Trial Discussion Thread #10 - 14.03.19, Day 13

[Trooper]

Yes, it is hearsay. There are certain exceptions that could come into play, and I'll not go through all that - but it's hearsay and you could not count on those statements being admissible in court.

it would be hearsay if it wasn't the murdered person s words confiding to a friend as the scenario proposed by the poster was. ..it would be even l less considered mere hearsay if the murdered person said it in the company of two friends, or said it to two different people using the same phraseology.

it WOULD be hearsay if a friend heard another friend stating what the murdered person said. that's hearsay.. or someone overheard parts of a conversation the murdered person was having and wasn't the person the murdered person was addressing..

Every attorney knows that.

 

[LemonMousse]

I didn't say there was no screaming before 3:10, I said there has been no testimony of screaming until after 3:10.

So no one heard cricket bat sounds, then how did Stipp hear "3 or 4" bangs and ten minutes later heard "2 or 3" bangs?

All of the state's witnesses, including the latest blood spatter witness and ballistics witness said there were only 4 shots fired that night. One can speculate that there were additional shots, but the witnesses say otherwise and we have to follow the evidence, not hypothetical possibilities. We're talking about proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

You actually said that the screaming and yelling started after the first bangs. That may be correct, it may not. We don't know. We only know that they were the first Stipp heard.

I don't know what Stipp heard precisely. But I don't have to know what it was in order to be pretty sure what it wasn't. And I'm pretty sure that it wasn't a cricket bat against a door.

Do you know how much energy OP would have to transfer via the bat to the door in order for the resultant sound to be as loud as a gunshot? More than he, or anyone else can produce. And the door would have been in total smithereens. It wasn't. The panels were clearly prised out, that's why they all look so neat.

And yes - we should follow the evidence. And where precisely is the evidence that a bat on a door could be as loud as a gunshot? You are assuming it must be because OP has said he battered down the door and some people heard loud bangs.

This does NOT prove that therefore the bangs were the bat. It might do if evidence is produced that this is a justifiable conclusion, but there's been none.

And yes, it's been proved that the bat was used on the door after the gunshots - and I expect it was. But that's ALL that's been proved.

And the ballistics and blood spatter have not proved that the gun was only used four times. They have shown the evidence of four gunshots - but you can't prove a negative. If there is no physical evidence that it was used more times than that, then you can't prove anything about them including that they didn't happen.

Yes, it's hypothetical - but I have not plucked extra gunshots out of thin air. Stipp says he heard them and OP has form for shooting into the air. I am not saying that I outright believe this....I don't know. But I think it's more probable than the idea that OP managed to produce sounds loud enough to break the sound barrier without ending up with a pile of splinters.

 

[MeeBee]

it would be hearsay if it wasn't the murdered person s words confiding to a friend as the scenario proposed by the poster was. ..it would be even l less considered mere hearsay if the murdered person said it in the company of two friends, or said it to two different people using the same phraseology.

it WOULD be hearsay if a friend heard another friend stating what the murdered person said. that's hearsay.. or someone overheard parts of a conversation the murdered person was having and wasn't the person the murdered person was addressing..

Every attorney knows that.

Ok, hearsay is a tricky thing. I wouldn't get into an argument over it with an attorney. Just saying.

 

[MeeBee]

You actually said that the screaming and yelling started after the first bangs. That may be correct, it may not. We don't know. We only know that they were the first Stipp heard.

I don't know what Stipp heard precisely. But I don't have to know what it was in order to be pretty sure what it wasn't. And I'm pretty sure that it wasn't a cricket bat against a door.

Do you know how much energy OP would have to transfer via the bat to the door in order for the resultant sound to be as loud as a gunshot? More than he, or anyone else can produce. And the door would have been in total smithereens. It wasn't. The panels were clearly prised out, that's why they all look so neat.

And yes - we should follow the evidence. And where precisely is the evidence that a bat on a door could be as loud as a gunshot? You are assuming it must be because OP has said he battered down the door and some people heard loud bangs.

This does NOT prove that therefore the bangs were the bat. It might do if evidence is produced that this is a justifiable conclusion, but there's been none.

And yes, it's been proved that the bat was used on the door after the gunshots - and I expect it was. But that's ALL that's been proved.

And the ballistics and blood spatter have not proved that the gun was only used four times. They have shown the evidence of four gunshots - but you can't prove a negative. If there is no physical evidence that it was used more times than that, then you can't prove anything about them including that they didn't happen.

Yes, it's hypothetical - but I have not plucked extra gunshots out of thin air. Stipp says he heard them and OP has form for shooting into the air. I am not saying that I outright believe this....I don't know. But I think it's more probable than the idea that OP managed to produce sounds loud enough to break the sound barrier without ending up with a pile of splinters.

Have you seen the video of the man comparing the sound of gunshots to the sound of a bat on the door? And the door he used was the exact same make and kind as the one Oscar has in his bathroom. He hit it loud enough to produce a noise that sounded an awful lot like a gunshot from a distance and the door was not in smithereens.

This is why we cannot use our own speculation as evidence. We can maybe and perhaps all we want. It means nothing regarding facts.

 

[LemonMousse]

What you are failing to account for is the mere possibility that the witnesses are mistaken. To an untrained ear, a loud bang can sound like a gunshot. The other night I heard banging sounds outside and at first thought they were gunshots. But they weren't, someone was banging on something.

And I don't think it was every witness who heard bang...bangbangbang. It was only one, right?

What I don't understand is how to account for Stipp, who had been awake the longest, hearing two sets of bangs. What was the other set? It stands to reason one set was the gunshots and one was the bat hitting the door. Regardless of the order, he said they sound the same and based on the evidence one set must have been one and another set the other. Doesn't the possibility remain that the witnesses who awoke later heard the bat and mistook it for gunshots if they indeed sounded the same?

ETA: wow, I apologize for my poor English. I hope what I'm trying to say is coming through lol.

It's not about whether the bat could sound like a gunshot - of course it could. It's about whether it could be loud enough to travel to the ears of Stipp at the same volume as a gunshot.

Things are loud because of energy. If you are at a door and knock lightly, you might not be heard. But if you draw back your fist and really thump, you will be. You've put more energy into it. (Not being patronising, I know you know this, just trying to explain what I mean).

A gun is extremely loud for various reasons and bullets move so quickly out of the nozzle because of the amount of energy the gunpowder exploding generates.

Human beings, even young strong ones like OP cannot produce that kind of energy. They just can't. For the sound of a whack to reach Dr Stipp at the same volume as a gunshot, then the initial sound (before it travelled to his ears) would have to have been as loud. Do you think that's likely?

If Stipp said one set of shots were much fainter, then that would be consistent. But he didn't. He is adamant that they sounded exactly the same.

Not to mention the fact that a door that's been given three enormous, deafening wallops would probably splinter into many pieces....not a few bits that can be stuck back together with not much difficulty.

To be clear, I am not saying the others are wrong and I am right - just that it is not necessarily as clear cut as they are suggesting.

 

[sorrell skye]

I actually think the most damaging and damning Testimony for Pistorius so far is one that hasn't been mentioned much, the gun licenser Sean Rens.

Sean Rens was the one witness Roux couldn't get out the witness box fast enough lol. :escape: Says a lot, doesn't it?

He's blaming the 'unexpected extension' of his murder trial for the sale? But I thought people expected it to last months, and Nel's just said he's closing next week.

Poor Oscar. He's such a victim. :boohoo:

 

[LemonMousse]

Have you seen the video of the man comparing the sound of gunshots to the sound of a bat on the door? And the door he used was the exact same make and kind as the one Oscar has in his bathroom. He hit it loud enough to produce a noise that sounded an awful lot like a gunshot from a distance and the door was not in smithereens.

This is why we cannot use our own speculation as evidence. We can maybe and perhaps all we want. It means nothing regarding facts.

I have seen it - I've also seen it being laughed at by quite a few physicists in a quite a few forums about how many things are wrong with the "experiment".

I could be wrong, of course, but I'm allowed to give my reasons for not believing something, right?

Oh, and I'm not giving evidence. I am talking on a forum. I have already acknowledged that I don't think any of this would stand up in court and that the evidence to convict OP is not there so far.

 

[Rumpole]

Have you seen the video of the man comparing the sound of gunshots to the sound of a bat on the door? And the door he used was the exact same make and kind as the one Oscar has in his bathroom. He hit it loud enough to produce a noise that sounded an awful lot like a gunshot from a distance and the door was not in smithereens.

This is why we cannot use our own speculation as evidence. We can maybe and perhaps all we want. It means nothing regarding facts.

That was an eye (ear) opening demonstration for me.

Frankly I had HUGE reservations that bat on door could sound remotely anything like a gun shot. That YT at least confirmed that YES it is plausible.

The YT does NOT purport to be a re-enactment of the same scene.. it is no more that a sound comparison. IMO the sound may well have sounded even more like a gunshot if it had involved a door inside a small bathroom with tiles and the sound first reverberating in the bathroom and the house and then across some distance.

For those who have not seen it.... well worth a watch (with an open mind).
Remember it is NOT a reenactment of the crime situation.. just a demonstration of what a bat on door can sound like

Oscar Pistorius Door: Cricket Bat v Gunshot Sounds - Analysis - YouTube

 

[minor4th]

Ok, hearsay is a tricky thing. I wouldn't get into an argument over it with an attorney. Just saying.

Yeah, the quote you were responding to was incorrect about hearsay. At least in the US.

 

[minor4th]

You actually said that the screaming and yelling started after the first bangs. That may be correct, it may not. We don't know. We only know that they were the first Stipp heard.

I don't know what Stipp heard precisely. But I don't have to know what it was in order to be pretty sure what it wasn't. And I'm pretty sure that it wasn't a cricket bat against a door.

Do you know how much energy OP would have to transfer via the bat to the door in order for the resultant sound to be as loud as a gunshot? More than he, or anyone else can produce. And the door would have been in total smithereens. It wasn't. The panels were clearly prised out, that's why they all look so neat.

And yes - we should follow the evidence. And where precisely is the evidence that a bat on a door could be as loud as a gunshot? You are assuming it must be because OP has said he battered down the door and some people heard loud bangs.

This does NOT prove that therefore the bangs were the bat. It might do if evidence is produced that this is a justifiable conclusion, but there's been none.

And yes, it's been proved that the bat was used on the door after the gunshots - and I expect it was. But that's ALL that's been proved.

And the ballistics and blood spatter have not proved that the gun was only used four times. They have shown the evidence of four gunshots - but you can't prove a negative. If there is no physical evidence that it was used more times than that, then you can't prove anything about them including that they didn't happen.

Yes, it's hypothetical - but I have not plucked extra gunshots out of thin air. Stipp says he heard them and OP has form for shooting into the air. I am not saying that I outright believe this....I don't know. But I think it's more probable than the idea that OP managed to produce sounds loud enough to break the sound barrier without ending up with a pile of splinters.

If I said there was no screaming before 3:10 then I misspoke. I meant to say that we have no evidence from witnesses of screaming before 3:10

 

[Trooper]

Have you seen the video of the man comparing the sound of gunshots to the sound of a bat on the door? And the door he used was the exact same make and kind as the one Oscar has in his bathroom. He hit it loud enough to produce a noise that sounded an awful lot like a gunshot from a distance and the door was not in smithereens.

This is why we cannot use our own speculation as evidence. We can maybe and perhaps all we want. It means nothing regarding facts.

btw.. Dr Stipps ear is unfortunately for Oscar, highly trained.. he spent 7 years in the military.

Yes I have seen that video...its absurd. Certainly the door was NOT the exact same make and kind...


it didn't sound anything like gunshot to me. but then, I , like Dr Stipp, Mrs Burger, Mr Johnson, and Judge Masipa herself, Roux, Nel, Oscar, Van Rensburg, Mungeena, Samantha, Darrin, the owners of Tasha, Baba, blood spatter man, Kevin Larena, have all grown up with a lifetime of hearing cricket bat sounds and watching cricket bat swings.All of them. Every one. .

day in day out, year in, year out. every night on the TV news, hearing it across the park, at a stadium, in the neighborhood streets..

Roux knows this. He even asked Van Rensburg did he play cricket.. Van Rensburg said no. not these days. ( he is about 57) but of course he has attended matches. Naturally he has. A very tiny vignette .

Oscars bat is not an esoteric or exotic artifact. Its the normal thing to have in a South African home, one among many nations where it is as common as having a front door key. The probability of mistaking the sounds are remote and highly unlikely given that South Africans , in general are no strangers to gunshot sounds either.. but cricket bat sounds are the bass riff in their lives.

Oddly, Roux made a mention of that vid clip you refer to.. he tried to put it to Vermulen to watch it. Vermulen as Roux expected, and was not surprised by, dismissed it .. most everyone with any cricket bat experience does. Which is why I guarantee you, Roux will not submit any sort of test re that matter into evidence .. along with the 'recording test' of Oscar 'screaming like a woman', its a no-show.

 

[Viper]

Oh well, I guess we can talk about the state's case of bat first shot second next week!:floorlaugh:

 

[LemonMousse]

http://www.iol.co.za/news/crime-courts/we-put-bat-or-bullet-theory-to-test-1.1661152#.UyulOX8gGSM

Here's another test that's been done - with limitations explained. And the opinion of an audiologist too.

 

[Trooper]

That was an eye (ear) opening demonstration for me.

Frankly I had HUGE reservations that bat on door could sound remotely anything like a gun shot. That YT at least confirmed that YES it is plausible.

The YT does NOT purport to be a re-enactment of the same scene.. it is no more that a sound comparison. IMO the sound may well have sounded even more like a gunshot if it had involved a door inside a small bathroom with tiles and the sound first reverberating in the bathroom and the house and then across some distance.

For those who have not seen it.... well worth a watch (with an open mind).
Remember it is NOT a reenactment of the crime situation.. just a demonstration of what a bat on door can sound like

:notgood::crazy::laugh::giggle::turkey:

 

[Rumpole]

btw.. Dr Stipps ear is unfortunately for Oscar, highly trained.. he spent 7 years in the military.

<Snipped to address just this point>

I think Stipps was a GREAT witness for OP. THE BEST. His testimony would sit well as testimony from a defense witness.

He confirms two sets of noises and the times of both.

We KNOW that the gunshots came first and so Stipps confirms 3:10 for gun shots. His testimony blows Burger(s) out of the water.. they heard only one set at 3:17.. clearly the bat noises.

He does claim to have experience and so an ear that can identify gun shot noises. Even HE was fooled (as he admitted). One set was the cricket bat, and yet to his "trained ear" it sounded like gun shots. Brilliant. OP/Roux could not have hoped for more even if they had written the script

 

[Peliman]

Don't we have testimony that OP and Reeva were having a loud argument for an hour before the shooting or bat (take your pick)

 

[nastasya]

See, I'm torn. If I look at this from a "presumed innocent, prosecution bears burden of proof"

The state has what's called a prima facie case. It's self-evident that all components needed to show guilt exist:

1. RS was shot to death.
2. OP shot RS and killed her.
3. OP followed after RS into the bathroom with gun before shooting her. That's prima facie evidence for premeditation.

Now the burden of proof is on the defense to show that OP's act of following RS into the bathroom and shooting four times at her and killing her was NOT a violation of SA murder laws.

The only evidence they will have is OP's own testimony. For OP to be not guilty of premeditated murder he must convince the judge that his story is reasonable.

The state does not have the burden to prove that OP didn't imagine an intruder or navy seals or space aliens were attacking him. It's OP's burden of proof to show his firing four bullets directly at the woman he knew was in his bedroom wasn't illegal.

 

[Viper]

<Snipped to address just this point>

I think Stipps was a GREAT witness for OP. THE BEST. His testimony would sit well as testimony from a defense witness.

He confirms two sets of noises and the times of both.

We KNOW that the gunshots came first and so Stipps confirms 3:10 for gun shots. His testimony blows Burger(s) out of the water.. they heard only one set at 3:17.. clearly the bat noises.

He does claim to have experience and so an ear that can identify gun shot noises. Even HE was fooled (as he admitted). One set was the cricket bat, and yet to his "trained ear" it sounded like gun shots. Brilliant. OP/Roux could not have hoped for more even if they had written the script

We do not know the gunshots cane first. Where did you get that?

 

[Trooper]

Stipp did not admit to any such of a thing.. he merely allowed that Roux was entitled to make an observation and ./or suggestion that he, Stipp could have been mistaken .

Stipp agreed that Roux may hold an opinion that somewere, someone may be found that could make this mistake, but he, Dr Stipp was not that someone.

he heard gunfire...

end of story, really.


( confusing what the witness states, and what the defence suggests is a common error, easily made. but should not be adhered to as it being laid down as a fact that what the Defence suggests is consequently what the witness testified to. )

It really is incumbent upon Roux to unarguably 'impeach'( a word flung about indiscriminately) Dr Stipps on this testimony by producing the exact replica of the sounds he says OSCAR made, and then the Judge will adjudicate as to whom is mistaken.

Of course, with your theory, there is the terrible problem of only 2 cricket bat sounds..

4 sounds heard.. by all witnesses.. one says possibly 5... but only 2 cricket bat marks..

the Judge is asked to believe that the witnesses not only mistook the sound as gunfire, they also misheard the amount of sounds. I saw Judge Masipa actually handle the bat.. she aint no stranger to a cricket bat. she knew which end was up, and which end to hold and how much it weighs. and what marks from the damage the door made to the bat .

UNLESS Roux can find 2 extra cricket bat marks on the door, and 2 extra door marks ( gouges) on the bat..

big ask.

anyways.. enough of the sound mistaking.. its a dead end, it goes nowhere, and it doesn't advance Oscars proposition that he thought it was an intruder after firing the first shot. which makes him a pre meditated murderer.

 

[Rumpole]

We do not know the gunshots cane first. Where did you get that?

That is the state case?

It is NOT something in dispute.

Confirmed by their experts... especially Colonel Vermeulen.

It is also OP's version of events... so everybody is on the same page regarding this point.