Trial Discussion Thread #27 - 14.04.16, Day 24

[Gbtaketwo]

Yes, I think this is something that lots of people are overlooking. The gun shots occurred BEFORE the cricket bat strikes. If the two sets of noises correlate with the Stipps sequence of events,then this evidence really confirms the Defense case more so than the Prosections.

The Prosecution will either have to explain what made the noises at 3:05 am. Their case is that they were neither gun shots or a cricket bat striking the bathroom door at that time. Also, they will have to explain why no ear witnesses heard the cricket bat strikes shortly after the gun shots at 3:17 am.

This seems to be the biggest hole in the Prosecutions case. Yet Nel has mentioned he will address these issues, so he obviously has an explanation...

(edited to correct a spelling mistake)

I am still confused about this because I thought there was some possibility that the shots were before the panels were ripped out of the door but not necessarily before the bat strikes. It may have been during Nel's redirect ?
I keep meaning to go through all this testimony again to get it clear in my mind

 

[patCee]

What was y'all's take on Roux's comment that he was "ducking and diving"? TIA

Common saying in the UK. I used it on the previous thread, hmm!

 

[DebinGA]

What was y'all's take on Roux's comment that he was "ducking and diving"? TIA

Embarrassment re Dixon's testiphony.

 

[Insp.Dots]

Normally I don't post tweets like the one I'm going to...but we've discussed it before. Everyone's reactions, including those of Reeva herself, in treating Oscar like a little boy are just so bizarre to me. I get he probably needs consoling - I'd be hiding under Masipa's robes - but I just don't get treating him like a toddler with a scraped knee. Little wonder he continues to deflect any responsibility. (Not blaming his family at all - it just seems Oscar is surrounded by people who treat him much younger than he actually is.)

Aislinn Laing @Simmoa Pistorius sitting in the dock, his head resting childlike on his aunt's bag as she strokes his hair and neck. #OscarPistorius

https://twitter.com/Simmoa

Totally agree with you, though the family think they have been loving and protecting, it has made him incapable of things that we all have to deal with in everyday life. I am in NO way blaming them for his actions, smothered or not he knows right from wrong and must take the consequences of his actions.
I feel as much sympathy for his family and friends as I do Reeva's and a actually admire their un-faltering show of support for him. Saying that I would love to be a fly on the wall in Uncle and Aunts place, I can well imagine some of their private conversations.

QUESTION: wasn't Dixon one of the previous Police experts boss or is that someone yet to come?
I do hope at the end of this the Judge voices her concerns on the way ALL the evidence has been collected and used in this case as it has done nothing but hamper both sides. I think the Advcotes have handled it very well considering they had all that to deal with as well.
As they say "A good workman never blames his tools!" and boy have there been some 'dodgy' tools in this case!:twocents:

 

[Gbtaketwo]

So here's what I think Dixon established and that he was actually qualified to testify about:

He provided evidence that Oscar kicked the door (can't remember which mark), and he provided evidence that the door was hit with the cricket bat three times and actually tested one of the marks that Vermuelen said he didn't test (although photographic evidence proves otherwise.)

I haven't listened to all of the testimony yet, so I can't say anything about the sound test yet.

Agreed
However evidence of the door being kicked means very little because at this point because there is no proof as to when exactly the kicking occurred .
It has not been proven either way whether he was or wasn't wearing his legs the whole time.
JMOO

 

[Cherwell]

Can anybody remember where he claimed that none of the bullets missed Reeva?

Yes, he said that "all of the bullets hit the door..." Very helpful!!!

It is helpful to Oscar! Remember, he said he only aimed - no, sorry, pointed at the door!

 

[minor4th]

I am still confused about this because I thought there was some possibility that the shots were before the panels were ripped out of the door but not necessarily before the bat strikes. It may have been during Nel's redirect ?
I keep meaning to go through all this testimony again to get it clear in my mind

That's ambitious!

The only other really long trials I've watched were OJ and Jodi Arias, and as the weeks and months drag on, it is hard to keep it all clear and remember exactly which witness said what.

 

[minor4th]

Agreed
However evidence of the door being kicked means very little because at this point because there is no proof as to when exactly the kicking occurred .
It has not been proven either way whether he was or wasn't wearing his legs the whole time.
JMOO

Well it's been agreed by both sides that he was at least not wearing his legs when he shot through the door.

And I agree that the sock evidence isn't huge, but it's another piece of the overall picture - it supports OP's version of kicking the door and it's also something that Vermuelen completely failed to investigate.

 

[Giles]

I do. (But I'll concede that I'm easily won over by the State in many cases.)

The screams not being refuted and the ever-evolving defence explanation for those screams is my BARD moment. I may change my mind but I really doubt it without those five witnesses being discredited by something solid and logical.

I think the screams are pretty key to my thinking. I am interested to hear the testimony of the Defense ear-witness who knew OP and recognized his voice screaming while his wife thought it was a woman's voice. This could sway my thinking if it seems reliable.

This way you would have 6 witnesses who heard what they thought was a woman screaming, but 1 person who thought it was a man, and that one person was the only witness who had actually met and knew OP. This could create 'reasonable doubt'. We'll see. I am finding this a fascinating case to follow.

 

[DebinGA]

I do. (But I'll concede that I'm easily won over by the State in many cases.)

The screams not being refuted and the ever-evolving defence explanation for those screams is my BARD moment. I may change my mind but I really doubt it without those five witnesses being discredited by something solid and logical.

Both Stipps saw the bathroom light ON long before OP's tale has him returning to the bathroom from his futile Reeva-search in the bedroom and finally feeling safe enough to turn on the bathroom light.

 

[04009margaret]

So here's what I think Dixon established and that he was actually qualified to testify about:

He provided evidence that Oscar kicked the door (can't remember which mark), and he provided evidence that the door was hit with the cricket bat three times and actually tested one of the marks that Vermuelen said he didn't test (although photographic evidence proves otherwise.)

I haven't listened to all of the testimony yet, so I can't say anything about the sound test yet.

Oh Minor, for your benefit please wait until you've seen it all including Nel's cross, you will then understand

 

[Lyra500]

I am just on audio, but they are going thru pics of wounds, including one on buttock.

D: I looked at Prf S's testimony...contusion.....consistent with.....as I'm not a wound statitician/wound expert/no medical training etc....that is why I disagree with his findings...

Oh. My. Gosh.

Am i misunderstanding what this chump is saying?

Did Dixon actually say that he disagrees with the professor's testimony because he (Dixon) is not an expert in the matter. Really?

 

[Viper]

Molly is indeed correct.

Lt Col Vermeulen not only agreed that the bat hits were after the gunshots, but also demonstrated this is court.

10:31 to 11:40 (transcript link)

Link

Oh, here we go down the rabbit hole again! Sorry, most will not follow down.

BIB1 No he did not.

He pointed out that the bat was used to pry a piece of a panel loose and it tore through a bullet hole that was in the door. In that case the bullet came first the bat was used as a prying tool second; that is not bat strikes, that is using the bat as a tool to pry.

In addition he said that it was not scientifically possible to determine which came first, the bat strikes or the bullet holes. Which is easy to understand because none of the bat strikes had bullet holes in them, and vice versa.

BIB2 That link is not to a transcript of the testimony. :facepalm: It is a live updates page written by Josie Ensor, and Aislinn Laing in Pretoria. It is their words, not what the forensic expert testified.

 

[Giles]

I am still confused about this because I thought there was some possibility that the shots were before the panels were ripped out of the door but not necessarily before the bat strikes. It may have been during Nel's redirect ?
I keep meaning to go through all this testimony again to get it clear in my mind

I thought the same for a while, but this doesn't seem to be the case. We'll find out tomorrow if Nel decides to question this evidence which was presented to court by Dixon.

 

[minor4th]

Oh Minor, for your benefit please wait until you've seen it all including Nel's cross, you will then understand

I did hear some of the cross examination where he was talking about things that he's clearly not an expert in - he did keep saying he wasn't an expert in those things though.

But yes, I'm anxious to hear the whole thing

 

[DebinGA]

Well it's been agreed by both sides that he was at least not wearing his legs when he shot through the door.

And I agree that the sock evidence isn't huge, but it's another piece of the overall picture - it supports OP's version of kicking the door and it's also something that Vermuelen completely failed to investigate.

Capt. Mangena left open the possibility OP shot from his hip/waist wearing his legs. I think in one of his evolving versions late last week, before changing it back, OP described shooting with a bent arm.

 

[kaos]

No I don't think so. He was just being obtuse in answering one of Nel's questions.

Does anyone know whether urine was found in the toilet bowl? I know this has been discussed before but I never heard a conclusive answer.

The attorneys on Oscar Radio had that as a twitter question and their thoughts were if it had been tested that it didn't prove anything conclusive and is pointless for DNA as DNA can't be retrieved from excreta.

 

[Cherwell]

I think the screams are pretty key to my thinking. I am interested to hear the testimony of the Defense ear-witness who knew OP and recognized his voice screaming while his wife thought it was a woman's voice. This could sway my thinking if it seems reliable.

This way you would have 6 witnesses who heard what they thought was a woman screaming, but 1 person who thought it was a man, and that one person was the only witness who had actually met and knew OP. This could create 'reasonable doubt'. We'll see. I am finding this a fascinating case to follow.

Mr & Mrs van der Merwe. But I thought that this related to someone crying, which I don't equate with screaming.

I cannot be sure about this because IIRC Mrs vdM testified in Afrikaans, so there may be a linguistic or translation issue.

 

[minor4th]

Capt. Mangena left open the possibility OP shot from his hip/waist wearing his legs. I think in one of his evolving versions late last week, before changing it back, OP described shooting with a bent arm.

Right but he concluded that the most probable is that Oscar was not wearing his legs.

 

[shane13]

Am i misunderstanding what this chump is saying?

Did Dixon actually say that he disagrees with the professor's testimony because he (Dixon) is not an expert in the matter. Really?

Not exactly in those words, but similar.

Actually my understanding is that what he testified to is physcially impossible.
Since the broken hip bone from shot 1, immedaitely caused her to fall, the rest of what he testified to is impossible. IMO.

I posted upstream why he was picked and indeed given what I just wrote, what he was picked to say is not only false, but impossible.