Trial Discussion Thread #44 - 14.07.1-2, Day 34-35

[JudgeJudi]

Nel: If somebody asked you why that happened you would not be able to tell us?
VZ: No.

Nel: On 13, 14 Feb this incident took place. You discussed this with OP?
VZ: Yes. I only shared my condolences and feelings for what happened.

 

[zwiebel]

VZ: I discussed the incident (Reeva's death) with him, shared my condolences...

N: Did you discuss the specifics of the incident..?

VZ: Mr P never explained the specifics...I never asked him...

 

[PrimeSuspect]

Day 35

Court resumes. Nel starts cross-examining Lin.

Nel asks Lin about the nature of "listening". Lin says he finalised his report about a week ago. Confirms that he used different scenarios for sound tests. Used three possible sound sources - the bathroom, balcony and toilet.

Nel points out that the area of the Silver Lakes house where Steenkamp was murdered has changed. New houses, trees, etc in the area.

Lin confirms these tests were all done in the last two weeks.
Lin confirms tests in which Burger's window was closed can be excluded.

Nel moves onto man and woman screams.
Often we can identify male and female screams, says Nel. Lin confirms but says it's also perception. Lin: "I would consider it as common sense but not reality."

Lin: the 120db used in the models is extremely loud, almost as loud as a jet airplane.
Nel asking about sound being amplified because of it taking place in bathroom.
Lin: Not amplified, it will be same energy.

Lin: Tiles don't make scream get louder, but ensure noise doesn't "dissipate" so fast.
Lin: I.have no knowledge of gun firing at 160 db. Nel: But it will be higher than human range? Lin: Yes.

Nel: When a woman screams there's a tonal character.

Nel asking why Lin didn't add 5db, according to SANS, which states you should when dealing with noise of a tonal character. Nel suggesting that a woman's voice/screaming, because it has a tonal character, would register as more audible. Lin doesn't agree.

Nel asks Lin about direct lines of sight between Pistorius' house and the listeners' homes. Nel stresses that estate Lin visited was different from the estate pictured at time of shooting, other houses built.

Nel asks if window didn't seal properly, it would have allowed less attenuation- Lin agrees.

Nel to Lin: "You don't make a finding on somebody's ability to differentiate between a male and a female scream."
Nel says at time of screams, "everyone" heard a woman screaming. Roux challenges. He says defence will show Nel is wrong.

Roux begins re-examination by asking Lin for a sound demonstration. Everyone quiet. Lin says it's between 40-41 dba in court.

Peet van Zyl is the next witness.

Roux: I want you in your own words to tell the court about your relationship with Mr Pistorius. Van Zyl says he's OP's manager. He met OP just after 2000. Had a formal business relationship from about 2006.

Van Zyl: It was very evident that OP had a heightened sense of awareness.
For example, OP would drive very quickly to the airport. When Van Zyl said it wasn't necessary to drive that fast, OP referred to a hijacking incident in 2007.

Van Zyl (VZ): he would park his car in a well lit, open space to ensure it was safe.
Now VZ refers to an incident in New York. "In NY in 2011 we heard a loud noise in the streets, OP grabbed me by the arm and then released it again - was strange."

VZ: In restaurants he always sat where he had a clear view of the entrance.
VZ: we'd spend time at his home to discuss work, he'd always be fidgeting, checking safety of the house, dogs.
VZ: At hotels he would always ask “who is there” when I knocked on door, he also latched and locked door.

VZ says OP once had blisters on stumps so didn't wear prosthetics on a flight. Was clear he didn't want anyone to see stumps.

VZ: Only 2 specific incidents when OP lost his temper. Not aggression. I sometimes lost temper more than he did...

Barcelona 2009 - camera crew stuck camera in face and called him "a cheat." I lost my temper too - VZ
London radio interview at BBC in 2012. Zyl and OP objected to tone of questions and left studio.

VZ: I met Ms Steenkamp at a number of occasions..loving and caring relationship. They always called each other pet names.

In a first, OP asked if he could get RS to accompany him on a trip. He said he wanted RS to see what "my world" was like, VZ explains.
VZ says after the London games Oscar’s profile had been raised to global sports icon.

VZ reads another email in which he requested Steenkamp accompany OP to another racing event in Brazil in March.
Zyl cites instance when OP requested business class flight for RS on work trip to UK.
VZ reads from correspondence with an event organiser to finalise conditions on which Pistorius would compete in Manchester.

Van Zyl says there were offers of share options in firms,brand ambassadorships. Says OP was an "astute businessman" and aware of opportunities.

Van Zyl: there were plans in place for Oscar to take Reeva to a Andrea Bocelli in Tuscany. He was very excited.

 

[james83]

Well somebody's coming across a bit Evasive aren't they?.

 

[zwiebel]

VZ became aware of OP's love of guns Nov 2012 (I think).

 

[zwiebel]

Judge: Is manager and agent the same thing?

VZ: That is correct. Correct terminology is 'athlete representative'.

 

[james83]

VZ: There were issues between two athletes and the team dealt with it....I wasn't made aware of specific issues...

Utterly unbelievable, who wouldn't ask exactly what the issue was?, LOL.

 

[JudgeJudi]

Nel's really on the ball. He's aware of so many things we've all discussed here.

 

[zwiebel]

Nel asks if VZ read interview where OP said if he cldn't sleep nights, he'd go to shooting range.

VZ: I read it....did not discuss it with Mr P.....didn't seee it as anything negative at the time.

 

[zwiebel]

VZ 'Can't recall' seeing the pic of 9mm gun on the bedside cabinet.

 

[kaos]

Utterly unbelievable, who wouldn't ask exactly what the issue was?, LOL.

I'd imagine the relationship between an agent would be similar to that of your lawyer - one where you shouldn't have any secrets as they can't defend you if there's any surprises.

 

[PrimeSuspect]

A true and deserving Olympic athlete would never insinuate or accuse another athlete of cheating. He should not be allowed to call himself an Olympian.

I agree. OP shows himself to be arrogant and petulant. :facepalm:

 

[zwiebel]

N: Do you not think he was paranoid?

VZ: I'm not qualified to make that opinion...

 

[MissJ]

With respect you are getting things all mixed up. OP was only evaluated in respect of whether any psychological condition/s he may have, if any and whatever it or they may be, could have affected his ability to appreciate wrongfulness, and/or his ability to act in accordance with his appreciation of wrongfulness, the night of the offence as per Masipa's order.

The "Mental State at Time of Offence Evaluation" as often called, covered nothing more. Zilch. And all of which doesn't mean, and repeat, doesn't mean, that OP doesn't have personality and/or psychological issues, as many of us do and as he probably has, and all of which the defence will obviously use as best they can, and as is their right, to try to mitigate sentencing, simply that the psychological issues OP has, be these GAD, OCD, ACD, or whatever they or other psychologists found, don't affect and didn't affect his ability to appreciate right and wrong that night, the ONLY thing the panel had to evaluate for the court.

So you are saying that in SA when they do an eval they don't take note of hypervigilence? Alrighty then! I was a BCPN for many many years in the US and thats not the way its done here. And yes I worked in the area of forensic evals for the government here. Whatever.:moo:

 

[zwiebel]

Nel asking about NY incident with bang. VZ says he just thought it was strange a 'young man' would grab my arm.

 

[Forensics]

Hand on heart I am not saying you are wrong about the "cat in the bag" thing, just that I don't understand why it would be a mistake, if that's what you mean, since it is bound to be used by the defence for mitigation purposes, (obviously in the case the court finds for culpable homicide or the murder of an intruder), as doubtfully much mitigation could be sought if, as many believe, OP wilfully, purposefully, premeditatedly, and intentionally, murdered Reeva by shooting at her through his toilet door.

Or are you saying he can't be suffering from PTSD, in which case I would respectfully have to disagree because, even if it would be unusual for cold blooded murderers that shoot a woman through a door as I described above, to be remorseful since that would sort of contradict them being cold blooded, it would still be possible. Or perhaps you are meaning Nel was indiscreet, since a person's medical records are very personal and should not be disclosed unnecessarily. JMHO

I took it that OP has been suffering from PTSD subsequent to, not prior to, his shooting Reeva. His remorse could well be triggered by his current predicament as much as anything. My comment re 'cat out of the bag' was that Nel alluded to this condition yesterday prior to (as you pointed out to me in an earlier post) the full detail of the assessment being released.

 

[zwiebel]

Nel questioning if OP always sitting in the same spot was really unusual.

Then moves onto OP's treatment of Samantha Taylor.

VZ:..I never saw him treat any woman unkindly or in an undignified way...

 

[zwiebel]

Whooo, listen to Nel listing OP's 'I wanted to show reeva why I needed this, why I needed that....'

 

[james83]

Laughing in the dock like that, so disrepectful, as well as down right creepy.

 

[jay-jay]

Great .. Nel has got him to concede that he is not qualified to comment on whether OP is hyper-vigilant, paranoid or whatever.