Trial Discussion Thread #46 - 14.07.7, Day 37

[minor4th]

If someone has the report handy, I am sure I saw in the report a table of the mean results etc. ... and now Derman is reading them so I was right.

I don't think it was in anything printed that has been published, but it might have been part of what Roux read of the report

 

[JudgeJudi]

Nel: Are you done Professor.
Derwent: Pardon?
Nel: Are you done?

 

[PrimeSuspect]

Nel: Are you done Professor? Are you done? :scared:

 

[katydid23]

Derman found a way to make the long winded point he was wanting to make for awhile now,
and Nel says... " Are you done professor?'

excuse me?

Are you done?


[ lol]

 

[ColonelMustard]

Did this guy Derman REALLY just start talking on his own???? WHAT an idiot.

 

[Chelly]

First it was Sholtz or Kotze, now Foster or Kotze, and I would ask, is that Foster or Vorster?

Seems we have tower of babel talk today both online and in the court!

I'm still blaming my pecan pie with cool whip.

 

[minor4th]

UGH. We get it. OP's score for anxiety is "high" but it is not high enough to be a diagnosed anxiety disorder

 

[zwiebel]

N: At page 14, even in the mind of Dr ??? the 70 wasn't significant.

D: He has indicated OP measured high..

N: Results of the EAI (?), page 14. High but NOT significant.

D: I see that, yes.

 

[Greater Than]

I know, and Oldwage shouldnt have gone there. I dont know why they dont just call the doctors who wrote the reports.

ETA: The witness should concede the point and withdraw his statement about 71 results in a finding of a disorder

This egotistical guy? Ha! He would never!!!

 

[katydid23]

Did this guy Derman REALLY just start talking on his own???? WHAT an idiot.

Yep. lol

While Nel was busy looking for a document, the Professor said " My Lady, I 'd like to take the opportunity to say that...bla bla bla"...lol

 

[zwiebel]

N: Accused did not suffer from any disorders listed in the DSM 5.

D: That is correct.

 

[christee]

The guy to Nel's left watches Nel with expressive interest...this still amuses me. :biggrin:

 

[supernovaNic]

Is this the doctor that said OP wasn't steady on his stumps?

 

[Nausicaa]

The prosecution counter-witness who probably won't testify is called Dr Carla Kotze.

 

[Forensics]

Is this the doctor that said OP wasn't steady on his stumps?

Yes this is the one.

 

[minor4th]

Here we go again with the "running"

I do not believe OP can actually "run" on his stumps. He can move his stumps more quickly but that is not running

 

[katydid23]

D: " I know that Mr Pistorius cannot run..."

OH OH. lol

 

[christee]

andrew harding

@BBCAndrewH

Retweeted by

Derman - Mr Pistorius "cannot run" - since that means both feet off the ground at same point .

 

[supernovaNic]

Do ya'll see Amy mouth like "oh please?" Do you think it's oh please let the vid come it or oh please don't let it.

 

[zwiebel]

N: You described on Thursday how he moved...how he ran...

D: How he ran...how he demonstrated to me in a corridor in chambers.

N: He did not say, I never ran, I moved cautiously?

D says he knows OP cannot run. And Nel asks if D if he thinks it's possible OP cld walk backwards! Wonder which video he watched this weekend! D says 'I've never seen OP walk backwards, don't see why it wouldn't be possible'.