Trial Discussion Thread #31

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Look at which pictures? It would be helpful to include the photo, itself, or at least a link.

Thanks.

I was looking at the pictures above under the pictures section.

I can't find the almost 200 photos entered into evidence. I would like to look at those.

Here's a new [to me] picture of the toilet. Scroll down, first picture.

I'm just amazed at how little blood is there and no arterial spurts all over the walls.


http://news.sky.com/story/1097557/pistorius-images-show-bloody-scene-of-killing


Oh, and no magazine rack.
 
What? How about on appeal?

What would happen if the situation was similar in the US?

How would you view this handling of evidence if you were the Judge?

I think the judge is going to see the crime scene evidence as tainted - not totally, but for certain purposes. I do not think she will give a whole lot of weight to crime scene pictures and testimony to the extent they try to place certain items in certain locations as evidence in support of the state's case.

If she ignores the fact that the crime scene has been compromised, that will certainly be a point on appeal.

Remember just because it made its way into the trial does not mean that the judge has to accept it as true and accurate.
 
That is supposedly how the duvet appeared immediately after the incident, according to Nel. I'm not so sure that's the case though.

oh, thanks...if my good Mr. Nel said that is how it was first found then thanks.

That is how it was found.

now.....hhhmmm......rushing around with a loaded and cocked gun over a spread out duvet seems impossible to me.
 
I posted this a few days ago.
But maybe some now did not see it?

Gunshot 1000 times louder than bat strike, says forensics consultant
Something I've said here for a long time in different terms (such as gunshot incorporating sonic booms, etc}

He says "sound made by pistol shot is effectively 1000 times louder than a bat on door."At circa 2:00 minute mark, but entire interview is revealing.

Oscar Pistorius Trial: eNCA interviews David Klatzow on Oscar trial proceedings - YouTube

Thank you for re-posting as I had missed it. Referring to 'sound' generated by cricket bat striking a wooden door or gun shots, David Klatzow states that 'sound is attenuated by distance'. In brief, those closest to the sounds may be less likely to distinguish them clearly, but those further away would be more likely to distinguish them as a gun shot is 1000 times louder that a cricket bat striking wood. It is implied that the louder sound waves (i.e. gun shots) would travel further over distance than the softer sound waves (cricket bat striking wood) would most likely drop off earlier over distance. He recommends an acoustic expert for commentary. Makes sense to me.

This is why i have always said that it makes far more logical, scientific sense that the second set of noises around 3:17 which were heard by all five ear witnesses were far more likely to be the gun shots, since some of the ear witnesses were some distance away and i simply do not think the sound of the cricket bat hitting the door would have travelled that far.

As many people keep saying, there is a choice between a logical simple explanation which fits the evidence so far with no requirement for suspension of disbelief, or an outlandish fabrication cobbling together a whole string of unlikely actions and unbelievable coincidences. I know which one seems more compelling for me at the moment.
 
If I understood all 3 correctly they concluded the gunshots that killed Reeva could not have occurred shortly after 3am. I think. I was trying to follow along but I did so not miss my calling by not entering the medical profession. ;)

Hopefully, they'll correct us if we're wrong because it did indeed get technical and I don't want to misinterpret another poster.

The conversation was about blood spatter, not about the time of the murder. Although part of Jakes argument was that Reeva died much much later than Dr. Saymaan says she did. Jake had picked up on one notation that Dr. Saymaan made in court about Reeva's heart being a pale color, he then twisted that to mean that Reeva died of severe blood loss (she bled to death). But for that to be true there would be massive amounts of blood in the WC, the bathroom, and a heavy trail all the way to the bottom of the stairs with arterial spurts trailing on the walls too. And Dr. Saymaan did not ever mention anything about massive blood loss, he determined that Reeva died within seconds and her cause of death as "gunshot wounds."

Crass??? tried to say that Reeva's wounds would stop bleeding massive amounts of blood bacause her body would do that on its own, and he put forth that even if she wasn't breathing her heart would continue to receive oxygen from whatever amount was already in her blood so her heart could keep beating and she could be alive for a long time. :facepalm:

Further, Dr. Saymaan listed the cause of death as "gunshot wound" and he concluded that she died within seconds of receiving the bullet that tore through her brain because there was no blood in her airways and the bullet caused a severe fracture to her base of skull where many critical structures are located.

The other issue was Nest's opinion that the blood patterns on the wall above the bed and the sofa beneath the stairs were cased by arterial spatter. Many people want to believe that both Dr. Saymaan and Nest opinions are correct and true, but they both cannot be true, one is right and one is wrong. Crass??? posted information that confirms that compression and decompression of Reeva's dead body could move blood through he body. So as OP carried Reeva he must have caused blood to shoot out if her wounds just by his movement coupled with her bouncing up and down as he walked.
 
Thanks for the response. Re your first point I do think they will carry much weight so we'll just have to wait and see on that one.

Re the downplaying of OP's ability to accurately recall, he was ADAMANT that the duvet was on the bed. He had to be, or else how did he avoid becoming entangled in it when he ran out on to the balcony? So it was by no means a case of a hazy memory: he was arguing with Nel over these things. Ervery change he made was needed to make his version possible, That's possible, not probable. So if that's where the fan and duvet were when the investigators first walked in then OP and his 'version' is gone on those two little things alone. OP got visibly upset when being pressed on all this.

Agreed, astute clue to OP's internal world IMO: "OP got visibly upset when being pressed on all this. I think he may have cried. So IMO calling them 'little things' underplays their threat to OP - he certainly seemed to realise how much they matter".
 
(Between first and second set of sound's)

Dr Stipp, who lived in a house behind and across the road from Pistorius’ villa, also repeatedly used the word “intermingled” to describe the sounds of a man shouting and a woman screaming, saying he believed two people were yelling at the time.

Wow, Oscar was shouting like a man and screaming like a woman at the same time, impressive.

Dr Stipp only used the word "intermingled" one time I believe. And he clarified that he did not hear the two different voices at exactly the same time.
 
oh, thanks...if my good Mr. Nel said that is how it was first found then thanks.

That is how it was found.

now.....hhhmmm......rushing around with a loaded and cocked gun over a spread out duvet seems impossible to me.

Well, he didn't exactly say that is how it was found, but he implied it. I need to go find that part of the trial to find out the time stamp on that photo.
 
The missing phone mystery is something very odd and intriguing.

However, for the sake of the integrity of this trial, I think it is important to note that none of the data submitted as evidence, is data that could have been tampered with. What was submitted related to the 5th phone?

Phone call records: These are not in the phone. They are provided by the telephone company.

I read a suggestion that Team OP may have wanted to delete a suspicious call OP may have made. This is not possible. The phone company still has the full call log.

What's App messages: As much a three months worth of OP-RS messages were put into evidence. These are not native to the iPhone. The thread of messages could have come from Reeva's What's App account, from OP's account...either. They exist on both.

In short, neither of these types of 5th phone data evidence require the physical iphone handset, nor could they be deleted.

In fact, even if the phone was never found, they would have been able to submit this evidence. They knew the phone number from Reeva's phone contacts

What could have been deleted from the returned phone? Photos, an incoming voice message (though company phone logs would still show the incoming call), records of internet searches on the iphone, text messages using the iphone text function.

Among those, something incriminating certainly could have been theoretically lost. However, I expect the Apple geniuses visited in CA would have been able to recover some of it anyway. In addition, with these smartphones, so little of the data is uniquely located on the physical phone. It is often synced to other devices, backed up in iCloud etc

So, while I think the 5th phone disappearance is worth investigating, I am not yet convinced that it is the smoking gun.

But I still want to know who took it and why.

I remember the witness talking about what he took off the actual phone. But it's possibe I missed something about related or synced sources. thanks.

Also Cape wrote a couple days ago she knows [of] hackers in Joburg who get these phones and alter them. I myself know little of the electronics matters.

if there were nothing crucial here, Roux and Co. would have immediaely returned the phone to Pros. and there would not be the excision of the stipulations at the beginning of March 25 Session 1.

I/we await Cape's return on her "long think" on my 'logic of the 5th phone removal from the crime scene."
 
Dr Stipp only used the word "intermingled" one time I believe. And he clarified that he did not hear the two different voices at exactly the same time.

How could he not have heard them together if he said they were intermingled. That makes no sense.

I seem to recall that he went to great pains to say that he DID here the voices at the same time - hence the use of the term intermingled.

Correction - i have seen an article which mentioned that Roux got Dr Stipp to concede that he did not hear them at exactly the same time. However, Stipp did say this:

Stipp told the court that he went to his balcony, saw lights on in Pistorius' house, then heard the sound of a woman screaming and a male's voice. His bedroom is 72m from Pistorius' bathroom.

While trying to phone Silver Woods’s security back in his bedroom, he heard three more bangs, which he thought were also shots and shouted for his wife to get to safety.

Stipp returned to the balcony and heard a man screaming three times for help. He returned to his bedroom and after consulting with his wife, got dressed and drove to security before going to Pistorius' house.

http://www.timeslive.co.za/local/2014/03/06/the-oscar-pistorius-murder-trial-day-4
 
Very confusing :(

I understand. We have 11 official languages in South Africa. (One reason a jury system won't work here.) Anyway. Most of us speak, or at least understand, a few of these languages. When, for example, Van Rensburg or Mangena speaks English we don't just listen to the English words. If we understand the speaker's native language we will also take into account the grammar and semantics of his native tongue.

I'll try to translate Van Rensburg's testimony from my post above for you.

Original confusing transcript:

Van Rensburg: (talking about Maluleka) He was not there before me. Sebetha and...I can't remember the other constable's name now...they was not standing off there before me. I was the first vehicle, with Const. Prinsloo, standing off there. And, very easy, I don't know if the investigation do it, each police vehicle's got the AVL system. And on the AVL system it indicates the correct coordinates...when, time frames, a vehicle is moving where. So the court is more than happy can request that type of evidence.

Roux immediately changes the subject.


Translation of above:

Van Rensburg says that what Roux is implying is wrong. Maluleka was not the first police officer on the scene of the crime. And neither was Sebetha and the other constable. Van Rensburg and Constable Prinsloo, who was with him in his vehicle that night, were the first police officers on the scene.

And then he says that it is very easy to confirm this because every police vehicle is equipped with an AVL (Advanced Vehicle Locating) system. This system automatically records the time and geographical location of every police vehicle and transmits it to the police computer. So there will be a record of who arrived when at the scene of the crime that night. And Roux was welcome to request those records in order to confirm Van Rensburg's testimony. Roux immediately changed the subject.

Wikipedia: "Automatic vehicle location." (AVL or ~locating; telelocating in EU) is a means for automatically determining and transmitting the geographic location of a vehicle. This data, from one or more vehicles, may then be collected by a vehicle tracking system for a picture of vehicle travel.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automatic_vehicle_location
 
Sorry, I'm on a mission now and moving to have all evidence thrown out and a mistrial declared based on tainted, tampered, and missing evidence.

Until Minor4th rules against me.

Has the defense filed a motion for a mistrial? No. You're grasping at straws.

Not only that, did the defense ask for an acquittal after the state rested? No. In fact, the state's case was so strong that they were backed into a corner and had no choice but to put OP on the stand.
 
This is why i have always said that it makes far more logical, scientific sense that the second set of noises around 3:17 which were heard by all five ear witnesses were far more likely to be the gun shots, since some of the ear witnesses were some distance away and i simply do not think the sound of the cricket bat hitting the door would have travelled that far.

As many people keep saying, there is a choice between a logical simple explanation which fits the evidence so far with no requirement for suspension of disbelief, or an outlandish fabrication cobbling together a whole string of unlikely actions and unbelievable coincidences. I know which one seems more compelling for me at the moment.

Yes Lyra, sound intensity actually falls off with the square of distance.
[E.g. twice as far away=1/4th the intensity.]

ETA: With waves you always have to keep in mind the superposition principle--that waves can add up or subtract, and lead to such thiings as echoes, null regions etc.
 
How could he not have heard them together if he said they were intermingled. That makes no sense.

I seem to recall that he went to great pains to say that he DID here the voices at the same time - hence the use of the term intermingled.

Because he obviously meant by "intermingled" that the two voices were heard in close proximity to each other - but not at exactly the same time. Listen to his testimony again. Roux specifically asks him if he heard the two different voices at exactly the same moment and he says he didn't.
 
Thanks again but you are just comparing things you say OP could have done with what he actually said he did. Had the fan been in the way, he would have mentioned moving it as he would have needed to to get to the balcony. But the fan isn't moved. Ignore these things all you want but they cannot be wished out of existence - as I said before, his emotional response to questions you don't think matter shows how much they actually do.

My intention isn't to ignore things, it is to try and determine the appropriate weight to give the many pieces of information we have to consider. My essential point is that there are several explanations for the comparatively minor issues of the relative position of things. One is them is that Oscar is lying. Another is that his recall is flawed. Still another is that the scene may not have been properly preserved, something we know to be the case on other crime scene details. In comparison, the order of bats and shots considered with the witness testimony and physical evidence is harder to explain in more than one way.
 
o.k.

8pm...east coast usa time...I'm off to bed to keep my 3am wake up hour.

cheers,

:offtobed:
 
I understand. We have 11 official languages in South Africa. (One reason a jury system won't work here.) Anyway. Most of us speak, or at least understand, a few of these languages. When, for example, Van Rensburg or Mangena speaks English we don't just listen to the English words. If we understand the speaker's native language we will also take into account the grammar and semantics of his native tongue.

I'll try to translate Van Rensburg's testimony from my post above for you.

Original confusing transcript:

Van Rensburg: (talking about Maluleka) He was not there before me. Sebetha and...I can't remember the other constable's name now...they was not standing off there before me. I was the first vehicle, with Const. Prinsloo, standing off there. And, very easy, I don't know if the investigation do it, each police vehicle's got the AVL system. And on the AVL system it indicates the correct coordinates...when, time frames, a vehicle is moving where. So the court is more than happy can request that type of evidence.

Roux immediately changes the subject.


Translation of above:

Van Rensburg says that what Roux is implying is wrong. Maluleka was not the first police officer on the scene of the crime. And neither was Sebetha and the other constable. Van Rensburg and Constable Prinsloo, who was with him in his vehicle that night, were the first police officers on the scene.

And then he says that it is very easy to confirm this because every police vehicle is equipped with an AVL (Advanced Vehicle Locating) system. This system automatically records the time and geographical location of every police vehicle and transmits it to the police computer. So there will be a record of who arrived when at the scene of the crime that night. And Roux was welcome to request those records in order to confirm Van Rensburg's testimony. Roux immediately changed the subject.

Wikipedia: "Automatic vehicle location." (AVL or ~locating; telelocating in EU) is a means for automatically determining and transmitting the geographic location of a vehicle. This data, from one or more vehicles, may then be collected by a vehicle tracking system for a picture of vehicle travel.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automatic_vehicle_location

Thank you for that. So Van Rensburg was the first on the scene. And he was the first to view the crime scene on the 1st floor. Was Botha with him at that time or not?
 
How could he not have heard them together if he said they were intermingled. That makes no sense.

I seem to recall that he went to great pains to say that he DID here the voices at the same time - hence the use of the term intermingled.

Correction - i have seen an article which mentioned that Roux got Dr Stipp to concede that he did not hear them at exactly the same time. However, Stipp did say this:



http://www.timeslive.co.za/local/2014/03/06/the-oscar-pistorius-murder-trial-day-4

That's an article reporting about what Dr Stipp said. You need to listen carefully to his actual testimony to really know for sure. The media has made many mistakes when they interpret what witnesses mean :)
 
I was looking at the pictures above under the pictures section.

I can't find the almost 200 photos entered into evidence. I would like to look at those.

Here's a new [to me] picture of the toilet. Scroll down, first picture.

I'm just amazed at how little blood is there and no arterial spurts all over the walls.


http://news.sky.com/story/1097557/pistorius-images-show-bloody-scene-of-killing


Oh, and no magazine rack.

http://i.cdn.turner.com/dr/hln/www/release/sites/default/files/2014/04/01/img_0870.jpg

http://assets.nydailynews.com/polop...rivatives/article_1200/pistorius15n-3-web.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
100
Guests online
1,661
Total visitors
1,761

Forum statistics

Threads
606,038
Messages
18,197,304
Members
233,716
Latest member
aaravpatel
Back
Top