Trial Discussion Thread #50 - 14.08.8, Day 40 ~final arguments continue~

[PrimeSuspect]

The verdict won't be today, right? Monday I guess?

Definitely not JK. Judge Masipa says she is busy all next week. So probably any time after that? September if we're lucky. :crossfingers:

 

[zwiebel]

R: I can't say Prof S is wrong. But I can say be careful.

 

[jay-jay]

R: Prof Simon said digestion does not stop after death...on his own evidence, enzymes would have caused further digestion. So why could he still identify stomach contents so many hours later?

So what is Roux saying ... that someone like Professor Saayman is wrong? making it up? What rubbish .. someone like him is not going to be wrong, or make stuff up to support the state.

 

[Val1]

Well, I honestly can't listen to the whining anymore tonight. I'll be reading the arguments... maybe later today, it's almost 4am. fftobed:

 

[zwiebel]

R: Do I say she didn't eat after 11? No. I do not know.

 

[PrimeSuspect]

Roux is saying that they both went down to eat? No one is stating that are they?

HAHA Judge Masipa - " I think you made your point."

 

[zwiebel]

Roux again and again saying I'm not attacking Prof S.

Judge: I think you've made your point.

Laughter. Roux says he has throat problem, wants lunch adjournment. 38 mins.

 

[minor4th]

Geez, Roux spent an inordinately LONG time on the stomach contents!

 

[sorrell skye]

I've never put any stock in the stomach contents, because there are so many factors that can affect gastric emptying.

I've read about a couple of U.S cases where guilty verdicts have been overturned on appeal because the prosecution used stomach contents to establish a timeline and accused the wrong person. Gastric emptying has been proven to not be a reliable indicator of time of death, due to digestion being variable from person to person.

Although TOD isn't in dispute in this case, I don't think the State should have used stomach contents to try to establish a timeline of events.

As I've watched this trial, I've often wondered if some of the forensic experts in SA might be a bit lacking in knowledge of current forensic sciences or relying on outdated information.

 

[BritsKate]

So what is Roux saying ... that someone like Professor Saayman is wrong? making it up? What rubbish .. someone like him is not going to be wrong, or make stuff up to support the state.

RBBM

And why not...every other witness for the State is apparently.

 

[jay-jay]

Oooh, don't think Judge Masipa liked the way he was dissing Saayman/Saayman's evidence ..! "I think you made your point" !

 

[jay-jay]

RBBM

And why not...every other witness for the State is apparently.

Yes, it does seem so, doesn't it! :-D

 

[zwiebel]

Mmm. I think Prof Simon's evidence was more definitive and confident re times, than Roux made out, but he has skillfully brought out all the probabilities of great (but rare) variances in digestion times.

 

[JudgeJudi]

I just had to take a break from Roux and I found this little gem from Professor James Grant given today. He said that Roux would be attempting to construct a timeline which would show somehow that the State’s version cannot be true and he was looking forward to that because the relative times at which people heard calls hasn’t been so significant for him. “Murder doesn’t require that you kill somebody at 3.17. It’s still murder if it’s 3.18 or 3.16”. He said that OP not being clear what his defence is damning.

When asked what the most powerful and damaging piece of evidence was he said the neighbours who heard a woman scream followed by shots You can, as Roux did, attack that evidence and raise doubt, even reasonable doubt about that evidence. They might have been mistaken. Their timeframes might be slightly off, but our law operates in a way it takes the combined effect of all of that evidence together.” He mentions the mosaic mentioned by Nel. “But then you have 4 independent parties claiming that they heard a woman scream at night followed by shots. Now that carries a tremendous amount of weight”.

When asked, “If you were the judge sitting hearing all this evidence, what would judgment possibly have been?” He replied, “I remain undecided because I want to see and hear all of the evidence again, but I am prepared to say that I’m leaning towards the fact that the chances are of a court recognising any reasonable doubt in Oscar’s favour are probably fading, and its entirely possible that the court might find him guilty on the evidence presented”.

http://www.sabc.co.za/news/a/d8e441...istorius-may-be-found-guilty:-Expert-20140808

 

[jay-jay]

Sorry, just a quick OT .. I had to laugh just now as I was trying to post a post using the 'quick reply' button .. I pressed submit and then got the message 'quick reply ... please wait' (and that wheelie thing going round for about 2 minutes) .. LOL!

 

[patCee]

OP's hug with dad at court, plus some good photos, including Carl P's car after the smash. One photo of OP staring at RS' parents, there goes that confrontational personality again.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ne-final-chance-convince-judge-innocence.html

 

[jay-jay]

I just had to take a break from Roux and I found this little gem from Professor James Grant given today. He said that Roux would be attempting to construct a timeline which would show somehow that the State’s version cannot be true and he was looking forward to that because the relative times at which people heard calls hasn’t been so significant for him. “Murder doesn’t require that you kill somebody at 3.17. It’s still murder if it’s 3.18 or 3.16”. He said that OP not being clear what his defence is damning.

When asked what the most powerful and damaging piece of evidence was he said the neighbours who heard a woman scream followed by shots You can, as Roux did, attack that evidence and raise doubt, even reasonable doubt about that evidence. They might have been mistaken. Their timeframes might be slightly off, but our law operates in a way it takes the combined effect of all of that evidence together.” He mentions the mosaic mentioned by Nel. “But then you have 4 independent parties claiming that they heard a woman scream at night followed by shots. Now that carries a tremendous amount of weight”.

When asked, “If you were the judge sitting hearing all this evidence, what would judgment possibly have been?” He replied, “I remain undecided because I want to see and hear all of the evidence again, but I am prepared to say that I’m leaning towards the fact that the chances are of a court recognising any reasonable doubt in Oscar’s favour are probably fading, and its entirely possible that the court might find him guilty on the evidence presented”.

http://www.sabc.co.za/news/a/d8e441...istorius-may-be-found-guilty:-Expert-20140808

BBM .. absolutely! :goodpost:

 

[Susza]

Well, I honestly can't listen to the whining anymore tonight. I'll be reading the arguments... maybe later today, it's almost 4am. fftobed:

Me too, I'm hesitating to cut off this whining, high pitched voice. Sweet dreams, Val!

 

[zwiebel]

Whoop saying Roux may have knocked down premeditation, maybe. http://whoopwhoop.tv/pistoriusradio.htm

 

[jay-jay]

Geez, Roux spent an inordinately LONG time on the stomach contents!

Well it does take a long time to digest some of the stuff he is coming out with!