely make a dent, let alone break the solid wood door. :(

Success because
I took the dog with me. Dog who is totally, totally allergic petrified and terrified of gunshots, fireworks, even just the smell is enough to send him racing for safety.

He sat there happily while I tried to demolish that door. It sounded nothing like a gunshot to him. Case closed for me. :)
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    191.6 KB · Views: 41
Tssiemer said:
Gunshots usually echo. A bat hitting my door doesn't.

--Lived in Kentucky for 27 years
--My dad loved guns.....
--Bats are ugly....
Click to expand...

Are you and me both running around hitting our doors with bats? What'll the neighbours think!!
 
zwiebel said:
Excuse my typing, I've hurt my hand. See photos.

My (most unscientific) experiment was a failure but also a small success.

Failed because
I couldn't find the bat or the cricketer so used a heavy lump of wood myself.
And could barely make a dent, let alone break the solid wood door. :(

Success because
I took the dog with me. Dog who is totally, totally allergic petrified and terrified of gunshots, fireworks, even just the smell is enough to send him racing for safety.

He sat there happily while I tried to demolish that door. It sounded nothing like a gunshot to him. Case closed for me. :)
Click to expand...
Hahaha, you lucky you didn't break your hand! :p Anyhow, a cricket bat is pretty solid and I can only imagine the amount of adrenalin powering through OP possibly gave him considerable power kwim?
 
I believe the show with Reeva's mother has aired?? Can anyone provide transcripts or a youtube link?? Think its called the today show?
 
Paladine said:
Thank you for that link. Seeing where the door is and where the shots were fired from and then looking at the toilet...it sure would be where I'd cower if I were under attack from gunfire from that doorway. There was blood ON the toilet...leads me to believe she wasn't sitting on it.

Thanks, again...great link.
Click to expand...

You are welcome! I just edited and added another link to the post...
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    23.1 KB · Views: 21
I wonder where the key for that door was found?
 
'When the athlete last appeared in court, he said when he realised his mistake he did everything to save his lover, battering the toilet door with a cricket bat to get to her.'

I have always been interested in the cricket bat... I have a few round the house, but not upstairs.. one leaves them in the garage, or in the laundry.. ready to grab on the way out.. it's not something you swing about in the bedrooms, or store there.. off season, stored in its cover..it was the cricket season, in South Africa at that time, though... it would most likely be near the back door ... where did he say he got it from?? does anyone have info on that..??
 

Attachments

  • graphic-in-his-own-words-how-oscar-pistorius-killed-reeva-steenkamp.jpeg
    graphic-in-his-own-words-how-oscar-pistorius-killed-reeva-steenkamp.jpeg
    117.8 KB · Views: 24
minor4th said:
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
Click to expand...

It is not as simple as that. I have just been reading about sound and the way it travels and quite clearly the sound of the shockwave of a bullet being fired travels at a faster rate than a voice (depending on the gun it can actually be supersonic) so it seems it is possible, if I have read and understood correctly, that the sound of the shockwave could arrive just before Reeva's last scream which would not have been supersonic but travelling at 330metres/second. The shockwave is the crack rather than the bang of a bullet being fired. Do we have any physicists on board?

There is a small amount info here but I would love to hear from a physicist. I may be totally wrong but it would be good to know one way or the other.

Bullet bow shockwave - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 173 more.
Total: 4,940 (members: 174, guests: 4,766)

Online statistics

Members online
174
Guests online
4,766
Total visitors
4,940
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
602,829
Messages
18,147,442
Members
231,547
Latest member
Jesspi
Back
Top