Oscar Pistorius Trial Part 7

[Roussette]

here is Part 6. Nearly time for a new one.

I'm sitting there thinki

I'm sitting there thinking oh

Ah! Bloody phone.

Was sitting there thinking oh I meant feed not fees.

Then saw it [blush[

Right, so this is tricky. The two sound recordings of the bat and the gun. Nel says, that with the bat, you can hear ambient sound - crickets chirping. On the gun test, you can hear them, but much quieter.

This implies that the sound was turned up for the bat. So not like for like.

However, this is really hard, because this witness has said several times that he cannot hear - he has hearing aids and has constant tinnitus. He can't hear the crickets on either recording. So there's no way of agreeing or disagreeing that in court.

Jesus wept! If it is "neither here nor there" about Black Talon and Ranger as Nel just said, why is he banging on about it?

There is dispute over whether Black Talon bullets were available in the calibre that Oscar used.

Wolmaran asks for a letter from Winchester proving that they manufactured them in that calibre.

I think he's doing very well still.

Hang on, he is hard of hearing? So why is he playing recordings of gun shots and bats?

I missed the afternoon session; can't quite understand why defense haven't got an expert witness on accoustics rather than non-experts carrying out tests then saying they can't comment?

I had to go to work and missed all of this afternoon. What was the conclusion? I've read back. Did Wolmaran hold his own?

I think he did, yes. I thought he handled Nel's games very well.

Rousette - His cross-section isn't over, so don't think we can call a conclusion yet, but Nel was brutal to say the least.

Nel was Nel, but he didn't make mincemeat of Wolmaran at all, the guy was confident and held his own IMO.

I have been at work all day today so wasn't able to watch, have got the gist from twitter feeds but want to watch for myself to get a better idea, anyone know where I might be able to get today's sessions? How quickly do they get put up on YouTube?

On the whole it seems that while today's testomony didn't really help the defence much, apart from a few slightly embarissing moments it also wasn't too damaging to the defence. So really things aren't much different on the balance of things from Monday morning to now. I wonder what the defence have got planned for next week, I think they planned to rest a couple if days into next week so unless they are saving the biggest gun for last I have to say that on balance the States case is the stronger of the two. Neither an swear some if the most important questions, both have gaping holes, both are very ambiguous.
I would not like to be the judge.

RoadKill - It's already up on youtube, a channel there records it live.

I think Wolmaran did really well. I was pleased, because I haven't felt confident about any of the defence witnesses so far. It's not so much that he's changed my mind (from being on the fence), it's more that I didn't want to feel that the trial hadn't been balanced and fair. When it was just Dixon, I felt that way.

I haven't heard Roux object to Nel's questions much.

whosyourdadic.com/ David Dadic's blog is quite interesting

That's a very interesting article Mary thank you.

Roux said that they were hoping to wrap up the defence witnesses by next Tuesday. He said that on Monday IIRC.

That's mort, perfect! Honing to get stuck into that now, expect some of my traidmark long winded wordy novels later!

Agreed, thanks, Mary.

Thought Wolmaran did ok, considering. I mean he didn't lose credibility much and he held his own. I liked the rapport between him and Nel.

But there was too much 'it coud have happened ths way, or the other way' nothing that conclusive.

On way home on the train and have missed all of today.

Will catch up when I get home,hopefully haven't missed too much

Very good Mary, that was an excellent and informative blog

I am now way into the cross from today. He held up pretty well so far, better then twitter jernos lead me to believe, just way I wanted to see for myself, I do think they tend to have a flair for the dramatic, how ever often they claim they are giving a blow by blow account, even the good ones!

Even though he held up well there are still issues, the dating of the report is one. Very shoddy work for a seasoned profestional! I happen to believe him to be honest that all he changed was his English grammar and a repetition but the fact is he has left no way to know and engaged in meetings with people who have already testified.

Going to go back to it now, see you on the other side!

Very shoddy work for a seasoned professional

I haven't managed to watch many days live due to working full time, but I have noticed what seems to me like a lack of preparedness all round, seemingly disorganised material, forgotten things, important notes not properly documented. I have no idea if it's normal to carry on like this in court but they seem incredibly inefficient.

"they seem incredibly inefficient."

My thoughts as well.

CharlieSierra I agree. I just don't understand with mega money and plenty of time why the defence isn't better prepared. They must know what Nel is like and they should be drilled surely to expect every question and every eventuality sorry wine talking, i know what i mean