Trial Discussion Thread #45 - 14.07.3, Day 36

[G.bng]

BBM - I'd imagine that not wanting it divulged would be because OP's speed and balance on his stumps totally contradicts the DT's expert witnesses claim that he is barely able to walk on them, and can't balance unless he's holding onto something.

I am so sorry but I cannot agree with you. Either Derman or the previous witness explained that OP's proprioception would be extremely compromised in the dark, which to me makes absolute sense, and further it he or whoever also explained that OP was better able to balance when moving quickly rather than if going slowly, i.e. walking, which again makes sense if you think of it like riding a bike when it is much more difficult to balance when going slow than when going fast.

And unless you provide a link to where a witness says this, (btw Sam Taylor testified he was very unstable without his legs) from what I recall I think it is a gross exaggeration to say the DT's experts claimed OP "is barely able to walk" on his stumps. He can walk but clearly not as a normal person with feet, calf muscles, etc., and frankly with his size torso it seems impossible he could do so at a slow pace and keep his balance for long stretch without support every now and then on such narrow stumps which are some of the narrowest, if not the narrowest, I have seen on youtube videos of which there are quite a few and all have a better balance when moving quickly. And if you live with and care for two very disabled people as I do you would realise that "holding on" doesn't necessarily refer to physically grasping something, it can merely mean leaning against something, touching a wall here and there, etc.

 

[04009margaret]

So far the story has not been blocked from airing, Network Seven are still running this story as it's headline scoop. There is still time for the DT to lodge an urgent application to delay the airing of this footage, but it's Sunday here & the courts are closed LOL. It's currently 1:53 pm here in Aus (Sydney time) & the show is due to air at 8:45 pm.

 

[4MrsB]

Didn't OP say his gun was by his side? It's not in that video. I don't know anything about guns but that looks like aiming to me.

I am blocked from the 2nd released video footage of the re-enactment, but I was able to pick up a very short snippet of the audio before it stopped. I noticed the re-enactment of OP screaming for the intruder to "get the f#%* out" (twice) was loud screaming...but certainly did NOT sound like any woman to me. Was very strong "and manly" (for lack of a better description. Haha).

So we have a reenactment with Reeva being pulled from toilet area by an OP on stumps and screaming by OP in a "manly" tone. . . . I don't get it. Scratching my head on this. Wish I knew more of the background on why made.

Also...I think the video was taken at his Uncle Arnold's home. The white chair with dark wood trim looks so much like a chair you can see through the glass windows of pictures (looks like maybe a bedroom window) that have been posted online of Uncle's estate (showing back side & yard of estate).

 

[Val1]

This has a bit of a write up as to what the video contains, a couple of new pics too, I just can't access the clip. :/

https://au.news.yahoo.com/sunday-night/features/a/24395332/new-footage-of-pistorius-revealed/

 

[4MrsB]

So far the story has not been blocked from airing, Network Seven are still running this story as it's headline scoop. There is still time for the DT to lodge an urgent application to delay the airing of this footage, but it's Sunday here & the courts are closed LOL. It's currently 1:53 pm here in Aus (Sydney time) & the show is due to air at 8:45 pm.

So eager to hear . . . Hope it does air and you can report back to WEbSleuths readers as soon as you're able.

:tyou: Thanks for the original link. I think my jaw literally dropped, as I saw the video unfold, and with OP actually in it.

 

[vansleuths]

So far the story has not been blocked from airing, Network Seven are still running this story as it's headline scoop. There is still time for the DT to lodge an urgent application to delay the airing of this footage, but it's Sunday here & the courts are closed LOL. It's currently 1:53 pm here in Aus (Sydney time) & the show is due to air at 8:45 pm.

Tick, tick, tick, 2:06pm now...DT panicking by the minute :scared:

 

[Val1]

I am so sorry but I cannot agree with you. Either Derman or the previous witness explained that OP's proprioception would be extremely compromised in the dark, which to me makes absolute sense, and further it he or whoever also explained that OP was better able to balance when moving quickly rather than if going slowly, i.e. walking, which again makes sense if you think of it like riding a bike when it is much more difficult to balance when going slow than when going fast.

And unless you provide a link to where a witness says this, (btw Sam Taylor testified he was very unstable without his legs) from what I recall I think it is a gross exaggeration to say the DT's experts claimed OP "is barely able to walk" on his stumps. He can walk but clearly not as a normal person with feet, calf muscles, etc., and frankly with his size torso it seems impossible he could do so at a slow pace and keep his balance for long stretch without support every now and then on such narrow stumps which are some of the narrowest, if not the narrowest, I have seen on youtube videos of which there are quite a few and all have a better balance when moving quickly. And if you live with and care for two very disabled people as I do you would realise that "holding on" doesn't necessarily refer to physically grasping something, it can merely mean leaning against something, touching a wall here and there, etc.

bbm1 - I'm pretty sure Nel had whoever it was agree that the light from the window at the end of the passage would have been enough to "orient" OP so as to be able to keep his equalibrium, assuming that no other lights were on and there is still doubt as to that, only OP's words.

As for OP running, or walking quickly, or rushing, or whatever you want to call it, Derman was pretty clear that in his opinion, OP could not do that, which as we can all see is total nonsense, to put it politely. He can not only walk quickly/run/rush forward with no hesitation, he was also able to back up as well as I can....

http://www.enca.com/oscartrial/

05:23

Derman says there is "no way" Pistorius could run without his prosthetic legs.

05:22

Derman says that he wanted to clarify the area of "running" with Pistorius because according to his understanding, Pistorius cannot run (without prosthesis).

05:22

Judhe Masipa will have a look at the record on Monday to resolve this issue of whether Pistorius ever said he ran down the passage, or towards the passage.

05:18

Nel agrees that there is no reference to running in the passage. Pistorius testified that he "ran to where the passage begun".

Nel: I did not put a wrong statement to this witness.

 

[G.bng]

So far the story has not been blocked from airing, Network Seven are still running this story as it's headline scoop. There is still time for the DT to lodge an urgent application to delay the airing of this footage, but it's Sunday here & the courts are closed LOL. It's currently 1:53 pm here in Aus (Sydney time) & the show is due to air at 8:45 pm.

Not saying they will do this, but the courts may be closed for normal daily business but there are duty judges for outside normal sitting hours for emergency temporary injunctions, search orders, etc. and if they are in they had proper cause then it would probably be considered an emergency.

 

[04009margaret]

Thank you so much for this fantastic find. This is being telecast in Sydney on the Sunday Night show, which according to the program guide starts at 8.45, not 8.30. I just rang Channel 7 to confirm. They say it's due to start at 8.40pm, but I'll switch on at 8.30 to be safe. Since I haven't the faintest idea how to put things on You Tube, could someone PLEASE do this? People all over the world will want to see it IMO.

We need someone to record it then upload to you tube unless Seven upload it themselves, as a lot of their stories are already on you tube.

 

[4MrsB]

This has a bit of a write up as to what the video contains, a couple of new pics too, I just can't access the clip. :/

https://au.news.yahoo.com/sunday-night/features/a/24395332/new-footage-of-pistorius-revealed/

Interesting read. A few extra "tid bits" of info. Thank you for the link.

It mentions that his sister is the person used for the reenactment.

It also states that Reeva "stopped breathing 3 minutes before the ambulance arrived" and "died in his arms" . . . Yeah right!!! So Reeva was apparently alive when Dr Stipp was there and checked her. He must have missed that OR just decided to go back to bed even though she was still alive. :shame:

 

[04009margaret]

Interesting read. A few extra "tid bits" of info. Thank you for the link.

It mentions that his sister is the person used for the reenactment.

It also states that Reeva "stopped breathing 3 minutes before the ambulance arrived" and "died in his arms" . . . Yeah right!!! So Reeva was apparently alive when Dr Stipp was there and checked her. He must have missed that OR just decided to go back to bed even though she was still alive. :shame:

And the mystery man who leaked the video just maybe the Mr Roder they interviewed.

 

[JudgeJudi]

Judge Chris Greenland's lastest videos re: A bump in the night......

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yO1obCEArHE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WE5nzW92GY

Here's a transcript of the first link.

[Interview between Bongani Bingwa and Judge Greenland]

BB: Let’s then look at Prof Derman’s evidence, and speculation I suppose would be that since we understand from the psychiatric evaluation, the defence around a Generalised Anxiety Disorder seems to have fallen away. Would you then interpret this new evidence (Denman) and this direction in which Prof Derman and the defence are going as a kind of replacement of the assertions made by Dr Vorster?

JG: I think firstly from the public’s point of view we should understand that Vorster’s finding of GAD has been controverted by the Weskoppies’ reports – it’s out. As regards what you call this new way, it’s all, in a nutshell, it’s all geared or designed to convince the court that Oscar’s conduct on the night in question is understandable and excusable. But Bongani, I have a fundamental problem here. Everybody needs to ask this question: It’s all good stuff, it’s all relevant, if there actually was a threat. So if you, a healthy man and I a disabled person, are faced with a threat, yes, there’s going to be a huge difference in the way we respond. What was the threat? Oscar says he heard a bump in the night. That’s it, no more, no less. So that’s the first fundamental issue, and that’s – I anticipate that Judge Masipa is going to put this to Barry Roux. You first need to cross that hurdle. The bump in the night in the security and sanctity of your own home, is that a threat before we get onto the issue of how Oscar as a disabled person then reacted to it?

 

[4MrsB]

And the mystery man who leaked the video just maybe the Mr Roder they interviewed.

My first thought was that this "forensic expert" (Mr. Roder) was NOT some random forensic expert they rang up...he was on the defense payroll.

FYI: the picture in this subsequent link (with non blurred out faces), shows OP in toilet pulling out RS but from a different angle. In this picture it appears TO ME (may be mistaken) that OP has on his prothesis in this photo, not on stumps. So did they shoot several scenarios...maybe the film clip without the prothesis, shown in full, will actually reinforce that OP had to be wearing prothesis. Could not tackle this feat without prothesis on, otherwise blood would have been smeared everywhere across floor and different parts of his legs & body.

 

[4MrsB]

My first thought was that this "forensic expert" (Mr. Roder) was NOT some random forensic expert they rang up...he was on the defense payroll.

FYI: the picture in this subsequent link (with non blurred out faces), shows OP in toilet pulling out RS but from a different angle. In this picture it appears TO ME (may be mistaken) that OP has on his prothesis in this photo, not on stumps. So did they shoot several scenarios...maybe the film clip without the prothesis, shown in full, will actually reinforce that OP had to be wearing prothesis. Could not tackle this feat without prothesis on, otherwise blood would have been smeared everywhere across floor and different parts of his legs & body.

I guess it's odd that I'm "quoting myself" (sorry :slap but I needed to add something....

I wanted to add: IF the DT did film & role play BOTH scenarios (pulling Reeva out with prothesis on & without prothesis on) they could have saved some money. NO ONE believes OP was on his stumps when he pulled out Reeva from the toilet area. Money would have been better spent convincing a large number who think OP may have well had on his prothesis long before he states he put them on.

 

[Jake18]

ABC is a different network, government funded. It's on Network Seven, privately owned, but renouned for paying large amounts for exclusive controversial stories

This is correct. I did correct myself up thread however. And I'm much less surprised that it's channel 7

 

[Val1]

I guess it's odd that I'm "quoting myself" (sorry :slap but I needed to add something....

I wanted to add: IF the DT did film & role play BOTH scenarios (pulling Reeva out with prothesis on & without prothesis on) they could have saved some money. NO ONE believes OP was on his stumps when he pulled out Reeva from the toilet area. Money would have been better spent convincing a large number who think OP may have well had on his prothesis long before he states he put them on.

Sorry but you're wrong, I think he didn't put them on until he'd already dragged RS out of the toilet and left her bleeding out on the bathroom floor while he called Stander, security, Netcare and who knows who else, for all we know he may have had one of those pay as you go cell phones too .. and got all his ducks in a row. Then he put his "legs" on to make his grand descent.

 

[supernovaNic]

Just saw pictures from video on dailymail, and I know you guys are already over it and discussed it at length. But I have to say... wow his arm is not bent at the elbow in this reenactment. Hmmm. Wow. Now gonna go catch up and see what WSs are saying and what this video (which I didn't get to see) will do to the case.

 

[pandax81]

My summary + impressions from the 1-minute trailer:

- this is a pre-planned, high-budget and professional, glossy, program/piece of broadcast journalism
- the trailer is dramatic and scary with music and fast editing, overlaid at points is an actor with added echo re-enacting some of Pistorius' shouting
- by checking photos, I see the " US forensic expert" is Scott Roder, owner of the Evidence Room. It looks like he is participating fully with the programme, and from just the trailer he doesn't hold back in giving a biased view declaring Pistorius' innocence
- there's somebody else for balance similarly participating in the program saying "I don't buy it"
- there's a snippet that looks like Evidence Room animation showing the crime scene and laser trajectories through the door
- there is (old I believe) interview footage of Reeva's parents and a friend
- the show re-created the house and scene in a studio, and they show a time-lapse of it being constructed and a brief look at the bedroom, but it looks a pretty rough approximation just to give an idea

the footage of OP shows:

- him explaining to someone/the camera what he did when he fired: he has his left hand leaning on the wall, his right hand is outstretched at or above shoulder height, the elbow is not fully extended - it is flexed. He says "I heard the door *can't make out the next bit for certainty* sound". As he says this, he moves his hand upwards to above shoulder height, still flexed and as moving up, gestures by flexing his wrist several times - it looks like he's either imitating whatever made the door sound, or imitating gun movement/recoil. As he says what appears to be "sound" for some reason there is an obvious sound added over in editing like a metal chinking or jingling. He then says "I fired four shots".
- him walking forwards at slow to medium pace, unaided, on the rug, arms down by his side
- a snippet of him sitting down putting on his prostheses - we see him attach them to the stump very quickly just sitting normally without requiring any extension of the knee or kicking out (I recall he said in court he had to extend and would have kicked the fan if it was where it was in the photo)
- with his prostheses on, he carries what looks like Aimee Pistorius down the stairs and places her down in front of the front door

 

[Feynman]

I am so sorry but I cannot agree with you. Either Derman or the previous witness explained that OP's proprioception would be extremely compromised in the dark, which to me makes absolute sense, and further it he or whoever also explained that OP was better able to balance when moving quickly rather than if going slowly, i.e. walking, which again makes sense if you think of it like riding a bike when it is much more difficult to balance when going slow than when going fast.

And unless you provide a link to where a witness says this, (btw Sam Taylor testified he was very unstable without his legs) from what I recall I think it is a gross exaggeration to say the DT's experts claimed OP "is barely able to walk" on his stumps. He can walk but clearly not as a normal person with feet, calf muscles, etc., and frankly with his size torso it seems impossible he could do so at a slow pace and keep his balance for long stretch without support every now and then on such narrow stumps which are some of the narrowest, if not the narrowest, I have seen on youtube videos of which there are quite a few and all have a better balance when moving quickly. And if you live with and care for two very disabled people as I do you would realise that "holding on" doesn't necessarily refer to physically grasping something, it can merely mean leaning against something, touching a wall here and there, etc.

Thank you for that post. When I saw that video, my first thought was that indeed, those stumps are very small at the bottom and wobbly, and certainly worthy of the description "limited mobility". I simply don't understand the reaction of many here who think this is dynamite pro PT evidence.

 

[Val1]

Thank you for that post. When I saw that video, my first thought was that indeed, those stumps are very small at the bottom and wobbly, and certainly worthy of the description "limited mobility". I simply don't understand the reaction of many here who think this is dynamite pro PT evidence.

There's quite a difference between limited mobility and being unable to flee... especially when the exit is closer than the enemy, and you have a gun as an equalizer.