Trial Discussion Thread #10 - 14.03.19, Day 13

[sorrell skye]

Roux will try his best to discredit this witness. He will NOT succeed.

Roux is trying to claim that the magazine rack caused one of Reeva's injuries. :facepalm:

 

[zwiebel]

Roux saying his experts have done this test. Cpt say let me see it and I'll confirm if it's possible.

Roux turns it back to 'Have you done the test?'

Cpt M turns it back 'You bring me that report, I'll see if that's possible. I disagree Milady.'

 

[whiterum]

Onto prostheses.

I think he is testifying against state - OP not wearing legs?

If OP was wearing legs he would have had to be holding gun at hip height.

The state did not have ballistics back when that idea was put forward at the BH by Botha and was since discounted. Now it appears the State believe he was on his stumps with bat strikes and with shots.

 

[sorrell skye]

I LOVE THIS WITNESS!!!!!

Mangena will not be turned!

 

[zwiebel]

Cpt M: I disagree Milady...I disagree Milady,,,I disagree

R: Have you tested that?....have you tested that....

 

[zwiebel]

Cpt M: Milady, that can be their version

R: Are you saying that's not true?

Cpt: I disagree with that Milady (what R is saying his mysterious experts found)

 

[zwiebel]

You really need to see this witness to understand....he is addressing the judge with his body, explaining everything by pointing and gesturing on his own body. Very easy to understand.

Roux just tried to get him to go off and do some dang meaningless test and witness smiled...and turned him down; 'Milady....I don't think I can do that now'.

 

[zwiebel]

Lol:

Witness to Roux: '90 is more than 60'.

 

[MeeBee]

Onto prostheses.

I think he is testifying against state - OP not wearing legs?

If OP was wearing legs he would have had to be holding gun at hip height.

The state has already conceded he was on his stumps when he fired.

 

[zwiebel]

The witness just said: 'That cannot be'!

 

[zwiebel]

The witness is finding Roux amusing at times. He has a lovely smile (Cpt M)....

 

[Val1]

Hey judge, what happened to counsel not being allowed to argue with a witness, the evidence is supposed to do that and Roux saying "i put it to you" does not qualify as evidence imo. All Roux is doing is trying to get this witness so upset by being so condescending towards him that the witness mis-states his testimony and then Roux will crow about it until kingdom come.

 

[Trooper]

the captain disagrees.. he points out that Roux theory is not following the path of the bullet.. the bullet cant fit that theory..

based on his experience.. bullets don't behave in that way..

Captain observes that defence experts can testify to this, but he disagrees... we will see.

Roux says. Oscars evidence will show she had her hand clenched.. oh well.

Roux steering away from the head shot.

the splinter evidence.. ( the magazine rack was wooden) clearly shows the range of the splinters..

but can youdo that test? says roux??

I can do it now.. oh , says roux. . well. moving on.


the distance of the shooter from the target..

not less than 60 cms from the door..

it cant be more than 100cms...

so what was the position at 90??

Ididnt measure at 90, because it doesn't make any difference.. he cant have fired it closer than 60 cms..

you say its probable he was on stumps.. yes.

gunfire residue at the lightswitch.. would that be consistent with him firing that far back..

primary residue can fly anywhere.. it isn't definitive.. it is inconsistent...

the cartridge case is consistent to firing back from there?? its not inconsistemt.. but its also not consistent..

no mention of the head shot from Roux as yet..

you go to autopsies and such?? yes.

do you have reports from ballistics before you started your investigation??

On to the bail application.

 

[MeeBee]

'There is definitely a break between the first and the second shots'

He is saying there must have been a break between the hip shot where Reeva collapsed and others. So;

Bang...bang bang bang.

This corroborates what one witness heard (bang...bangbangbang).

 

[sorrell skye]

The look of puzzlement on Cpt M's face! Peering at Roux and leaning forward.....like a teacher with a pupil who needs things explaining v carefully.

Roux talking about 'collar' of wound. Attempting to take on expert on his own ground but I think he is out of his depth...

Roux is totally out of his depth with this witness! But I'm sure that Roux will try to make it seem that he knows what he's talking about.

 

[zwiebel]

R: At the bail appli, there was evidence Mr P was standing 1.5m from the door

Cpt: I have no idea

R: That he was standing on his prosth - where does that come from?

Cpt: I have no idea Milady.

Roux asked if there was another expert brought in before this one, by the state for the bail hearing. Hinting a report has been concealed, but witness says if there had been one he would have mentioned it in his own report.

 

[Val1]

Roux: I understaaand that, but that's not my question...

Same ol same ol

Too bad the witness doesn't state that if the evidence had not been tampered with by the body having been moved he could have been better able to do the tests.

 

[zwiebel]

Roux has just used the phrase 'bone replacement' instead of the correct, 'bone displacement'. Witness had to work out what he was trying to say....

Talking about Reeva's skull wound.

 

[sorrell skye]

Mangena: I wouldn't expect the bone fragments to go in the opposite direction of the bullet.

Go Mangena!!! :cheer:

 

[zwiebel]

Cpt: There won't be bone fragments coming back. I've never seen that in my entire career Milady.