Trial Discussion Thread #5 - 14.03.11-12, Day 7-8

[Trooper]

Nel did initially, but Roux had him demonstrate different angles and heights

no... Roux didn't do that, and cant.. it isn't Roux turn to cross examine..Roux cannot interrupt and ask a question of the states witness until he is given leave to cross examine. he probably will when he takes over his segment.

but that was Nel who had the bloke demonstrate

 

[zwiebel]

Nel: Any marks on face of bat?

Witness: 'Sort of reddish marks on face, similar to ones on back of the bat'

 

[minor4th]

Ok, that's helpful - showing the indentations of where the bat contacted the door

 

[katydid23]

so are they showing that OP was on his stumps when he hit the door? It seems like it, the way the colonel kneeled down and swung.

 

[Trooper]

Yes, he did, and it was pretty loud even though he barely hit it.

I don't mean to question the colonel, but are these things exact? Like is it necessarily true that is the only way the bat could have hit the door?

well yes.. from the marks on the bat.. naturally. the contact point between the bat and the object it hit.

 

[zwiebel]

Two points that led to conclusion

One mark on door exact physical match to marks on bat on either side, when it went through door.

Note: They just explained when saying 'Frame' they mean door frame around the door panels, not a separate frame.

OP hit weakest part of panel, that's why it broke.

Angle of bat was 4,8??

 

[zwiebel]

Witness is not standing upright when he swings the bat to fit the door marks in photos....

 

[zwiebel]

Angles coming up. Help! It's numbers, not my thing!

 

[zwiebel]

Lots of photos taken when he did the test.

Nel asks if Col knew what height OP would be without legs when he did test.

Col says he knew he would be shorter but didn't know exact height. Found out Nov last year he saw the measurements. OP shoulder height is 1.25m off floor.

 

[Trooper]

good lord.. the marks were consistent, with Oscar NOT having his prosthetics on.

whaaaa!!

 

[zwiebel]

Doesn't that match a height mark on the door mentioned earlier? I Thought OP said he put his legs on before breaking door?

 

[BritsKate]

Yes, he did, and it was pretty loud even though he barely hit it.

I don't mean to question the colonel, but are these things exact? Like is it necessarily true that is the only way the bat could have hit the door?

I don't view this as much different than tool mark impressions. Forensic investigators are able to compare weapons to injuries/damage and testify to a probability.

JMO

 

[zwiebel]

Were some other marks...One below lock but he couldn't confirm it was caused by bat though 'It looked suspicious'.

 

[Trooper]

other marks on the door.. NOT cricket bat marks.. not gunfire shots. one he cant identify as to what it could be.

 

[Trooper]

I am sorry that I cant translate metric into feet and inches for those who don't live with that measurement, I just don't have the time.

 

[zwiebel]

Mark three

Col: 'Mark caused by an object in line with the door, seems to be going downwards...quite low down on door. Not what I'd expect to be caused by a cricket bat.'

 

[zwiebel]

"I was not able to determine it was actually the bat that caused that mark'

Nel wants adjournment to go through his notes.

10 mins.

 

[minor4th]

I don't view this as much different than tool mark impressions. Forensic investigators are able to compare weapons to injuries/damage and testify to a probability.

JMO

Yes, it became more clear when he started discussing the indentations.

 

[Trooper]

( only 2 cricket bat marks... don't know how that's going to be confused with 4 gunshots) .

slight break.

 

[minor4th]

Nel asks for a lot of breaks and adjournments