Trial Discussion Thread #28 - 14.04.17, Day 25

[kaos]

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 ?

I'd have thought the ballistics guy would be next purely to get Dixon's testimony out of the judge's head. I thought the DT had to give the state a list of their witnesses at some point but that doesn't seem to be the case.

 

[Val1]

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 ?

I'm hoping it's one of the Standers.... though it will probably be one of the "experts" that the defense tried to use Dixon as a replacement for, lol.

 

[BritsKate]

GB,
Just to answer your question, Nel is done with Dixon unless...
A special arrangement is made to recall him (like what happened with Vermeulen iirc) or he presents a rebuttal and calls him as a witness. AFAIK - SA may be different though.

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

 

[jay-jay]

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 .

.. and why couldn't he not just have gone and done it from their house anyway, from the exact same spot they saw it? Or is he not allowed into their house, because they are prosecution witnesses?

 

[Val1]

I'd have thought the ballistics guy would be next purely to get Dixon's testimony out of the judge's head. I thought the DT had to give the state a list of their witnesses at some point but that doesn't seem to be the case.

In that case, it certainly works better for them to have a two week break to allow Dixon's testimony fiasco to fade a bit.

Well, fftobed: sweet dreams!

 

[shane13]

Just relistened.
Thise were not the original socks on the prosthetics.

I guess they removed them because they had blood on them.

 

[Hatfield]

I keep thinking that Dixon was chosen because he does speak well. They found someone in such contrast to OP that can actually communicate and listen to the defense to say what the defense wanted him to say.

Hired on the spot. LOL

 

[kaos]

.. and why couldn't he not just have gone and done it from their house anyway, from the exact same spot they saw it? Or is he not allowed into their house, because they are prosecution witnesses?

I think those tests were done this year which means there are now new houses built between the Stipps and OP's house. He could still have used a cherry picker to get up to the same height though.

 

[jay-jay]

I think those tests were done this year which means there are now new houses built between the Stipps and OP's house.

.. ok, thanks ..

He could still have used a cherry picker to get up to the same height though.

.. yep, exactly.

 

[Freya1977]

Just relistened.
Thise were not the original socks on the prosthetics.

I guess they removed them because they had blood on them.

Soooo what's the point of testing the fibres if they aren't the ones he was wearing?

 

[Hatfield]

And just typing up his findings would have had more weight. It seems strange the DT did not insist on Dixon to type up some summaries of some key points.

 

[patCee]

I would have expected Dixon to have detailed notes on all photos produced, as well as other evidence. How can the PT cross otherwise, except to merely criticise

 

[AlexUK]

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 ?

If it's the 'face-stroking' , 'clapping' woman that should be a laugh! Or is she not allowed to give evidence as she has been present in the courtroom?

 

[Hatfield]

Its pretty sad when one of your star witnesses does worse than the defendent. You paid the guy to help you out not come across as a wash.

 

[Viper]

I'd have thought the ballistics guy would be next purely to get Dixon's testimony out of the judge's head. I thought the DT had to give the state a list of their witnesses at some point but that doesn't seem to be the case.

What leads you to expect that the ballistics expert is going to give testimony that is any more credible than Dixon's? They are both tasked with tailoring their opinions in favor of OPs fairy tale, and we have seen how ugly that looks once the Pitbull goes after them!

ETA: http://s28.postimg.org/43398ejnh/Roger_Dixon.jpg

 

[Gbtaketwo]

.. ok, thanks ..



.. yep, exactly.

This break is going to help the next defence ballistic guy amend and rework some of his testimony to try and offset the things that Dixon has said .
:-(
Hope Nel stays on the ball .

 

[kaos]

Soooo what's the point of testing the fibres if they aren't the ones he was wearing?

He saw a photograph of the actual socks and used his eyes as instruments to determine they were the same fibres/fibers.

I was trying to describe Mr Dixon to my partner yesterday and wondering why he was hired in the first place. My partner said "maybe they asked him if he was a sound expert" and Mr Dixon thought "yes, my theories are always sound - sound as a pound". (perhaps only the Brits will get that reference).

 

[G.bng]

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.

I knew you knew was more clarifying it!

I like the bench system. I lived in Spain for 40 years with a bench system and my experience (only twice directly admittedly) was positive.

Indeed my only time as an accused was incredibly positive because the case never got past the first pre-trial hearing held in chambers due to what I think is a really nice part of the Spanish system which I call a "face-off". The owner of a company I worked free lance for accused me of "stealing" (not returning) graphic computer equipment he gave me so I could finish graphic work I was doing for them and continue to work for his company when he moved it LS&B to Italy. Several months later when I refused to send him editable artwork files of the finished products until he paid me works he already owed he accused me of stealing the equipment. My one day in chambers, despite legal advice, I told my whole story in detail so as only my accuser's lawyers were present the judge ordered a face off, i.e. that my accuser appear so I could question him directly and him me. My accused never appeared so the judge accepted my story in full, which I must add was the absolute truth, and threw the case out.

 

[Cherwell]

I was trying to describe Mr Dixon to my partner yesterday and wondering why he was hired in the first place. My partner said "maybe they asked him if he was a sound expert" and Mr Dixon thought "yes, my theories are always sound - sound as a pound". (perhaps only the Brits will get that reference).

Didn't he actually say something like that on the stand yesterday? :floorlaugh:

 

[kaos]

Didn't he actually say something like that on the stand yesterday? :floorlaugh:

I must have missed that - wouldn't surprise me at all if he did say it amongst his many other Dixonisms.