Oscar Pistorius

[KZNSeagull]

Sadly, I am working today so am just listening to audio, so if any of you watching see anything interesting, please post.

The defence forensic expert is continuing his evidence. Yesterday, I thought some of his evidence was contradicting Oscar's version (re the position of the magazine rack in the toilet) and other evidence was rather pointless as it was confirming something that both defence and prosecution agreed on (shots first, cricket bat second). Let's see what he has to say today

 

[MarioOrlandi]

Pistorius should get an Oscar for his performance, great acting!!!

 

[KZNSeagull]

Pistorius should get an Oscar for his performance, great acting!!!

rumour is that he has been getting acting lessons. Probably from the pr company he hired after the incident.

 

[KZNSeagull]

This defence forensic chap is NOT an expert in blood spatter, ballistics or sound and he did not compare the fibres on the door to the actual socks that Oscar wore over his prosthesis, so I am not sure how much credence the court will hold over his evidence. (There were some white fibres on the door, which appear to have come from these socks when Oscar kicked the door, prior to breaking the door with the cricket bat).

The witness says he is an expert in marks (shoes etc) on objects, but he has not done a proficiency test since 2011/12 as he has left the forensic science labs (they have to do tests annually).

Nel is getting rather cross with this bloke as, like Oscar, he does not always answer the question asked and his answers tend to go on and on.

 

[Bold Seagull]

I think they are going to struggle to prove it was pre meditated as despite the holes in his story there are no witnesses to back up the prosecutions version of what they think has happened. Essentially it's one word against the other which I don't think will be concrete enough for a murder conviction. Most likely outcome is manslaughter with the firearm offences lumped on top

I'm not sure I agree with you there at this point. The prosecution don't actually have to prove their version of events, in essence all they need to do is to prove to the court enough doubt for OP's version of events not to have happened. If the court does not believe OP's version, then they can convict for murder on account that he shot someone dead (fact) and has made up a version to explain it. That would be enough to convict for murder.

In terms of there being no witnesses, there are witnesses who have testified to hearing both a man's and women's screams before and after the shots that contradict OP's version, even if some of the witness accounts have discrepancies between them.

At this point, I would say the prosecutions case is looking very strong, and OP's credibility as a witness took a hammering while he was on the stand.

Will be interesting now the defense witnesses have started to testify. Nel is again cross examining in great detail, and our first defense witness Mr Dixon is struggling to demonstrate to the court that his findings can be relied upon under close scrutiny. His testimony is critical in relation to the succession of sounds heard by witnesses, and the injuries caused by both the gun shots and falling, potentially on the magazine rack, which now has great significance on the case given it is agreed it can have been the only thing to have created the final noise OP heard in his version to have made him shot. We therefore have to believe that Reeva moved that rack in OP's version to create the noise, then stand by the door from where she got shot.

Court is adjourned for lunch.

 

[KZNSeagull]

This trial has taken a turgid turn.....am not quite sure what the defence are trying to achieve with this witness as Nel seems to be doing a pretty good job of discrediting him.

 

[KZNSeagull]

I'm not sure I agree with you there at this point. The prosecution don't actually have to prove their version of events, in essence all they need to do is to prove to the court enough doubt for OP's version of events not to have happened. If the court does not believe OP's version, then they can convict for murder on account that he shot someone dead (fact) and has made up a version to explain it. That would be enough to convict for murder.

In terms of there being no witnesses, there are witnesses who have testified to hearing both a man's and women's screams before and after the shots that contradict OP's version, even if some of the witness accounts have discrepancies between them.

At this point, I would say the prosecutions case is looking very strong, and OP's credibility as a witness took a hammering while he was on the stand.

Will be interesting now the defense witnesses have started to testify. Nel is again cross examining in great detail, and our first defense witness Mr Dixon is struggling to demonstrate to the court that his findings can be relied upon under close scrutiny. His testimony is critical in relation to the succession of sounds heard by witnesses, and the injuries caused by both the gun shots and falling, potentially on the magazine rack, which now has great significance on the case given it is agreed it can have been the only thing to have created the final noise OP heard in his version to have made him shot. We therefore have to believe that Reeva moved that rack in OP's version to create the noise, then stand by the door from where she got shot.

Court is adjourned for lunch.

Ah, thank you. Now I understand what they are trying to do. This is very difficult evidence to follow when one is not giving it full attention.

 

[Seasider78]

I'm not sure I agree with you there at this point. The prosecution don't actually have to prove their version of events, in essence all they need to do is to prove to the court enough doubt for OP's version of events not to have happened. If the court does not believe OP's version, then they can convict for murder on account that he shot someone dead (fact) and has made up a version to explain it. That would be enough to convict for murder.

In terms of there being no witnesses, there are witnesses who have testified to hearing both a man's and women's screams before and after the shots that contradict OP's version, even if some of the witness accounts have discrepancies between them.

At this point, I would say the prosecutions case is looking very strong, and OP's credibility as a witness took a hammering while he was on the stand.

Will be interesting now the defense witnesses have started to testify. Nel is again cross examining in great detail, and our first defense witness Mr Dixon is struggling to demonstrate to the court that his findings can be relied upon under close scrutiny. His testimony is critical in relation to the succession of sounds heard by witnesses, and the injuries caused by both the gun shots and falling, potentially on the magazine rack, which now has great significance on the case given it is agreed it can have been the only thing to have created the final noise OP heard in his version to have made him shot. We therefore have to believe that Reeva moved that rack in OP's version to create the noise, then stand by the door from where she got shot.

Court is adjourned for lunch.

I think the main issue here is that the only people who really know the real sequence of events are Oscar and Reeva. This just leaves Oscars versions of events and the prosecution can only pick apart his account of what happened as there is nobody else available to give another account of what actually happened. This alone will make it very hard to offer another version of events as anything other than speculation.

The decision will rest on how much the lack of credibility in oscars version allows the likelihood of the other version of events to be believed. That is a big ask when hanging a murder tag on someone and I don't think by any means this one is in the bag.

Certainly a very interesting case to follow and will be interesting to hear what other evidence is heard to support the case

 

[Uncle C]

He knew exactly what he was doing when he made Reeva fear for her life, and I am certain that she ran to the bathroom because he was waving the gun at her in the bedroom.

Oh dear I think he's going to shoot me, I'd better lock myself in the bathroom. I guess while I'm here I might as well have a wee and read a magazine.

 

[The Truth]

Just like Reeva, Oscar is getting caught with his pants down.

 

[KZNSeagull]

Just like Reeva, Oscar is getting caught with his pants down.

Reeva had hers on. His are on fire.

 

[KZNSeagull]

Oh dear I think he's going to shoot me, I'd better lock myself in the bathroom. I guess while I'm here I might as well have a wee and read a magazine.

Have we heard wee wee in the toilet evidence? I know that is what Nel said yesterday in his cross-exam (ie during the time Oscar heard a noise, him grabbing his gun and going up the passage, Reeva went to the loo, had a wee, then slammed and locked the toilet door), but I do know that there was some, but not much, urine still in her bladder?

 

[KZNSeagull]

Have we heard wee wee in the toilet evidence? I know that is what Nel said yesterday in his cross-exam (ie during the time Oscar heard a noise, him grabbing his gun and going up the passage, Reeva went to the loo, had a wee, then slammed and locked the toilet door), but I do know that there was some, but not much, urine still in her bladder?

Apparently, you cannot get DNA from wee wee in the toilet. As she had wee in her bladder still, it suits the Prosecution case more.

Talking to myself now - that's not good

 

[symyjym]

Apparently, you cannot get DNA from wee wee in the toilet. As she had wee in her bladder still, it suits the Prosecution case more.

Talking to myself now - that's not good

No your not, I'm checking in every now and then

 

[KZNSeagull]

Nel is shooting this guy down now - he has made an inference about the marks on Reeva's bum (she fell on the magazine rack), which was fully explained in the Post Mortem report as being caused by the bullet wound to her hip.

 

[fat old seagull]

Why in pity's sake would she lock the toilet after she'd had a wee-wee ? There is clearly something mentally wrong with OP.
It amazed me that when asked if he'd ever been a victim of crime he reeled of an endless list of crimes he'd suffered over a number of years. Yet at least every other question he answered under cross examination ..... He couldn't remember!

 

[Bold Seagull]

Nel is shooting this guy down now - he has made an inference about the marks on Reeva's bum (she fell on the magazine rack), which was fully explained in the Post Mortem report as being caused by the bullet wound to her hip.

Dixon hadn't read the entire post mortem report, Nel jumped on that like an underfed hyena presented with a fresh gazelle carcass. Nel is accusing Dixon of tailoring his evidence to suit the case of the defense rather than as an objective expert witness.

 

[KZNSeagull]

Dixon hadn't read the entire post mortem report, Nel jumped on that like an underfed hyena presented with a fresh gazelle carcass. Nel is accusing Dixon of tailoring his evidence to suit the case of the defense rather than as an objective expert witness.

Yes, I heard that. He also asked Dixon was he aware of how dangerous it is to purport to be an expert when you are not. At one point, Dixon said "in my layman's view", when talking about ballistics! As far as I can see, this last day and a half has pretty much been a waste of time as this guy cannot now be a decent defence witness at all.

 

[papajaff]

"Roses are red, violets are blue, I think today is a good day to tell you that, I love you."

"Roses are red, violets are blue, don't shoot me Oscar, I'm having a poo"

Sorry if it's been done.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

"Roses are red, violets are blue, don't shoot me Oscar, I'm having a poo"

Sorry if it's been done.

This has mostly been a grown up discussion of a serious crime, with some respect shown toward the young victim who was shot in the head, cowering in fear of her life.

So it hasn't, no. Well done.