Discussion Thread #61 ~ the appeal~

[GR_Turner]

Recently some friends and I had the opportunity to carry out some sound tests. Whilst not replicating all of the conditions of that night the results are nevertheless very interesting.

We had access to two villas which were of block and concrete construction. The area was on flat open ground but the villas were slightly closer packed than where OP lived.

Firstly I tried screaming as loudly as I could to see if it could be heard at a distance. At 80m in the open (paced out) 4 people in line of sight not expecting to hear anything did not hear anything unusual. This was at about 28 degC with a light wind blowing towards the witnesses. This was surprising to me as Burger and Johnson both reported "helps" at more than twice this distance.

Secondly we tested female screams at a similar distance. At 80m the screams could be heard clearly. At 177m they could only be heard as very faint by one witness . There was again a light breeze from the screamer towards the witnesses.

This was very surprising given what Burger reported but of course this was with surrounding buildings which could have redirected and "concentrated" the sound. It was not possible to replicate these conditions but it was possible to investigate how screaming from a room affected what was heard.

Next a woman screamed as loudly as she could from within a closed room inside the ground floor. The room had two windows like OPs bathroom but they were slightly smaller and double glazed. This screaming could not be heard any further away than 50m. In fact a woman and girl both screamed together. I expected that this would change when the window was opened. On opening the window completely the scream could be heard clearly at 50m and at 80m but became very difficult to hear at 100m and beyond.

Here is the most fascinating part.
From a villa next door no more than 10m away the screaming could not be heard at all even with the window wide open until the screamer was right next to the window and the witness was right next to an open window when it was clear.

Obviously those screaming were not doing so "for their lives" but I was stunned as to how the screams could be lost over such relatively short distances.

When you actually measure out 177m (580ft) it is a huge distance and seemed much further than I had been thinking of when first analysing the PT witnesses evidence.

I suspect the pattern of what was heard is to do with the tiled bathroom and pitch of the screams. It seems that high pitched sounds carry further. It's a shame you didn't try breaking down a door right next to the window to see who could hear that

 

[Trotterly]

Do you mind me asking what time of day did you did these tests?

I would have thought that in the early hours of the morning, -when the OP case sounds were heard, the potential for confusion/ misinterpretation/ not hearing anything would be greater, given that people are generally asleep. ..

I agree with your comment.

It was between 8pm and 10pm when all the "witnesses" were up and about and wide awake. I was hoping the first "surprise" test would have different interpretations but I was not expecting no one to hear.

 

[Trotterly]

I suspect the pattern of what was heard is to do with the tiled bathroom and pitch of the screams. It seems that high pitched sounds carry further. It's a shame you didn't try breaking down a door right next to the window to see who could hear that

A woman and a girl were screaming together in our "toilet". The pitch of the girl's screams was very high but even they were not heard from a closed room anywhere near the 177m that Burger and Johnson claimed. It's not that I think that they were lying but if it was Reeva they heard then she cannot have been in the locked toilet with the window closed. It is of course possible she was outside the sealed toilet but then the PT version cannot be true that she found refuge in the toilet and was then shot.

It is a shame but we didn't have an old meranti door and a cricket bat to hand !

Maybe next time.

 

[Interested Bystander]

A woman and a girl were screaming together in our "toilet". The pitch of the girl's screams was very high but even they were not heard from a closed room anywhere near the 177m that Burger and Johnson claimed. It's not that I think that they were lying but if it was Reeva they heard then she cannot have been in the locked toilet with the window closed. It is of course possible she was outside the sealed toilet but then the PT version cannot be true that she found refuge in the toilet and was then shot.

It is a shame but we didn't have an old meranti door and a cricket bat to hand !

Maybe next time.

I think you need to read up on temperature inversion. Cleverly the acoustics guy used in the trial totally avoided bringing this phenomenon into his report and yet he must have been aware of it and the PT were obviously completely oblivious of it.

 

[Trotterly]

I think you need to read up on temperature inversion. Cleverly the acoustics guy used in the trial totally avoided bringing this phenomenon into his report and yet he must have been aware of it and the PT were obviously completely oblivious of it.

There are many variables that could not be replicated but the fact that a sound not heard is really not evidence of anything is a point I have tried to make several times before with little success lol.

 

[Deleted member 102539]

There are many variables that could not be replicated but the fact that a sound not heard is really not evidence of anything is a point I have tried to make several times before with little success lol.

BUT a sound heard has to be evidence, I think (NOT scraping wood on the floor or a to the frame rattling window ). If one female witness heard a very shrill cry of a woman very obviously in mortal danger (other actual wording) which the witness never can forget, then why is that questionable? When it is known, a woman came indeed to death?

 

[Deleted member 102539]

There are many variables that could not be replicated but the fact that a sound not heard is really not evidence of anything is a point I have tried to make several times before with little success lol.

bbm

BUT a sound heard has to be evidence, I think (NOT scraping wood on the floor or a to the frame rattling window ). If one female witness heard a very shrill cry of a woman very obviously in mortal danger (other actual wording) which the witness never can forget, then why is that questionable? When it is known, a woman came indeed to death?

 

[Trotterly]

bbm

BUT a sound heard has to be evidence, I think (NOT scraping wood on the floor or a to the frame rattling window ). If one female witness heard a very shrill cry of a woman very obviously in mortal danger (other actual wording) which the witness never can forget, then why is that questionable? When it is known, a woman came indeed to death?

Because Reeva being clearly heard at that point clashes with the other evidence that she was locked behind an intact toilet door with the outside window closed, before the shots were fired. On the prosecutions version we don't even have a hole in the door through which she may have had a chance of being clearly heard.

Roux challenged the state to prove that she would have been clearly heard and they produced no evidence to support that.

It is the huge distance that is so critical.

Reeva may have been screaming right by an open window or door in another part of the house but that wasn't the prosecution's version. All the evidence has to fit together to make the version convincing and it does not.

Don't get too hung up on what the witnesses thought they were hearing and concentrate on what they actually heard. For example Mrs Burger thought she heard a woman screaming for her life but she also believed it was a house break where a man and a woman were being terrorized.

 

[Colin de France]

Because Reeva being clearly heard at that point clashes with the other evidence that she was locked behind an intact toilet door with the outside window closed, before the shots were fired. On the prosecutions version we don't even have a hole in the door through which she may have had a chance of being clearly heard.

Roux challenged the state to prove that she would have been clearly heard and they produced no evidence to support that.

It is the huge distance that is so critical.

Reeva may have been screaming right by an open window or door in another part of the house but that wasn't the prosecution's version. All the evidence has to fit together to make the version convincing and it does not.

Don't get too hung up on what the witnesses thought they were hearing and concentrate on what they actually heard. For example Mrs Burger thought she heard a woman screaming for her life but she also believed it was a house break where a man and a woman were being terrorized.

....and we know the outside window was closed when she screamed, do we ?

 

[Trotterly]

....and we know the outside window was closed when she screamed, do we ?

That was the evidence.

 

[Colin de France]

That was the evidence.

....what evidence ? .....

 

[Trotterly]

....what evidence ? .....

Photos/testimony, not challenged by prosecution. But the question should be where is the evidence it was not closed.

 

[Colin de France]

Photos/testimony, not challenged by prosecution. But the question should be where is the evidence it was not closed.

...it's not me that's been doing scream tests....so if i am correct you do have evidence and photos to prove that it was closed whilst she screamed.....

 

[Trotterly]

...it's not me that's been doing scream tests....so if i am correct you do have evidence and photos to prove that it was closed whilst she screamed.....

Ha, nice try!

 

[Colin de France]

Ha, nice try!

...i'm just following you....so for the second time around, where is the evidence and the photos that the window was closed when she screamed ....?

 

[Trotterly]

...i'm just following you....so for the second time around, where is the evidence and the photos that the window was closed when she screamed ....?

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/03/14/article-2580764-1C48AE6F00000578-631_634x440.jpg

 

[Colin de France]

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/03/14/article-2580764-1C48AE6F00000578-631_634x440.jpg

.....i know the Daily Mail like to push the limits but to be just underneath the toilet window just at the moment when there was a murder taking place and to photograph it at the same time is beyond words.....thank you so much for this wonderful piece of evidence, incredible ......

 

[Trotterly]

.....i know the Daily Mail like to push the limits but to be just underneath the toilet window just at the moment when there was a murder taking place and to photograph it at the same time is beyond words.....thank you so much for this wonderful piece of evidence, incredible ......

You think OP closed the toilet window after murdering Reeva?

 

[Colin de France]

You think OP closed the toilet window after murdering Reeva?

...for the third time, where is the evidence and the photos showing that the toilet window was closed at the time of the screams ? ......

 

[Trotterly]

...for the third time, where is the evidence and the photos showing that the toilet window was closed at the time of the screams ? ......

I've shown you. Please don't ask again.