Trial Discussion Thread #26 - 14.04.15, Day 23

[BabaJ]

Molly, the bangs did not occur at 3.17 am... the phone call connected at that time. The bangs could have occurred two or three minutes earlier. This is very important in terms of timing.

You may be right as I believe that Dr. Stipp was on the phone with the security when the second set of bangs occurred around 3:15 am.

 

[sleuth-d-]

Yeah, unfortunately, the State has locked itself into gunshots before bat.

So that's the evidence we have to accept because both sides agree.

what you have said above doesn't mean i have to accept it.

 

[nastasya]

This is really sooooooo simple.

Version 1: GUILTY

Bangs - woman screaming - bangs

Evidence - 5 witnesses who heard woman's terrified screams


Version 2: NOT GUILTY

Bangs - oscar screaming like a woman - bangs

Evidence - Oscar Pistorius' non-sensical, ever-changing, re-worked "versions."

 

[sleuth-d-]

But both state witnesses and defense witnesses said all the gunshots happened at the same time. Nel specifically acknowledged and agreed to this to the judge.

The judge is not going to come up with her own theory to prove Oscar's guilt when both sides agree on this.

i thought we were interested in working towards the possible truth?

 

[molly333]

what you have said above doesn't mean i have to accept it.

No. You don't. Just thinking in terms of the Judge.

I'm working on my second key theory of the water closet, myself.

But the prosecutor didn't even consider the keys.

 

[shane13]

What I want to know, and what I am sure Nel will want to know as well, is:

Why did this defence expert do the sound tests outdoors on a shooting range?

He was right there, in OP's house, to do the light test. Why not attach a door to the toilet and do the sound test with the cricket bat on site?

My feeling is that they tried this and the results were less conclusive / dramatic / loud than the noise of a cricket bat in the open. Therefore they are using this as "proof".

Yes I thought of that too, and it is vastly different and makes his entire testimony dubious at best.

makes you wonder who might have paid for the youtube that also has the guy with these things done outdoors.

 

[Forensics]

Yes, I found Dr Stipp to be the most credible of the ear witnesses.

Yes a very credible ear witness but not much good at doctoring according to OP.

 

[molly333]

This is really sooooooo simple.

Version 1: GUILTY

Bangs - woman screaming - bangs

Evidence - 5 witnesses who heard woman's terrified screams


Version 2: NOT GUILTY

Bangs - oscar screaming like a woman - bangs

Evidence - Oscar Pistorius' non-sensical, ever-changing, re-worked "versions."

Version 2

And supported by the two sets of 'gunshots' heard by the Stipps, gun before bat agreed on by both sides, and the timeline.

 

[Rumpole]

Yes a very credible ear witness but not much good at doctoring according to OP.

You would not expect a Radiologist to be especially good at dealing with multiple gunshot victim.

I admire Dr Stipps for his willingness to rush to the scene and offer what assistance he could.

 

[wb180]

No I never implied anybody was lying

You are missing the point. Saying somebody is misinterpreting the source of what they heard is not close to saying they are lying.

I repeat. I accept they heard screams. They are not lying... as far as I know.

I am not missing the point. You are effectively discrediting their testimony because there are "hundreds of potential witnesses in a radius set by the distance to the Burger(s) house". That is just plain weird when we haven't even heard about these witnesses. You imply all these witnesses will testify against what these 5 witnesses said even though they haven't even given evidence on trial.

Then you use text messages as an example to reinforce your claim which is bad because we never got to hear from all these potential witnesses.

 

[wb180]

Version 2

And supported by the two sets of 'gunshots' heard by the Stipps, gun before bat agreed on by both sides, and the timeline.

Version 1 has two sets of bangs as well?!

 

[BabaJ]

it was just one crack. i have attached the image previously, but will do it again.

interesting that when states 'door' expert talked about said crack, roux cut him off before he could talk about the other bullets in the wood.

prying the panels could be done quickly after the initial hole was made, and without the loud bangs.

bullethole [D] has the crack.

imo, you are right to question the order of bullets/bat noises... i have posted separately about the order.

Thanks a lot, I am not a door expert but you actually confirmed what I was thinking. There was so much talk about three shots and three bat bangs that I was not sure that I remembered it right but I thought that the state expert based the "bullet before bat" fact on the bullet hole D. I will have to go back to the testimony but your theory would make a lot of sense. There must be some simple logic in all this, it always is.

 

[Mr Fossil]

Dr Stipps claims to have heard a man calling for help three times after hearing the second set of bangs ("3 more loud bangs") and after then calling security at 03:15:51 (16 seconds). Mrs Stipp claims to have heard a man screaming at this time but not what he was screaming.

It makes more sense to me for OP to have screamed for help after prising the toilet door panels off and seeing Reeva, or possibly having attempted to move her, than calling earlier (as he says) after the 4 shots. If he called out then, what was he calling for?

 

[Forensics]

You would not expect a Radiologist to be especially good at dealing with multiple gunshot victim.

I admire Dr Stipps for his willingness to rush to the scene and offer what assistance he could.

I don't think even the foremost medical professional would have been able to do anything to help the victim at that time....she was dead after all. My facetious comment was prompted by Oscar's testimony regarding Dr Stipp.

 

[molly333]

Version 1 has two sets of bangs as well?!

The first set of bangs works in the defense favor.

Prosecution ignores it altogether.

 

[shane13]

Yes a very credible ear witness but not much good at doctoring according to OP.

Slight correction: a physician who could not resurrect someone who OP well waited to be dead (at least 5 minutes of doing nothing buyt crying and praying [or was it preying] before pretending to try to help her.

And given OP's personality, would not OP hate Dr. Stipp?
If not for his intervention...well most of you surmise what might have ensded up happening.

Also people here transcribed Mr. Baba's testimony. He said he saw OP just standing at the top of the stairs holding Reeva, and only then proceeded to carry her down after he saw that he was now seen.

 

[wb180]

The first set of bangs works in the defense favor.

Prosecution ignores it altogether.

Is that the fatal flaw? I.e. Prosecution ignores/doesn't explain first set of bangs?

 

[molly333]

Nope. The State's version is that the sounds which occurred close to 3.17 were the gunshots. This does not mean they cannot support their own timeline. Where is the proof that any witnesses at all heard OP breaking down the door?

The Stipps heard it at 3:17am

 

[nastasya]

Version 2

And supported by the two sets of 'gunshots' heard by the Stipps, gun before bat agreed on by both sides, and the timeline.

Both sides do not agree gunshot came before bat. That's false.

Nel specifically asked about this, and the witness said there is no way of scientifically knowing if the bat hits came before or after the gunshots.

The wood was broken out after both the bat hits and the gunshots. That's self-evident.

Look at this photo.

 

[BabaJ]

Yes I thought of that too, and it is vastly different and makes his entire testimony dubious at best.

makes you wonder who might have paid for the youtube that also has the guy with these things done outdoors.

I could not believe when Roux brought up the video with the gunshot vs cricket bat test outside. Please tell me if I am wrong but to my knowledge for a test to be considered comparable, it should be done under comparable and control conditions as there are too many variables that can alter the results of the test. It should be done in the house constructed from the same material, under the same background noise, similar weather conditions (wind strength, direction, etc.), closed/opened windows, curtains on the windows, etc. etc. and measured with the appropriate device. The test should be carried by a proper sound expert. IMO