Trial Discussion Thread #27 - 14.04.16, Day 24

[G.bng]

Strange that Dixon agreed with the state, that the head shot was last. Didn't he say that?

Because at one point, earlier in the trial, Roux 'promised' that his experts were going to prove the head shot was first.

Nell said a lot of things like that, didn't he! Wonder if they are all like this one Geologist...*advertiser censored*...ballistic expertet...*advertiser censored*...sound expert...*advertiser censored*... blood spatter expert... *advertiser censored*... pathologist... any more cums? Maybe he'll just keep cuming back for more each time DT calls an expert !

 

[Cher352]

I am a bit late today so thanks again for the commentary
Listening to this witness today I can't help but think that the defence must have struggled to get the most qualified experts in any given field to testify on OP's behalf.
The pathologist ended up agreeing with the state . This one is seeming as someone put it yesterday " jack of all trades ,master of none "
Considering the expense OP has gone to for these witness's you really would expect some better and more compelling testimony than we are hearing so far.
I would love to know if any other more eminently more qualified people were approached and turned down this case .
Also I am wondering if we will actually here from the defence pathologist that actually attended the autopsy ? Has anything been said about that ?

From this article I was reading this morning:

...forensic team includes forensic geologist Roger Dixon, private forensic pathologist Reggie Perumal, and gun experts Thomas Wolmarans and Jannie van der Westhuizen.

Team Pistorius is unusual for its size and depth in South Africa.

Many trials are run with the barest minimum of forensic evidence, a post-mortem report by the pathologist and maybe a few photographs.

Read more: Forensics key to Pistorius case - Latest - New Straits Times http://www.nst.com.my/latest/forensics-key-to-pistorius-case-1.494255#ixzz2z2Xb6SyM

 

[zwiebel]

Ah, it needs Flash as it's a webinar and I haven't got it. Hope the link works for people on a computer.

ETA, no, it didn't.

Try here. They are interesting forensic broadcasts, and they do seem to be experts. In the relevant field - unlike some people.....

http://www.thermoscientific.com/content/tfs/en/about-us/events/raman-webinar-presentations.html

ETA: scroll for forensic ones. I can't see the cotton one right now.

 

[04009margaret]

Whoopwhoop is just saying that it was 'blatantly, patently' obvious bat and bullet sounds were completely different.

So did Oscar radio host who is a lawyer

 

[BritsKate]

To be totally fair: the defence wants us to believe there was no screaming but Oscar was screaming like a woman who wasn't screaming who was crying like a man.

You just couldn't make it up.

Please pardon errors as posted via Tapatalk with a less than stellar user.

 

[shane13]

I respect experts and I don’t want them on the stand having their credibility reduced.

That said, you have to be slightly cautious because some paid-experts have been used as experts-measure-to- measure, helping their clients cases by interpreting data in certain way.

Experts can also be earnest and hardworking but sometimes overstress their knowledge in areas not of their specialty.

Really unsure how Roger Dixon can do a light test with his own eyes, conduct a seemingly unprofessional sound test, or analyze sock fibres with a photograph – seems unprofessional over something so important.

I believe that devices that count photons (light) are quite cheap now.
Just poor.

Sad--geologist gets caught with mud on his face.

Somehow I think his business of testifying will get a big hit. JMO

 

[LaLaw2000]

zwiebel didn't have breakfast ready this morning so I am eating a cold dinner roll from last night followed by a piece of chocolate.

 

[zwiebel]

Interestingly, at that link I just posted, they also deal with rock/gem/mineral analysis. So there may indeed be some crossover in the geology fields and forensics. Don't think it will help this witness though now....

 

[beach]

To be totally fair: the defence wants us to believe there was no screaming but Oscar was screaming like a woman who wasn't screaming who was crying like a man.

You just couldn't make it up.

Please pardon errors as posted via Tapatalk with a less than stellar user.

I see you've entered the twilight zone with me. I'm in good company.

 

[Forensics]

And that's with so much attenuation, because we are listening to machines and not the actual sounds.

No matter how the audio is modified by recording and playing it back, the modification would be the same in both examples (firearm and bat). Also it would be assumed that the test would have been carried out with high quality microphones/ recording and playback equipment capable of reproducing the entire audible spectrum of sound and volume. With today's technology that is not a big ask!

 

[steveml]

i have no idea how anyone can say which bullet hole led to the hip wound. how do they know where she was standing?

I agree. It's far too easy for either the DT or PT to suggest whichever one suits their claim, and make a convincing argument for it.

If we had a better idea of the time lapse between shots 1 and 4 this information wouldn't really be so essential.

 

[MsY]

Apparently Dixon gets used for a lot of SA's high profile court cases. Oi.

 

[G.bng]

i have no idea how anyone can say which bullet hole led to the hip wound. how do they know where she was standing?

I may be wrong which letter but Mangena explained how he worked the first two out and that was because, the missed bullet ricocheted on the wall and hole (whatever letter) and he was able to line it up with the laser to the mark on the wall, and the hip one became obvious because there was only one of the three remaining that was high enough to hit the hip and the other two were too high for her to be standing or to be seated on the toilet... elementary my dear Watson!

 

[zwiebel]

zwiebel didn't have breakfast ready this morning so I am eating a cold dinner roll from last night followed by a piece of chocolate.

I bought a beautiful raspberry cheescake for tea break.

And ate half of it last night, before I took a photo.

We're back....

 

[jay-jay]

Just answer the questions! :banghead:

 

[Onlyamum]

Is there no end to his talents? 'assisting him with his English' Translator too! What a guy :facepalm:

 

[zwiebel]

Nel wants D to speak on what was in report. What were the differences in the sequence of shots?

D: Difficult question to answer....I cannot remember a specific difference....

 

[shane13]

No matter how the audio is modified by recording and playing it back, the modification would be the same in both examples (firearm and bat). Also it would be assumed that the test would have been carried out with high quality microphones/ recording and playback equipment capable of reproducing the entire audible spectrum of sound and volume. With today's technology that is not a big ask!

Still there are many trials where for exact duplication, judge takes the jury and witnesses to the actual crime scene for visual or audio aspects.

I think this should be done here to disavow all doubts.

 

[Forensics]

Barry Bateman ‏@barrybateman
#OscarTrial Nel asking Dixon about the sequences of the shots - what were the differences in different reports.
He can’t remember.

 

[zwiebel]

Now Nel asking about sounds. 'Do you think that's enough.' (playing a sound clip). YOU feel that's enough? I don't want you to elaborate on facts, just answer that question.

D doesn't understand question, then long pause, then says a simple yes is a very difficult answer....