Trial Discussion Thread #46 - 14.07.7, Day 37

[zwiebel]

Ah! Nel moved on after D's last unhelpful (to defence) answer, and D's hijacked the cross to go back and 'clarify'.!

Nel has to win the battle all over again. But it wasn't that hard....

 

[Val1]

Does Derman not realize that the Judge has a disability as far as walking quickly, in fact, I would surmise that she probably is more disabled than OP in that regard.

 

[PrimeSuspect]

WD goes back to Nel's question about OP being able to flee. WD says OP is able to flee as much as he is able to. Not as rapidly as able-bodied persons could.

OP could walk out the door, at the same pace he walked to brush his teeth, Nel asks. Derman agrees.

 

[zwiebel]

D explaining startele response psychiological responses again (or is it physical responses)

N: So in fact there is heightened awareness?

D: Yes- um, why I am hesitating here.....

 

[Greater Than]

But they weren't talking about the video - they were talking about whatever demonstration OP did for Dr D. And although I haven't seen the video, I still say that Oscar moving quickly on his stumps is not the same as running with two complete legs and feet and tendons and calf muscles, etc

Of course it's not the same. But the past two DT witnesses have painted this picture of a very fragile, unsteady OP with very limited mobility. The video displayed a vastly different OP in regards to his mobility. He also put his prosthesis on in 25 seconds. They timed it.

 

[minor4th]

I don't think anybody here believes he can run in the same manner as an able bodied person so I don't see why there's any need to qualify the definition of running. He can move quite fast on his stumps and even OP described himself as running.

Yes, but I think it is an important distinction to make in Court.

 

[PrimeSuspect]

Nel: So there would be a heightened sense of awareness?

Derman: "A startle is a very, very rapid response. It's a response that primes the system." The brain matches threat with experiences.

 

[PrimeSuspect]

Nel: I failed to ask earlier, you view your evidence as objective? You've never considered that OP's version might be a lie?

 

[zwiebel]

N: You view your evidence as objective. Never once considered the accused version is a lie?

D: I didn't hear the question.

Nel repeats it and D says of course he has and 'Milady, I'm in a court case here'??

 

[zwiebel]

N: You never addressed it in your report.

D: I never addressed the state's case in my report.

 

[Greater Than]

This is a paid expert witness for the DT. Of course he's going to be biased.

 

[Forensics]

Yes, but I think it is an important distinction to make in Court.

Quite right but the Professor is confusing the issue himself as while he says that Oscar can't run and gives the definition of running ..... he has on a number of occasions responded that Oscar ran down the passageway etc etc

 

[Val1]

As an expert witness he should have at least considered the state's case, that OP lied about his version, that would show that his evidence was at the least somewhat objective.

 

[JudgeJudi]

@barrybateman · 2m

#OscarTrial Nel: you say your evidence is objective - have you considered the accused version is a lie?
Derman: I have. BB

 

[MsMarple]

Derman keeps mansplainin' to Nel.

 

[zwiebel]

Nel now mentions a study that 'mainly deals with mental illness'.

D goes into lengthy explanation of why 'more references give stronger data' and Nel says he hasn't answered the question.

 

[kaos]

Yes, but I think it is an important distinction to make in Court.

Professor Derman testified that OP's running wasn't the same as you or I and I don't think Nel objected to that but if the distinction was to be made clear for the court, then surely Professor Derman could have maybe had some video to show how he does move

 

[PrimeSuspect]

Nel in reference to an article: It's clear that it is focused on people with mental illess. Derman expands on article.

 

[ColonelMustard]

D: ...the amygdala that we spoke so much about on Wednesday.

We? WE?

HE delivered a lengthy soliloquy on the amygdala ...as well as on everything else!

 

[minor4th]

Professor Derman testified that OP's running wasn't the same as you or I and I don't think Nel objected to that but if the distinction was to be made clear for the court, then surely Professor Derman could have maybe had some video to show how he does move

That sure would have saved a whole lot of time!