Trial Discussion Thread #28 - 14.04.17, Day 25

[Melanie]

adjourning already? Do they ever get through a day. I guess I'll see you guys on 5/5.

 

[Gbtaketwo]

Sorry i have not been listening to live testimony .So just wondered what is the relevance of the left leg and callus about ?
Are we now looking at that OP was on his knees the whole time or maybe for the shooting

 

[kaos]

So Roux wants early starts but Nel seems to prefer late afternoons.

 

[zwiebel]

Judge not making a decision today about early start. They will consider after first day, discussion with court personnel.

So adjourned to 9.30am May 5th.

 

[kaos]

Sorry i have not been listening to live testimony .So just wondered what is the relevance of the left leg and callous about ?
Are we now looking at that OP was on his knees the whole time or maybe for the shooting

It's OP's way of explaining his lack of balance on his stumps.

 

[LaLaw2000]

Once again, THANK YOU zwiebel!

You rock!!!

 

[AlexUK]

So Roux wants early starts but Nel seems to prefer late afternoons.

I vote for late afternoons!

 

[zwiebel]

Sorry i have not been listening to live testimony .So just wondered what is the relevance of the left leg and callous about ?
Are we now looking at that OP was on his knees the whole time or maybe for the shooting

As far as I can make out, that was a reason given to witness (or excuse) for not providing him with exact height of OP with his legs on....

 

[Hatfield]

If I hadnt seen this Dixon testimony for myself I would not have believed it.

When Dixon said something like "I have been asked by defense for my testimony not my reports" I immediately thought he should have replaced the word "asked" by the word "paid"

 

[Melanie]

They want to shoot off early .. the fact there's a long break I'm sure has nothing to do with it

Someone has to pack for their holiday! Who cares about this trial, I'm going to Disneyland (whomever it is).

:floorlaugh:

 

[BritsKate]

Well, I think Nel did plenty to discredit Dixon and Roux didn't do near enough to rehabilitate a devastating cross.

My prediction is that the majority of his testimony, if not all, will be ignored. We'll see if the defence has a star witness waiting in the wings, I guess. I don't see how their case could get much worse in all honesty.

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

 

[Gbtaketwo]

As far as I can make out, that was a reason given to witness (or excuse) for not providing him with exact height of OP with his legs on....

So Dixon has been doing all these tests without having OP 's height on stumps.
Crikey that seems unbelievable .
Will Nel get to speak to Dixon again with the boards and papers they were talking about today or will Nel just get to view them ?
TIA
Just adding here
I also find it disgraceful that he has commented on what the stipp's could have seen without going up a set of ladders and putting himself at the same height as the witness's
This would make a huge difference and as another FM said the other day he was not right in front of the window but further back .

 

[G.bng]

Assuming its like an American court, I believe so...but we never saw that so its not my belief it is like America. Maybe that occurred pretrial though? But really, if you were Nel, would you want him not to testify? Dude's awesome for the prosecution's case.

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

From my readings SA follows UK procedural rules closely so no voire dire in respect of jury selection as a) SA don't have juries, and b) in UK procedural systems juries are taken from the jury pool present at court on a random basis and can only be objected to on a well founded basis.

Voire dire in UK procedural systems is also used for a "trial within a trial" without the jury present for discussions around "admissibility" of evidence, which wouldn't apply in respect of RD's opinion, or any matters that could influence the jury like an accused change of plea. In my reply to the same poster I thought they may have meant depositions which aren't used in UK systems either, only in so much as that during discovery pre litigation each side can ask questions in writing and the written replies can be relied upon in court. At least that's my understanding of how it goes.

 

[shane13]

Why wasn't the leg still caked in blood unless it's no longer in evidence? The sock is supposedly still in evidence, or at least in storage since Nel had said something about making it available if Dixon needed it.

I think that may have to go on the list along with the 5th phone for 16 days w.o any CofC its data entered into evidence, the .38 ammo (although that was returned allegedly in a few hours). The door. Motha handling gun w.o gloves. Watch or watches walking out. Aimee, Carl, Oldwage allowed onto the crime scene--all prob.w.o protective foot coverings. What else isn't right?

 

[Val1]

Originally Posted by Gbtaketwo View Post
Sorry i have not been listening to live testimony .So just wondered what is the relevance of the left leg and callous about ?
Are we now looking at that OP was on his knees the whole time or maybe for the shooting

It's OP's way of explaining his lack of balance on his stumps.

It was also to confuse everyone about the fact that they tried to pull another fast one by using a model that was only 1.1 metres on his knees for the pale figure silhouette in the bathroom window that Dr. Stipp saw, compared to OP on his stumps as measured by Mangena at 1.55 metres. That's around 18 inches difference... not to mention that they took the pic from ground level and not from the same height as from the Stipps' balcony. Dixon tried to claim that taking a pic from ground level made the figure look even taller than if taken at balcony height, not if you can't see him.... rofl

 

[BritsKate]

From my readings SA follows UK procedural rules closely so no voire dire in respect of jury selection as a) SA don't have juries, and b) in UK procedural systems juries are taken from the jury pool present at court on a random basis and can only be objected to on a well founded basis.



Voire dire in UK procedural systems is also used for a "trial within a trial" without the jury present for discussions around "admissibility" of evidence, which wouldn't apply in respect of RD's opinion, or any matters that could influence the jury like an accused change of plea. In my reply to the same poster I thought they may have meant depositions which aren't used in UK systems either, only in so much as that during discovery pre litigation each side can ask questions in writing and the written replies relied upon in court. At least that's my understanding of how it goes.

Thanks G! I thought as much but left the allowance for having missed something. I think I prefer the judge over a jury - for a whole lot of reasons - but I guess arguments could easily be made for both.


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

 

[shane13]

Dixon testified that Oscar leans over significantly, so his height must be taken as less than if he stood traight.

Sure seems to me that he is very upright whether on p-legs or stumps.
Obvsiously again, seems DT needs his height to be a certain length, so DT are fudging...

 

[AlexUK]

Wonder what OP will be doing during the break.......paying penance is a darkened room or relaxing in the sun with his new girlfriend?

 

[Val1]

I vote for late afternoons!

I'd rather go with earlier starts.. as it is I have to stay up from 12:30-6:00am on full court days.

 

[G.bng]

Considering Roux's affirmation that the next witness would need a whole day or more on the stand, I wonder if it is going to be the psychologist as to OP's state of mind at the time as well as to his general psychology of the effects of his disability, vulnerability, upbringing, etc. ?

Don't think for that length of time it could be an ear witness as Roux could have done the chief in an hour, like Nel did with the state's ear witnesses, and the cross left until after the break. Could be ballistics, pathologist or blood spatter but imo it would be unwise of them to call one of these straight away after Dixon... or could that be the real reason for wanting the break ?