Trial Discussion Thread #26 - 14.04.15, Day 23

[molly333]

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

Partly that, and partly the timeline they are left with if the shots are at 3:17am, and partly that they agree it had to be gun before bat.

They are boxed into a corner, leaving the evidence supporting the defense, because they wanted Reeva screaming before the shots to prove premeditation.

 

[supernovaNic]

Does anyone have a link to a photo that shows what the door looked like with the panel missing.... that OP apparently climbed into to reach down and get the key?

 

[wb180]

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.

Ok, so both PT and DT were not in agreement. Some posters are confusing people and not acting like a websleuther.

 

[BabaJ]

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.

Agreed, especially a dead victim. Based on Dr. Stipp, Reeva had likely been dead upon his arrival.

 

[supernovaNic]

Also, how did Oscar see the key if he didn't turn on any lights and it was dark and the toilet light was broken?

 

[molly333]

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.

I'm going on what minor 4th says about this.

The whole door thing doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

Like you said, I don't see how they could know that.

But if both sides are agreeing that all the gun shots happened together, then the gunshots happened before the bat by definition, because you have one bullet that you know happened before the bat.

 

[zwiebel]

'The Oscar Pistorius Trial has me hooked like no other'.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/15/watching-oscar-pistorious-trial-reeva-steenkamp

 

[Mr Fossil]

I'm going on what minor 4th says about this.

The whole door thing doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

Like you said, I don't see how they could know that.

But if both sides are agreeing that all the gun shots happened together, then the gunshots happened before the bat by definition, because you have one bullet that you know happened before the bat.

Possibly not, if the crack was caused by OP prising the panel out, not by the bat hit itself?

 

[Emz73]

Did we learn anything new today?

I'm flummoxed and frustrated.

Looks like I have to give up my theory of Reeva breaking up with him.

So I'm back to square zero about any argument that could escalate to murder.

Nel didn't deal with the locked door at all, and ended with a whimper, not a bang.

All my theories are down the drain.

Didn't think we needed a motive?
The State hasn't found a motive so really there's no point looking for one, and in all honestly it could of been about anything!!

Isn't it really about whether he intended to shoot whoever was behind the door?

 

[Rumpole]

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.

<modsnip>

I am not discrediting their testimony at all. Especially DR Stipp. He is a fantastic witness. I have said this many times.

They are all reporting what they hear. Not lying. I have no beef with that at all. I am certainly NOT suggesting that if other witnesses did not hear scream.. then screams did not happen. I am SURE screams did happen exactly when the 2 couples testified. How plainer can I put it? I do not think the ear witnesses are lying. I do not think they will be discredited by more witnesses from the defense.

I DO THINK that their interpretation of what they heard will be questioned. It already is. They heard screams at a time that Reeva was dead (IMO) and so their interpretation that the screams were Reeva is wrong (IMO). There may be more of that once we hear Defense witnesses. But STILL the State's witnesses will NOT be shown to be lying... just wrong. That is quite different.

 

[molly333]

Also, how did Oscar see the key if he didn't turn on any lights and it was dark and the toilet light was broken?

Was the key kept in the lock of the toilet room? Or did she have to get the key from some other location and carry it with her?

 

[steveml]

It has been accepted by both the PT and DT that the shots were fired first. This is no longer an issue in the trial.
They are both also in agreement that the shots were fired whilst OP was not wearing his prosthesis.

It has also been accepted by both the PT and DT that Reeva did not scream after the first shots. This also is no longer an issue in the trial.

 

[Lyra500]

He made a point of mentioning that he didn't go through her bag, soozieqtips. You doubt him???? /s

Why mention it at all?

It sounded just like the kind of assurances a pre-schooler gives their parent which indicates that they have just done exactly what they claim they have not.

 

[nastasya]

I'm going on what minor 4th says about this.

The whole door thing doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

Like you said, I don't see how they could know that.

But if both sides are agreeing that all the gun shots happened together, then the gunshots happened before the bat by definition, because you have one bullet that you know happened before the bat.

The bat hits and the breaking off of the piece of wood that went through the bullet hole are two independent events.

Oscar himself testified specifically to this point. He said the first hit broke a piece through the door where he could see into the toilet.

He then said he ripped out the piece of wood because he didn't want to hit it and have it land inside on Reeva.

Look at the photo I've attached. There is no way either expert can say if the marks on the door from the bat came before or after the shots. What they can say is the door piece was ripped out after the shots.

Big difference.

 

[molly333]

Possibly not, if the crack was caused by OP prising the panel out, not by the bat hit itself?

That's a good point.

 

[Val1]

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.

The only "shots" that all the witnesses heard at the same time were the second set.

 

[zwiebel]

Here is the new thread for today for anyone who wants to make a note of the link. It's not open yet though.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=241248&highlight=oscar+pistorius

 

[BabaJ]

Ok, so both PT and DT were not in agreement. Some posters are confusing people and not acting like a websleuther.

I do not think that anybody is trying to confuse people Some posters correctly said that the DT and PT agree that all the shots were fired at the same time. It is debated whether the shots could have been first or second and whether the bat swinging AND door prying was at the same time or separate.

 

[Lyra500]

I do believe he said he shot at the door fearing an intruder on the other side.....but did not intentionally mean to pull the trigger. It was an accident....aimed, fired.. but did not shoot <---Oscar-speak. moo

For a minute there I misread your first sentence and thought you were saying you believed the drivel that came after. I nearly had the vapours! :blushing:

 

[nastasya]

It has been accepted by both the PT and DT that the shots were fired first. This is no longer an issue in the trial.
They are both also in agreement that the shots were fired whilst OP was not wearing his prosthesis.

It has also been accepted by both the PT and DT that Reeva did not scream after the first shots. This also is no longer an issue in the trial.

None of what you just posted is accurate.

Even the shots being fired from his stumps was called into doubt by OP's demonstration of crouching and holding the gun low when he fired it.