Oscar Pistorius - Discussion Thread #68 *Appeal Verdict*

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
LemonMousse said:
Did Mrs VDM hear a woman screaming?

I thought she just heard bangs and then, shortly afterwards, crying & commotion.

Very, very interesting if she heard a woman screaming too.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I misread an article again that went straight from talking about Mrs VdMW to Burgess without a break. So apologies. I am giving up as from today because I only dip in and out and I am obviously not concentrating enough. See you all at the Appeal.
 
LemonMousse said:
I've been sitting here, Trotterly, trying to figure out what point you think you're making to me and how it assists your argument.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but your issue is the use of the words "loudness/quietness" when really we/I should be using "more powerful" with calculations like the one I used above.

Well, OK - but do you want, therefore, to calculate the "loudess"? I am assuming not because this is impossible for us....we don't have the necessary parameters, do we?

How many db do we knock off for ambient noise? For the energy drop off over distance? What's the amplitude? The bandwidth? Frequency? Exactly how much time were the hearers exposed to the noise? How does the placement of certain buildings, and the composition of the various walls, affect the levels of db reaching the hearers? What about the hearers ears.....all got top notch hearing? No wax bung up?

I don't know the answers, and even if I did, I wouldn't be able to make the necessary calculations. This is why discussions about relative loudness (as Lin said) is not entirely helpful.

A rule of thumb is that with every 20db gain - in laboratory conditions, with all things being equal - a noise will sound about 4 times louder to the average human ear.

But the fact remains that the noise intensity - the power initially expended in order to make the noise - is about 1000 times more in the case of a cricket bat vs gunshot.

This tells us - and it's all we actually need to know on here - that the gunshot was many, many, many times louder to everyone than any noise Pistorius - young and fit as he was - could possibly make with a cricket bat.

Another point - echo. Four noises of 160db each would bounce around noticeably. In other words, it would be heard as an echo. A cricket bat smacking a door would not echo at all.

(I have no idea how many db a cricket bat makes. I have heard various experts put it as low as 70 and as high as 100).

So.....please could you explain how it is logically likely that the neighbourhood was jolted awake by the quietest sound of the night but snoozed peacefully through a noise between 128 and 512 times louder?
Click to expand...

I was just pointing out your error in confusing power and loudness.

There seems to be further errors in this post though.

If your gunshot is 160dB and your bat 70 - 100dB then the loudness difference is actually between 64 and 512 times louder not between 128 and 512 times louder.

I don't think that 70dB is anywhere near loud enough for the bat. He would not have been tapping the door he was trying to break it. 70dB is a vacuum cleaner. Clearly hitting a door could be heard over this. 90dB, the noise close to a busy road would be much more like it.

BTW if you take the gunshot is 160dB and put the bat at just 80dB then the power difference is nothing like 1000x. It is actually 10^8 which is 100,000,000x
 
Trotterly said:
I was just pointing out your error in confusing power and loudness.

There seems to be further errors in this post though.

If your gunshot is 160dB and your bat 70 - 100dB then the loudness difference is actually between 64 and 512 times louder not between 128 and 512 times louder.

I don't think that 70dB is anywhere near loud enough for the bat. He would not have been tapping the door he was trying to break it. 70dB is a vacuum cleaner. Clearly hitting a door could be heard over this. 90dB, the noise close to a busy road would be much more like it.

BTW if you take the gunshot is 160dB and put the bat at just 80dB then the power difference is nothing like 1000x. It is actually 10^8 which is 100,000,000x
Click to expand...

Hang on.....what?

We are talking about sound! Acoustics!

A decibel is just a unit of measurement. It's used in lots of different ways, in lots of different disciplines to stop the numbers being worked with getting too huge.

It's amplitude we're interested in here. How much the sound waves produced have displaced the normal atmospheric pressure. We can then measure that in relation to the smallest sound detectable to the human ear to find the sound pressure level. Here a gain of 20db is x10.

I'm sure that there is a relationship between power, voltage and bat sounds, but it's far beyond the expertise of me and you, that's for sure. And how does it help on this thread?

A gain of 60db gives a sound 1000 times louder. Yes....LOUDER. The sound is that much louder.

If we then want to work out how this translates to individual ears...the perception...then we need access to information neither of us have.

A gun shot is MASSIVELY louder than any bat sound. That's it.

Regarding my calculation - I worked out the difference between 70db and 160db as 512 times louder...I mean...more intense.

Then I got distracted, decided in the interests of simplicity to give you 90db (which I agree is more realistic than 70db) and didn't bother recalculating.

So, I accept your correction there. I was being lazy.

IMPORTANT EDIT: I missed out an important part of my explanation. Attenuation. The SPL is run through an electronic meter that mimics the way human ears hear high and low frequencies and this gives a numerical value of 1000. The actual db is called db(A) SPL and this is what's referenced with all those tables that show db levels for vacuum cleaners and jet engines. A bald statement saying 20db = x10 does not give a true reflection of what we hear because we don't hear sounds in the flat way that that suggests.

And since I am both boring and confusing myself now, I shall leave it there.

A bat sound is 1000 times (roughly) quieter than a gun shot. I'll stand firm on that.
 
I am going to do an IB, I think, and leave Pistorius to wallow until the appeal. I have noticed that I largely only respond to posts that annoy me now, rather than pipe up when I have a sensible contribution. It's all been said, hasn't it....thousands of times!

Happy, Christmas Homies.
 
I know this isn't SA, but...

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/can-i-bail-while-i-appeal-conviction.html

A defendant who might pose a risk to the public will have a difficult time convincing a judge to allow bail pending appeal. This situation applies to a defendant whose criminal past demonstrates poor decision making
or impulsive behavior that has endangered others. Judges also consider the likelihood of the defendant continuing to commit nonviolent crimes if granted appeal.
Click to expand...
OP is certainly guilty of BIB red. What 'rehabilitation' has he undergone to curb his impulsive behaviour? Still can't believe that a convicted murderer (one who repeatedly lied and tampered with evidence) can swan around for the next 4 months while Reeva's family can do nothing but look on.
 
sleuth-d- said:
yep, all the numbers dialled/received are recorded at the provider [not the conversation] this is how we know when he phoned stander etc

same for text messages.

so things likely to have been wiped would have been - for example - text message content. photos stored on the phone. notes on the phone.

not sure if answerphone messages and email could have been retrieved from the service provider...

shame netcare didn't have a recording of their call, that would have been a hammer blow imo. another lucky break. [i notice they mention digital recording of messages now]
http://www.netcare911.co.za/live/co...a52b79bfcf01d0f10ca1e0d36ebc&Category_ID=1937

"Digital voice recording of all telephone lines ensures an accurate audit of events and allows for pro-active quality assurance and clinical governance."
Click to expand...

I haven't read the book, "One Tragic Night: The Oscar Pistorius Murder Trial By Mandy Wiener, Barry Bateman", but when I was messing around the other day looking for info on the .38 ammo in OP's safe I came across a pretty fleshed out accounting of the phone stuff from it. It's missing the odd page but it's worth a quick read from P.357-377.

I had done a google search for "oscar pistorius .38 safe" and this was the link I had followed:

https://books.google.ca/books?id=WI...#v=onepage&q=oscar pistorius .38 safe&f=false
 
I was reading on DS forum "Roux V Nel" how the NPA had knocked back a request made by someone's legal team (not OP!) to apply to the CC. Does anyone know if this is normal procedure for the NPA to do that? And.... has Roux yet applied on behalf of OP and can he be refused same as in case mentioned on DS so that the OP's appeal might not even get to the CC? I thought the CC would take a look at any appeal and say yes or no. Interested in the procedure from hereon in.
 
Marfa Lights said:
That's a very intriguing theory!! First time I have heard that idea and it could be very, very plausible. As Tortoise mentioned above, I don't think he would have needed to add any additional bangs though. But I do think it is very possible he might have called someone close to him for advice--the Titanium Hulk perhaps??
Click to expand...

It was a chaotic scene, I highly doubt that Oscar was of right mind to be "plotting" his how to get out of jail story.

Also,

If the calls were made on the cell, there would be a clear record of this unless the cold blooded Oscar was able to think rationally enough to not use his cell but instead use a wired line in which case the question begs to ask why would he need to call in the first place.
 
foxbluff said:
I've been thinking on that, too. My guess is there were probably crass remarks made about different women they know, open discussions about possible "affairs," things said about their friends and business associates, etc......I've lived a very quiet and decent life, but I would "die" if some of my acquaintances could hear the free/open discussions (sometimes just joking around) I've had over the years w/my Forever Best Friend. Egads, they would probably NEVER speak to me again!...lol
Click to expand...

BIB, This is a possibility. As we know, both Reeva and Oscar met while cheating behind Samantha Taylor's back.
 
mhiforme said:
BIB, This is a possibility. As we know, both Reeva and Oscar met while cheating behind Samantha Taylor's back.
Click to expand...

I notice in a previous post you propose as the scene was chaotic, then it was highly unlikely that Pistorius was of ‘right mind’ to be plotting his get out of jail story.

Yet you accept his mind was ‘right enough’ to be able to be able to recall that there was probably some ‘crass remarks’ on his cell phone.

Now on the contrary I would suggest his mind would have been sharp enough to concentrate far more initially on how to minimise the effects of a killing that would damage his sponsor generated income, his ‘super star status’ and could even result in a spell in a SA jail rather then worry about some ‘crass remarks’ he may have made on a cell phone. It’s a basic human instinct to try and ‘shift the blame’ when caught in an incriminating situation and this was without doubt mega incriminating, but of course even without thinking he would have had a ready-made and ‘understandable’ explanation to hand in the shape of an ‘intruder’ a fear which lurks in the mind of most, particularly white, South Africans. This is of course borne out by the number of times he blamed an 'intruder' from the moment he picked up the phone to call Stander.
 
LemonMousse said:
Any speculative theories of what might have been on his phone that needed to be wiped?

Presumably nothing directed at Reeva via her phone because that would have shown up on her phone.
Click to expand...

Perhaps some whatsapp msgs between him and his old buddy FH about RS? Re this tweet:

shoot4times.jpg
 
LemonMousse said:
Any speculative theories of what might have been on his phone that needed to be wiped?

Presumably nothing directed at Reeva via her phone because that would have shown up on her phone.
Click to expand...

The content of the what's app messages when he was supposed to be asleep

These don't get logged on the cell service - so all we are left with is the evidence of the data transfer
 
Val1 said:
I haven't read the book, "One Tragic Night: The Oscar Pistorius Murder Trial By Mandy Wiener, Barry Bateman", but when I was messing around the other day looking for info on the .38 ammo in OP's safe I came across a pretty fleshed out accounting of the phone stuff from it. It's missing the odd page but it's worth a quick read from P.357-377.

I had done a google search for "oscar pistorius .38 safe" and this was the link I had followed:

https://books.google.ca/books?id=WI...#v=onepage&q=oscar pistorius .38 safe&f=false
Click to expand...

Since I can't edit this I'll just reply to myself... anyone wanting a little more background on RS and OP/FH/etc can get a basic picture of it by doing the preview read of this book, it's free and covers a fair bit that for anyone outside of SA may not be common knowledge.
https://books.google.ca/books?id=WIKBAwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false
 
LemonMousse said:
Any speculative theories of what might have been on his phone that needed to be wiped?

Presumably nothing directed at Reeva via her phone because that would have shown up on her phone.
Click to expand...

I don't think the content was necessarily relevant - more that he was on his phone at a time when his defence team claimed that he was asleep. Any purposeful activity blows his entire story out of the water.

ETA - Snap, Mr Jitty.
 
L2L said:
http://www.sahistory.org.za/

Answers some questions I had.

ETA wrong link!


http://www.sahistory.org.za/how-case...tutional-court ... Nup, wrong again! One more attempt!


http://www.sahistory.org.za/how-cases-reach-constitutional-court
Click to expand...

I don’t know when this was written but I notice it contains the wording….

‘Since the Court may only hear constitutional matters, an applicant must show that the case concerns a constitutional matter’.

However since 2013 the Constitution of SA has been changed to read in Chapter 8

(3) The Constitutional Court—

(a) is the highest court of the Republic; and

(b) may decide—

(i) constitutional matters; and

(ii) any other matter, if the Constitutional Court grants leave to appeal on the grounds that the matter raises an arguable point of law of general public importance which ought to be considered by that Court, and

(c) makes the final decision whether a matter is within its jurisdiction.

Unfortunately, after more than 2 years the CC website has yet to be amended to include the wording of 3 (ii) in Chapter 8 of the Constitution
 
#ZumaMustFall dethrones #OscarPistorius from top spot

The trending hashtag pushed #OscarPistorius into second place in local Social Media over a 7 day period, according to media monitoring agency, ROi Africa.

PRETORIA 11 December 2015 - An online petition calling for the president to step down has already been signed by close to 60,000 people. The call comes after the president sacked Nhlanhla Nene as the country’s finance minister on Wednesday evening.​ Video: eNCA

https://www.enca.com/life/zumamustfall-ousts-oscarpistorius-social-media-top-spot
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 146 more.
Total: 2,681 (members: 147, guests: 2,534)

Online statistics

Members online
147
Guests online
2,534
Total visitors
2,681
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
595,168
Messages
18,020,668
Members
229,593
Latest member
MWinslow
Back
Top