Oscar Pistorius Trial Part 6

[Roussette]

here is Part 5 but we are ready (nearly) for a new one.

Lone - sorry, misunderstood.
I just can't get to the stage where I totally think he killed Reeva rather than a stranger.
It would make him some kind if callous to act out the rest of it to an audience. I also think panicking and stress may make it less easy to think who to call and we don't know if it would be better to try private health care or public services in SA as far as I know.

I've been thinking about today's witnesses and the differences from the state's witnesses. I wish the state had called an expert purely to carry out sound tests and discuss all the factors that could have impacted on how the sounds carried eg building materials, window design, glazing.

After every witness I always have a million more questions I wish they had asked! For example did all their houses have brick walls? Were some stone? Did they all have windows open? Were the windows double or single glazed? Sash or standard?

I know there's a massive difference in how sound carries upstairs in my own house through a sash window than downstairs through a standard window. A few weeks ago,a couple had rather a heated argument outside our house and dh didn't hear it at all despite being downstairs. Upstairs,I heard every word. (I was seriously tempted to open the window, agree with the random man that he was emotionally immature and advise the woman to dump him!).

Determining the accuracy of the ear witnesses seems pretty important to deciding on whether OP knew it was Reeva or not.

Book "Determining the accuracy of the ear witnesses seems pretty important to deciding on whether OP knew it was Reeva or not."

^ This is what I cannot get past; I cannot discount this evidence and certainly do not find it unreliable, despite the distance. Sound/noise travels in unexpected ways.

Thing is, they could do scientific sound tests until the cows came home but they would mean next to nothing because the variable factor is the human beings and human beings are all do detergent, they have different ranges of hearing, they have different minds that interpret sound in different ways, different life experiences a that would effect which aspects of the sounds they heard stuck in their memory.
Then you have to add in the fact it was the early hours of the morning, the cast majority of the witnesses were sleeping, everybody sleeps differently, some heavy some light. Some will always wake at the sound of their children but sleep through a thunder storm overhead.
So while scientific tests and information about building materials etc might give you a set of data about how the sounds would have traveled the reality is that when it comes to the question of what somebody heard that data is meaningless and would simply confuse matters and mislead.

Yikes, human beings all do detergent. I need to sack my phone and it's stupid auto correct, do detergent was intended to be different.
I think I really do need to go to bed at this point!

And isn't it amazing, Book that in such a high profile trial, they haven't done this.

Or maybe they have and just not presented it in court

They would want - as would most right thinking people - any conviction to be robust, so why not dot the is and cross the ts when it comes to evidence.

The state will have left out evidence that does not support their case, which is frustrating.

Justice is about more than successful prosecution, it is about uncovering the truth, but I guess in this trial, the truth will never be fully known.

I'm trying to understand something Jani Allen linked to on twitter about the time available after the shooting.

Morning all, I can hardly keep up with the thread.
My take on the last day or two, is that it matters not one jot how Oscar was crying after the event, so all the testimony from the witnesses who heard his crying, is frankly irrelevant. You can murder someone and then be regretful afterwards. It doesn't negate the intent to kill (or reckless negligence, depending on your stance) in the moment. Crying and trying to save an already dead woman were the actions of a desperate man trying to save his own skin.

What was that about Nerf? She seems to have lots of links to blogs and things

I read one from a psychotherapist but I think often the comments are as interesting as the opinions

About the 'smoking gun' of the time of death. She linked to something which was saying Reeva was already dead when dr stipp saw her, and that OP had said she wasn't breathing in the cubicle so he sat with her, then she was so he carried her down etc. it was about the timing - could he have shot her, run around trying to find her, breaking the door down, sitting with her, carrying her down with arterial spray on the walls before she died if she would only have had a few breaths?
But I don't know enough to know of it is possible.
And tbh I don't know if I would know someone was dead if I really wanted them to be alive.
And his comment yesterday to Kim Myers, if true, makes me think he is telling the truth.

I think much as their are lots of improbable things you have to believe if you think he is innocent of knowing it was Reeva, there are lots of improbable things if you believe in a row and killing her deliberately.
So, no evidence of a row except for jeans taken off - did he rip them off her as she was dressing? No nearby neighbours hearing a row, and no state evidence of how the far off ones could have heard (sound tests etc ) , she fortuitously chose to lock herself in the toilet cubicle rather than somewhere that made the intruder story less possible, they had lots of affectionate messages as well as tricky ones.

And tbh I don't know if I would know someone was dead if I really wanted them to be alive.

I completely and utterly agree with this. Working out if someone is dead or not is quite tricky. They did a blind test on this in Paddington (not the station; the hospital), where they had various people check for a pulse without being able to see the person they were testing. Not only did a lot of people not find a pulse on a living, breathing, perfectly well person, but a fair amount of people found a pulse on the corpse.

The only subsection who were reasonably accurate were anaesthetists.

Body's exhale and can do other things (fart, for example) after death. A corpse in the back of my Uncle's plane sat upright on the change in air-pressure (and yes, we did laugh when he told us.)

his comment yesterday to Kim Myers, if true, makes me think he is telling the truth.

Can you explain this a little bit more? I have a problem with this story in that I don't know what Myers is supposed to have done - I haven't looked at many articles or interviews that aren't specific to the evidence in court.

The legal panel in the clip I provided supports my clumsy assertion that it is more important to establish the independence v bias of the witnesses, rather than the audio quality of what they might have heard.

The stander evidence amounts to 'Stander v Stipp' in terms of possible 'subconscious bias'.

Indeed the legal panel feel that Stander may have rendered his testimony inadmissible because of his indisputable bias toward Oscar.

The defense would not object to Standers evidence being disregarded by Masipa because it promotes a change of plea to involuntary action, which is almost impossible for them to prove!

This is why Nel did not pursue Stander vigorously!
Stander was already sabotaging OP's defense all by himself.
Dr Stipp's is the most independent witness we have heard.

Yes Nerf could you please clarify the bit about Kim Myers and telling the truth

I am thinking the Myers must have had said something

I read -it was in the DM so nor sure how true - that June Steenkamp was less than impressed with the Myers famil.

I wonder if there is something in it

But I also agree that it is a distraction only

[fwarrenlevine.wordpress.com/2014/05/06/prove/or As for]the NDN's evidence.

warrenlevine.wordpress.com/2014/05/06/prove/

On another point, in reply to Nerf regarding the argument (or not) prior to the killing.

I know i put the cat among the pigeons previously as to the mumsnet juries opinion that the 3 pathologists and the blood experts testimony should be completely disregarded as to the TOD. I know to my detriment the shitstorm I was subjected to over that, so here we go again!

The evidence that the phone used that night was the one normally on charge in the kitchen supports the pathology finding about the gastric contents indicating RS was downstairs 2 hours prior to her death and OP was there too!

So I've just heard that Oscars live in housekeeper Frank was sleeping next to the kitchen that night and apparently heard nothing? Eh? He is not being called as a witness wtf?

Sorry I can see Frank has been discussed, but seriously? Oscar can only be guilty otherwise he would have used Frank to back him up, don't understand!

It does seem bizarre, but I think the point people have made was that his whole livelihood/home rests on him being seen to be discreet about his employers and that if he was required to give a warts and all account of OP's habits he might never work again. He needs someone to come along and give him enough money for housing/living expenses for the rest of his life. I suppose it wouldn't be such an issue here as there is the benefits system as back up if someone is strugglign to find work.

The comment to Myers. Sorry, I'm just thinking aloud. Reeva lived with the Myers family and they have apparently said negative things about the relationship after being pleasant at the beginning to OP. So I read OPs comments as calling them hypocrites , and I sort of feel that if he is bothered enough to say something, then their relationship wasn't so bad and he feels they are commenting for other, less altruistic reasons.

YNK, don't understand the phone/path thing?

Sorry nerf I have to pop out to do some RL.

The stomach contents indicate RS was awake prior to her death, as was OP in order to be using his kitchen (business) phone when she was shot. He said he carried that phone downstairs and it was in his pocket as he carried RS on her final journey.
It could well have been, but why would he be using that one when his personal phone was found in the bathroom?

Back soon!

Looking I'm at the Paddington test! That's so interesting - were they all medical professionals? It makes me feel a bit better that sometimes I can't find my own pulse!

Roadkill I understand sound testing wouldn't confirm or deny what people heard but I do think testing would have helped to answer the question concerning whether the nearest neighbours are likely to hear more than the others who were further away. My own (extremely limited personal experience!) shows that distance isn't the only factor and you can be closer to a disturbance and hear less than someone further away.

I've just remembered that when Roux was questioning the state witnesses at the beginning he said his team had carried out sound tests with a man (and woman too possibly?) screaming in the early hours of the morning. I wonder if the next door neighbours heard those noises or not. Although I guess we'll never know because they're off the stand and won't be questioned again.