Trial Discussion Thread #4 - 14.03.10, Day 6

[MeeBee]

You may be right! Did Jon Benet eat pineapple?

Is so, I have got my cases mixed up. Sorry.

But concerning the eating, I have often wondered when they ate and who cooked. OP seemed to be preoccupied all night with used car websites and porn. Did they dine early or was she still waiting for him? Or was she still hungry at 1am or thereafter?

She did! When you said that I immediately thought of that case but thought it was a crap shoot. Lol.

 

[hetty]

Shane, I'm intrigued by your posts about Pistorius,you mentioned something lying at the heart of his problems, please explain more if you can (I understand if not!).

 

[MeeBee]

Here we go!

Debora Patta ‏@Debora_Patta 3m

#OscarTrial There was some bruising unrelated to gunshot. Also abrasions on the back - the type of injury sustained through a blunt object

has the cricket bat strike been resurrected!!

Oh my goodness! See this is why you can't abbreviate testimony. That is huge and another tweeter made it sound like all injuries were from bullets.

 

[bessie]

From loohoo's link.

Some of the wounds showed that the bullets were atypically shaped when Steenkamp was hit, most likely from hitting the bathroom door first.

Saayman confirmed that it was likely that one of the bullets had passed through Steenkamp's arm and into her head.

Saayman added there were also small, superficial injuries caused by splinters.

Abrasions on her body suggested damage from a blunt object, or projectiles that lost the force to penetrate the skin.

http://www.iol.co.za/news/crime-courts/reeva-s-head-wound-fatal-pathologist-1.1659020#.Ux3GD4WPNpV

The court heard that Steenkamp had a few bruises on her body that were not as a result of the shooting.
Her upper eyelids were blue-reddish and there was soft tissue swelling but no injury to the eyes.
This was not caused by direct trauma but a fracture to the skull.
As Saayman explained that it could have been blood leaking from the skull Pistorius retched loudly.
There were also bruises on the upper part of the right thigh that were not linked to the shooting and behind the left knee and the left shin.

http://www.timeslive.co.za/local/20...esigned-to-maximise-tissue-damage-pathologist

http://www.iol.co.za/news/crime-courts/oscar-used-expanding-bullets-expert-1.1659043#.Ux3o_IWPNpU

Pathologist Gert Saayman told the court that Steenkamp did not take more than a few breaths after suffering her head wound.

Saayman described the wound to her head as an incapacitating wound, and said there was physical damage to the brain because of a substantial fracture to the base of the skull.
However, both the injuries to her arm and her right groin or hip area could have been fatal as well, he said. Her right hip bone was shattered and this was likely to cause immediate instability, he explained.

As Saayman spoke of the "painful wound", Pistorius bowed his head and retched. He said Steenkamp would have collapsed and, unless she had something to grip onto, it would have been difficult to get back up. It was also an incapacitating injury that if not operated on immediately could be fatal. He said there was a 50/50 chance of surviving the injury.

He described the wound to Steenkamp's arm as devastating. Her right arm was shattered, leaving it with no functionality.
Saayman said any of the head, arm or groin injuries could have caused her death because she needed urgent medical assistance to survive them.

http://www.timeslive.co.za/local/2014/03/10/the-oscar-pistorius-murder-trial-day-6
http://citizen.co.za/141417/steenkamp-took-breaths-head-wound/

Pathologist Gert Saayman said Steenkamp had two scratches on her back. This could have been caused by a blunt object or shrapnel.

Her right buttock was bluish in colour. Saayman said this could have stemmed from the injury that Steenkamp had sustained on her right hip, where a bullet had penetrated.

There was some reddish discoloration on her right nipple, said Saayman. He said this could have been caused by frictional contact.
Earlier, Saayman told the court that Steenkamp had also sustained wounds to her head, hips and hand.

http://www.sabc.co.za/news/a/b7b061...ned-bruising-on-her-back,-buttocks-and-breast

...a bullet entered Steenkamp's head in the right upper part, and ran under the skull before it exited from a second wound in the head. ...Saayman said a bulk of the projectile went into the brain.

The upper left arm was deformed due to the amount of fracture...

Wounds were caused by multiple small fragments. There was bruising in skin around the wounds. The right upper arm had a bluish discolouration surrounding that wound.

...Steenkamp's body was naked when it was brought in for the post mortem and her clothes were brought in along with the body. Saayman said the holes in the clothes corresponded to the wounds on the body.

...a grouping of abrasions, superficial fractures, on the skin of Steenkamp's torso. He said a close-up view of injuries showed they were not penetrating injuries.

...gunshot wound to her right hip, 92cm from the ground. He said a defect he had seen on Steenkamp's pants was in line with this wound.

...injuries to her left groin but these were superficial small abrasions, possibly caused by wooden splinters, said Saayman.

...a wound that he noted on Steenkamp's left hand that was between her second and third finger.

Steenkamp's Nike shorts had blood stains on them, and a small hole around 5mm in diameter. What initially seemed like a defect on the trousers turned out to be a blood spatter, he said.

A sleeveless black vest accompanied the shorts. Saayman said small tissue and bone fragments could be seen on the vest.

http://citizen.co.za/141361/family-members-console-pistorius/

 

[shane13]

Shane, I'm intrigued by your posts about Pistorius,you mentioned something lying at the heart of his problems, please explain more if you can (I understand if not!).

Clearly I left it for you and others to post answers. Sleuth on!

 

[Carol70]

Yay, my day is over and Im on my way home, so much to discuss tonight, will be back later, got lots to think about while sitting in traffic hehe

 

[shane13]

From loohoo's link.

http://www.iol.co.za/news/crime-courts/reeva-s-head-wound-fatal-pathologist-1.1659020#.Ux3GD4WPNpV

"Abrasions on her body suggested damage from a blunt object, or projectiles that lost the force to penetrate the skin. "

Now that is troubling, as I thought a good pathologsit/medical examiner was supposed to be able to tell the difference between a blunt force object strike and bullet fragment wounds.

This is why again I've said not to expect too much from both sides in this matter.

This is crucail to the death scenario. Did OP first strike her with an object, then she fled to the loo?

This is crucial and the pathologist can't pin this down?

 

[Mango33]

The article below has details I hadn't seen so far on today's testimony, including on the food in Reeva's stomach (vegetables), digestion time and the abrasions on her back.

The pathologist does not seem to think there was any beating, and explains how the various bruises and scratches may have gotten there. (In my reading of the article it was not so much a bruise from a bat as a scratch/cut.)

"Pathologist Gert Saayman said Steenkamp had two scratches on her back. This could have been caused by a blunt object or shrapnel."

http://www.timeslive.co.za/local/2014/03/10/the-oscar-pistorius-murder-trial-day-6

 

[Estelle]

Just found this ~
scroll down for commentary

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...ius-murder-trial-March-10-as-it-happened.html

This article states that Reeva ate vegetables about two to three hours before her death.

 

[MeeBee]

The article below has details I hadn't seen so far on today's testimony, including on the food in Reeva's stomach (vegetables), digestion time and the abrasions on her back.

The pathologist does not seem to think there was any beating, and explains how the various bruises and scratches may have gotten there. (In my reading of the article it was not so much a bruise from a bat as a scratch/cut.)

"Pathologist Gert Saayman said Steenkamp had two scratches on her back. This could have been caused by a blunt object or shrapnel."

http://www.timeslive.co.za/local/2014/03/10/the-oscar-pistorius-murder-trial-day-6

Some of his explanations of the residual bruising and such are not particularly convincing. He doesn't sound sure and several wounds were noted as not being a result of the shooting. He certainly leaves the door open to there being another explanation for the injuries. The one on her buttocks makes sense. But what about the bruises on her nipple or these:

"There were also bruises on the upper part of the right thigh that were not linked to the shooting and behind the left knee and the left shin."

 

[shane13]

The article below has details I hadn't seen so far on today's testimony, including on the food in Reeva's stomach (vegetables), digestion time and the abrasions on her back.

The pathologist does not seem to think there was any beating, and explains how the various bruises and scratches may have gotten there. (In my reading of the article it was not so much a bruise from a bat as a scratch/cut.)

"Pathologist Gert Saayman said Steenkamp had two scratches on her back. This could have been caused by a blunt object or shrapnel."

http://www.timeslive.co.za/local/2014/03/10/the-oscar-pistorius-murder-trial-day-6

BBM

Well then he's contradicting himself, and Roux will eat him for breakfeast.
As the quote still includes "blunt object" strike as possibly causing whatever wounds/scratch he is talking about

And I ask all you sleuthers; if all this is so innocent, why really did they deny freedom of the press with this testimony--when that has almost never happened in recent SA history? Including similar M.E. testimony in other shootings

 

[Trooper]

How lucky was that lovely boxer, Kevin Larena?.. lean mean Kevin.. with those bullets in that gun, he'd be legless today, too..

*lightbulb*.. was that deliberate..?? I now wonder if not only was the firing of the gun not accidental in the restaurant, but was it actually aimed at Kevins lower limbs?? jealousy?? malicious??

and how very very lucky young Samantha is... just plain good luck. ..that's all that separated her from Reeva.

 

[bessie]

A post mortem report revealed that not much liquid was found in Reeva Steenkamp's bladder after she was shot dead, the High Court in Pretoria heard on Monday.

It was about a teaspoon-full, said Professor Gert Saayman, who had conducted the autopsy on Steenkamp a day after she was shot and killed by her boyfriend, Oscar Pistorius.

Saayman said about 200ml of partially digested food, mainly vegetables with whitish cheese-like particles were found in Steenkamp's stomach. Steenkamp had eaten about two hours prior to her death.

Saayman gave a lengthy explanation of the factors that affect a conclusion on a last meal. He said digestion time depended on the type of food eaten, with proteins taking the longest and leaving the stomach slowly, carbohydrates taking less time, and fluids passing through quickly. The volume of food also affected this.

A small volume such as a light meal or snack, would probably be emptied from the stomach within 90 to 180 mins completely. A more substantial medium meal takes 2 to 4 hours and a big meal of 1.5kg or more may remain in the stomach for as long as six hours. Gastric emptying stopped when a person died, he said, and the food in the stomach remained there.

Saayman said no abnormalities were found in her stomach.
Her heart, however, just like her liver, was pale in colour as a result of blood loss, said Saayman.

http://www.timeslive.co.za/local/2014/03/10/the-oscar-pistorius-murder-trial-day-6

Debora Patta ‏@Debora_Patta
#OscarTrial crucial to note Reeva ate a small meal around 1am but according to Pistorius the couple were asleep at that time

https://twitter.com/Debora_Patta/status/443025513679171584

 

[Trooper]

no one will ever know what that final and lethal argument was about. Oscar will go to his grave with it. Because, there was an argument.. he argued, she argued...

Oscar would lie about it . It will forever be a mystery..

one thing is for sure, as I see it. she was winning that argument.. that's why she's dead.

 

[shane13]

Warning graphic


"There was also a reddish bruise on the right nipple."
But then it doesn't say if he said what caused this injury.
And could this be part of why they denied freedom of press.
What casued this injury should be stated.


http://www.timeslive.co.za/local/2014/03/10/the-oscar-pistorius-murder-trial-day-6

 

[soozieqtips]

One witness heard arguing and shouting about 2am. Reeva eats something a couple of hours before she's killed. Give or take an hour or two, she was eating somewhere between midnight and 1am when they were both allegedly asleep. This suggests that probably neither of them were both asleep at the same time, unless they both slept at 10pm, then Reeva woke up, felt peckish and went to get something to eat (this didn't wake up OP funnily enough) and I doubt she kept a meal of vegetables in her overnight bag.

So she gets up to get some food and comes back to bed. If OP is asleep, does she check his phone and find out he's been watching violent porn on Valentine's Day? Does he wake up and go nuts about her checking the phone? The argument starts about 2am (fitting in approx. with her last meal) and ends with OP hitting her or going at her with a bat? Could be when she started screaming.

She grabs her phone and flees to the toilet for safety. He then goes to the balcony to bring in the fan(s), closes the blinds and doors (making sure everything's in darkness), and then heads to the toilet with his gun to terrorise her. Maybe he even tells her if she doesn't come out, he's going to shoot. She doesn't come out and he shoots anyway and kills her.

She hasn't been able to make a call on her phone (that we know of) and we don't know how much of the crime scene OP altered regarding the phones. He certainly had plenty of time to move things about. But if she was locked in the toilet with an angry OP on the rampage, she would surely have tried to call someone if she'd had her phone on her.

I'm just rambling here and trying to get an idea of the timeline, last meal she had, and the argument that allegedly started around 2am. I don't rule out premeditation because I think he knew exactly what he was going to do once she'd trapped herself in the toilet and wouldn't come out. Just my feelings on it at this moment in time.

 

[MeeBee]

It was Valentine's Day and they were young, in a fresh relationship and having a sleepover. We've all been there. Do you guys really think they went to sleep at 10pm?

 

[Zinn]

In his summary after the pathologist's testimony, one court reporter said the pathologist stated superficial wounds were sustained under her right breast and right forearm, probably caused by door fragments. I believe they were prohibited from directly quoting testimony, so can't be sure of nuances here, but this could be an interesting finding depending on how her body came to rest after she was shot. For instance, if she was slumped over, would she sustain a splinter injury under her breast? Or did the splinter injury occur before shots were fired? Also, would the superficial wounds appear different depending on whether Reeva was alive or very recently deceased when the wounds occurred? If she was only able to take a couple breaths after being shot, would she not have been deceased prior to the door being batted down? Just thinking aloud.

ETA: Another reporter mentioned superficial abrasions to left groin area, likely from splinters according to pathologist.

As always, all of the above is just my opinion.

 

[soozieqtips]

It was Valentine's Day and they were young, in a fresh relationship and having a sleepover. We've all been there. Do you guys really think they went to sleep at 10pm?

BBM - no I don't and I never did. If they'd been married 40 years, then maybe. But this was a romantic night (Reeva had bought OP a gift). They very obviously argued about something and it got out of control. We don't know what it was and as Trooper said, Oscar with take that secret to the grave with him, because denial is all he can do now.

Even if he confided in his family, I'm absolutely positive they'd still support him and cover for him. If he's found guilty and dragged to jail, they will all protest his innocence (like families of murderers do) and they won't give a second thought about the real victim, Reeva, whose family have to live with the images of how she died for the rest of their lives.

My own mum was brutally murdered when I was a teenager by a person of authority, and I always, but always dwell on her last terrified moments and how she must have felt. This is what Reeva's family will have to go through for the rest of their lives. And for people who think it gets easier as time goes by, no it doesn't. The intensity lessens, but there are times (birthdays, Christmas, Mother's Day etc) when it all comes flooding back and it's like it just happened all over again.

I'm pretty sure neither OP nor his family give a damn about the life sentence he's subjected Reeva's family to.

 

[shane13]

Quote fn still not working for me.

Indeed Zinn.
Some frontal injuries could have come from parts of the door bashed in/on to her.
And I am not convinced that at least some cricket bat strikes to the door did not come before any shots were fired.