Trial Discussion Thread #36 - 14.05.09 Day 29

[Gbtaketwo]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZi6DQaT8gk

Awww bless, from 2.44 I do feel sorry for him

Yes I think I felt sorry for him as well. His testimony may have been better if he hadn't testified in English as it is not his first language so it was hard going at times .
I kind of liked him actually apart from his slight evasiveness about the notes. It was like pulling teeth trying to get his to admit to some. Although someone did say earlier that as a seasoned expert witness he may genuinely have kept altering his originally draft knowing that the prosecution might ask for earlier notes if they were available. I do find it hard to believe that he hasn't had to do some reworking after Roux conceded no double tap .

 

[G.bng]

What Nel is showing is that there was a large area of splinter dispersement actually in the skin of Reeva's forearm, not just a couple of splinters as seen on the witness boards. This would occur as the first bullet exited the door and entered her hip.

What W wants to claim is the splintering to her forearm occurred further away from the door when the bullet exited the door and entered Reeva's arm, and so there are only a couple of splinters as seen on his boards.

BTW Regarding out brief conversation last night. I'm certain that you noticed the questions from Nel today about where the spent casings were found inside the bathroom, and his questions about OP having to move in to the bathroom and to the right of where the laser set up was located to fire the last three bullets!

I haven't seen much of today and nothing for about the first 2 hours so will review over the weekend as well as trying to catch up with the day's posts. However, in respect of what you say about Nel showing "there was a large area of splinter dispersement in the skin of Reeva's forearm" and Wolmarans' board only showing "a couple", I still don't see what was the actual point Nel was trying to make because, as I understand it, the mere fact there were splinters on at the site of the arm shot is what the Defence's challenge to the State's sequence of events covering the actual shooting is all about.

To explain. The fact there were splinters associated with the arm wound but none associated with the head wound when according to the State's proposed sequence of events both were hit at roughly the same distance from the door, imo raises serious doubts about the accuracy of the State's sequence placing Reeva down and over by the wall for both the head and arm shots, as common sense dictates, to me at least, that if shot at equal distance to the door both head and arm should have door splinters associated not just one.

OTOH, maybe I am interpreting you incorrectly, why would Wolmarans want to claim, as you say, that "splintering to her [Reeva's] forearm occurred further away", when it is precisely the defence's sequence that Reeva was much nearer the door when hit in the arm than the State maintains; a theory they support precisely by the presence of splinters in the arm wound in contrast to there being none in the head wound. A theory that imo does effectively deal with the contradiction that left the state's sequence wide open and up for challenge when Mangena failed to explain why the arm wound would have splinters associated while the head would did not if both were at a similar distance when hit. A contradiction that an intelligent and logical thinker like Masipa presumably is would find difficult to tally so compromising her reliance on the State's version in respect of the sequence of events for the shots at least.

And is such an apparently small detail important? Well, IMO absolutely yes, because as noted previously, the State's version goes towards proving the Bang...bang,bang,bang which in its turn goes towards showing intent, premeditation, knowledge of target, etc. while at the same time leaving time for the possibility of screams, all important for the State's case to succeed in it's maximum charge at least, while the defence's theory goes towards proving either a non existent or a much lesser gap between first and second shot, which in its turn goes towards showing spur of the moment, fear, panic, etc., along with a reasonable possibility there were no screams due to the speed at which the shots were fired. JMHO SNNFS,I,OR

 

[steveml]

Yes I think I felt sorry for him as well. His testimony may have been better if he hadn't testified in English as it is not his first language so it was hard going at times .
I kind of liked him actually apart from his slight evasiveness about the notes. It was like pulling teeth trying to get his to admit to some. Although someone did say earlier that as a seasoned expert witness he may genuinely have kept altering his originally draft knowing that the prosecution might ask for earlier notes if they were available. I do find it hard to believe that he hasn't had to do some reworking after Roux conceded no double tap .

I think the notes issue isn't of great importance. All it really does is give Nel the opportunity to ask why Wollie changed his findings. My answer to that would be why not? Surely it should be considered entirely correct that if you later find some information that contradicts your initial findings, you should be prepared to re-examine your work. It would be far worse if Wollie was stubborn and just decided to contradict Captain Mangena's evidence for the sake of it.

The only couple of criticisms I have about today's testimony are the gun firing problem and the hanging of the bathroom door.

It's really not good enough for a ballistics expert to arrange a gun/sound test and not have a backup firearm or enough bullets. It's a murder charge we're dealing with, not a shoplifting offence. It should also not be too difficult to locate a competent door fitter to enable you to recreate a test. We've seen a fair bit of shoddy investigative and forensic work from both sides during this trial.

Overall I thought Wollie did fine today, despite his tinnitus, bad back and language difficulty. It was also a nice touch from him to talk about his respect for Captain Mangena.

 

[Fuskier]

Just found this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFM3d6sA-SY

Thank you for this post. Found it helpful. Judge said he was 'gobsmacked' at Social Worker's evidence and states his reasons for it. Also Wolly's
hedged testimony and the fact that two independent witnesses heard a woman screem.

 

[Ncl1968]

Defense gives Nel the hip shot first also defence wounds before fatal head shot..... Now if they are defending OP Sorry again they failed... Cos if she was hit in the hip and then had brain capacity to try and cover her vital organs then she would also be able to scream out and imo very loudly... .
OP you just gave us an murder...
Just for the record the hip shot was op giving a warning shot it failed cos after that she had to be silenced...
Sorry it's just damage control for defense now

 

[patCee]

That was the mishap bat and door test done at uncles house

I've now listened to the above part again and yes, you are right. OP was there and hit the door with the bat. The door was unstable and moved so test was a mishap. Uncle Arnold was there for part of the time at least.

In fairness Wolmaran does state that he is not a sound expert, but did supervise another test at the shooting range (not for decibels)

LIVE: Oscar Pistorius trial, day 29 (completed) - YouTube 1.57 on video

It follows on with Nel's questions over Wolmaran's reports to the DT.

 

[Viper]

I haven't seen much of today and nothing for about the first 2 hours so will review over the weekend as well as trying to catch up with the day's posts. However, in respect of what you say about Nel showing "there was a large area of splinter dispersement in the skin of Reeva's forearm" and Wolmarans' board only showing "a couple", I still don't see what was the actual point Nel was trying to make because, as I understand it, the mere fact there were splinters on at the site of the arm shot is what the Defence's challenge to the State's sequence of events covering the actual shooting is all about.

To explain. The fact there were splinters associated with the arm wound but none associated with the head wound when according to the State's proposed sequence of events both were hit at roughly the same distance from the door, imo raises serious doubts about the accuracy of the State's sequence placing Reeva down and over by the wall for both the head and arm shots, as common sense dictates, to me at least, that if shot at equal distance to the door both head and arm should have door splinters associated not just one.

OTOH, maybe I am interpreting you incorrectly, why would Wolmarans want to claim, as you say, that "splintering to her [Reeva's] forearm occurred further away", when it is precisely the defence's sequence that Reeva was much nearer the door when hit in the arm than the State maintains; a theory they support precisely by the presence of splinters in the arm wound in contrast to there being none in the head wound. A theory that imo does effectively deal with the contradiction that left the state's sequence wide open and up for challenge when Mangena failed to explain why the arm wound would have splinters associated while the head would did not if both were at a similar distance when hit. A contradiction that an intelligent and logical thinker like Masipa presumably is would find difficult to tally so compromising her reliance on the State's version in respect of the sequence of events for the shots at least.

And is such an apparently small detail important? Well, IMO absolutely yes, because as noted previously, the State's version goes towards proving the Bang...bang,bang,bang which in its turn goes towards showing intent, premeditation, knowledge of target, etc. while at the same time leaving time for the possibility of screams, all important for the State's case to succeed in it's maximum charge at least, while the defence's theory goes towards proving either a non existent or a much lesser gap between first and second shot, which in its turn goes towards showing spur of the moment, fear, panic, etc., along with a reasonable possibility there were no screams due to the speed at which the shots were fired. JMHO SNNFS,I,OR

It is really easy to get a bad case of "tunnel vision" when reading a post that does not jive with what your opinions and views are. I have caught myself doing it 2-3 times here, and have argued with several posters here for weeks on end when they refused to actually read and consider what I was presenting regarding which came first, the gunshot sounds or the bat sounds.

Dixon described numerous splinters on Reeva's forearm, he pointed to the outer portion of his own lower arm. That is away from where Reeva was shot in her upper arm, those splinters were blasted in to her lower arm by the first bullet that hit her in the hip. Dixon's witness board tests showed the splinters would fly 6-10cm, and at 20cm they just fell vertically to the floor.

Now comes Wollie. He says that splinters can fly up to 60cm and still puncture the skin.

Here is what I posted earlier:
Originally Posted by Viper
What Nel is showing is that there was a large area of splinter dispersement actually in the skin of Reeva's forearm, not just a couple of splinters as seen on the witness boards. This would occur as the first bullet exited the door and entered her hip.

What W wants to claim is the splintering to her forearm occurred further away from the door when the bullet exited the door and entered Reeva's arm, and so there are only a couple of splinters as seen on his boards.

Wollie's witness boards do not look like Dixon's boards. Not just the distance but also the number of splinters that could puncture the skin. In many ways I agree with Wollie's boards because if I recall correctly Reeva did have a couple of splinters in her upper arm, but I don't know that for a fact. If she did it would explain why Nel asked Wollie if the splinters could fly 55cm and still puncture the skin, Wollie said yes, all the way to 60cm is possible.

So the defense and Dixon and Wollie are wrongly identifying which bullet caused the splinters to Reeva's lower arm by saying it was the bullet that hit her upper arm, when in fact, based on the large volume and location of them it was the bullet that was fired first and hit her in the hip that sent all of those splinters flying in to Reeva's lower arm. And the reason Wollie is changing Dixon's witness board conclusions is because Wollie needs Reeva to be close to the door for both the gunshot to her hip AND close to the door for the gunshot to her upper arm. As I watched and listened to Wollie today he was describing Reeva falling straight down after the first shot, near the front of the toilet, and sometime later he says she fell horizontally back towards the corner and the magazine rack.

None of what they are saying makes sense when you consider what they are each saying with regards to this witness board testing and compare it to the cool logic of what Magena explained and you note the heavy volume of the splinters in Reeva's lower forearm.

Let the arguing commence!

 

[fox1lady]

I've now listened to the above part again and yes, you are right, though it was done at OP's house. OP was there and hit the door with the bat. The door was unstable and moved so test was a mishap. Uncle Arnold was there for part of the time at least.

In fairness Wolmaran does state that he is not a sound expert, but did supervise another test at the shooting range (not for decibels)

LIVE: Oscar Pistorius trial, day 29 (completed) - YouTube 1.57 on video

It follows on with Nel's questions over Wolmaran's reports to the DT.

It was done at Uncle Arnold's house

 

[44ALLAN]

Could some kind soul please tell me why paper would've been preferential to the board? I don't understand it .. I know that Nel said it would be easier to see, but I don't understand why it would've been or why paper would've made any difference to board

Because 'ALL' of the splinters would have left an impression/mark on the paper including the very small and fine ones.............whereas the small /fine splinters would just deflect off the board because of it's harder surface and not be seen at all.

AIMHO

 

[Emz73]

It was done at Uncle Arnold's house

Why would they hang one of OP other doors (the same type of door at Oscars) at the uncles house?

 

[G.bng]

Well, we may be watching different trials. I have already replied about Nel's use of "Yes, yes, I know, we'll get back to that."

But regarding whether or not Mr. Nel is absent minded... Clearly he is not! He has somehow managed to destroy every DT witness with his mental capabilities, so surely they must be very sharp indeed! LOL!!!

NO. You are so so so mistaken. Absent-mindedness has absolutely nothing to do with mental capabilities. Indeed to the contrary it is can often be associated with genius; to name but a mere few, Einstein, Newton, Aquinas, and a special favourite of mine, Leonardo da Vinci. All recognised geniuses in their fields yet notorious for being extremely absent minded. So no need to rush to defend Nel from me as he certainly does not need it.

 

[jilly]

RSFS

....None of what they are saying makes sense when you consider what they are each saying with regards to this witness board testing and compare it to the cool logic of what Magena explained and you note the heavy volume of the splinters in Reeva's lower forearm.

Let the arguing commence!

Thank you for your detailed explanation.

I'm just not getting how these witnesses are assisting the Defense in this case. Oscar's already admitted to shooting and killing Reeva. How are these witnesses helping Oscar? What am I missing? (sorry, I can't follow this case like many of you).

I was expecting witnesses relating to Oscar's paranoia re security, voice analysis for Oscar's screams, evidence of recent burglaries/crime in the area, etc. Something/anything to bolster Oscar's claim that he thought there was an intruder.

 

[44ALLAN]

Did anyone just notice the size of Woolies briefcase? I was more like a suitcase and yet he's got no notes, no reports, no laptop/computer with all his findings on .. so what's he got in there then? :facepalm:

2 watches a couple of I-pads/2 phones /a t-shirt covered in blood/a set of smashed in prosthetics with bloody socks and a 5 foot burglar who can scale a house wall without a ladder ...................................

 

[patCee]

It was done at Uncle Arnold's house

My apologies to everyone, when Wolmaran says "Mr Pistorius' house", I can just about hear the name Arnold now, possibly the accent. Grrrrrrr!

I've edited my post now.:

 

[G.bng]

i find it hard to believe he is absent minded. quite the opposite imo.

Wow, another poster who mistakes absent mindedness with a lesser intelligence when in fact it is only too often associated with genius or very intelligent minds, i.e. quick, good, creative and clever thinkers, e.g. Einstein, Galileo Galilei, Thomas Aquinas, Beethoven, Leonardo da Vinci, etc., all of them geniuses in their field but also notoriously absent minded. So if you have any absent minded and/or easily distracted kids watch out and nurture because it may be you have a genius in your midst as explained in the article
"Wandering Minds and Absent Minded Children Have Sharper Brains".

 

[Val1]

http://i.imgur.com/HSWslWf.jpg?1

The defense says Reeva came to rest on the floor. Where? No smears. No evidence of her body resting anywhere but on the magazine rack. Or am I missing something?

ETA: Should not have been a url but a link. Graphic image warning in link above.

Then W. comes along and confirms that the rack couldn't have been moved from right by the toilet bowl because it was obvious that the rack was still there while RS was bleeding onto the floor, thus causing the open spots from it's feet within the pooling of blood. He seemed quite pleased about being able to confirm that too, bless his heart.

 

[G.bng]

Absolutely, especially given the unfair SA rules where the prosecutor doesn't get to see the defense evidence until presented at trial. Wollie has been able to pour over Mangena's report for over a year.

Please folks... absent mindedness does not mean a lesser intelligence. I cannot believe how many posters are mistaking the term for this. It is associated with genius more often, e.g. Einstein, Da Vinci, Aquinas, Galileo, etc. and in recent times serious studies are showing that absent minded and wandering or daydreaming kids, the ones that in my days that were constantly being called up in class all the time, have actually more intelligence.

 

[atthelake]

nel slowly points out the reasons why this laser beam is pointing the way it is. he is getting Woll to see it, he gives woll a pat on the back for picking up an error and woll is pleased as punch ,he had a tiny win in a day of hideous losses, and nel has him relaxed and curious and wanting to KNOW more, instead of talk more.

Dang I wish I had been able to be here with y'all last night but rl got in the way. I have been :floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh: and think I need a depends and I'm only at 5:53 am in the thread (eastern of course) ! You guys were all GREAT in giving in print the real skinny and impressions and just can't wait to catch up on the thread.

Again :loveyou::loveyou: all that posted last night your silliness and interpretations and such VIVID descriptions of what happened.

Trooper and Zwiebel, hats off to you two for the transcripts in addition to the ongoing commentary.

 

[Val1]

Quote:
Originally Posted by jay-jay View Post
Could some kind soul please tell me why paper would've been preferential to the board? I don't understand it .. I know that Nel said it would be easier to see, but I don't understand why it would've been or why paper would've made any difference to board

Because 'ALL' of the splinters would have left an impression/mark on the paper including the very small and fine ones.............whereas the small /fine splinters would just deflect off the board because of it's harder surface and not be seen at all.

AIMHO

Just to add, as another poster previously stated, if the shot to the right hip was first, while RS was standing in front of the door with her right arm somewhere in close proximity, then where do you suppose some of the splinters from that bullet ended up.... bingo, in the right arm.

 

[atthelake]

W: Milady, unfortunately you can't see. I'm in the toilet now...

OMG you guys, if we only had a thread with the highlight "quotes" of folks like we did during the FCA case. Reading a thread afterwards in one sitting is just too much laughing here. If only these gems were all together for a late night laugh fest for review.