Day 1: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3: Michelle Burger
I'm still listening, but so far I have some notes on the cross: (Will edit this as I listen...OK. Done for now.)
Roux argues semantics and grammar in order to show that Ms. Burger is an unreliable witness. He tries to shame her into conceding that she could have heard things while she was asleep. She tells him that no, she was asleep so she could not have heard anything. Which is literally true. All this is a test of her reliability and credibility. Not so much a test of the facts. Because he rarely puts anything to her during the first two parts. But we have lots of putting-to-yous in Part 3.
So far in Witness vs Oscar Pistorius :
Ms Burger says she heard a woman scream. Terrible, blood curdling, fearful screaming. She says although its not in her affadavit she mentioned this to Capt. van Aardt during her affadavit. He can confirm this. (insert time here. Anybody? OK. I'll do this later.)
Day 1. Part 3. 24:30:
Oscar's version is: He fired four shots. At some point in time when he realized it might be Reeva, he was screaming for help. He screamed. And opened the sliding doors. And after that he bashed the door three times with the bat. We have experts. Roux: I put it to you that..on tests people will say the bashing of the door would resemble, when you hear it from a distance, gun shot wounds. It's hard (meaning loud): Dwa! You understand? It's not soft hitting, you hit the door to break. Do you understand that?
Day 1. Part 3. 34:07:
Ms Burger says she heard four shots after the screaming. Bang....bang, bang, bang. The screams faded with the last shot. She did not hear any other sounds after that: Not screaming and not anything else that sounded like shots. Maybe she was in the loo, maybe asleep, but she only heard the screams and the four gun shots.
Day 1. Part 3. 34:25:
Roux puts it to Burger that it was Oscar screaming that night. She replies that she definitely heard a woman. She doesn't know what Mr. Pistorius sounds like when he screams. So Roux says that he will prove that OP screams like a woman.
Day 1. Part 3. 35:00:
Roux: This is what I put to you. He fired shots. He was beyond himself screaming after that. Higher and lower. And that is why you heard a woman screaming and also a man screaming. (35:25) You heard both. But it was the same person.
Burger: I'm 100% certain that I heard two different people that evening. Male voice. Female voice.
Roux: You did not hear them at the same time.
Burger: True. Lady called for help and then shortly afterwards a man help, help, help.....I have no doubt that it was two different people. They did not sound remotely the same. (Again at 37:55. Two different people. Female. Male.)
Day 1. Part 3. 38:25:
Roux says: The hitting of the door with the bat was shortly after the shots. Not a long time. And you must have heard it.
Burger says: I'm sure gunshots will be louder than a cricket bat on a door. I'm sure I heard shots.
Day 1. Part 3. 50:00:
Roux: You should have been awake. You did not hear a cricket bat hitting a door so hard that it breaks the door?
Nel: I object. It was now put to this witness: "You did not hear it," as if it is true, as if it did happen and she could have heard it. He then also says its been asked and answered at least five times.
Roux: Huh? Is Nel saying the door wasn't hit with the bat?(I'm paraphrasing?)
Nel: I'll rephrase. As if it happened so loudly that she should have heard it.
Roux: We put to the witness. Could there have been gunshots before you woke up? She said no.
Judge: She explains it in terms of distance. She was far away.
Roux: We put it to her that she heard the bat, not the gunshots.
Judge: Yeees. You can put it to the witness. (52:12)
Day 1. Part 3. From 56:00:
Roux tries very hard to get this witness to say she heard both Oscar and Reeva scream at the same time. She keeps saying no. She heard them both call for help, but only the woman screamed. At 56:17 Roux: But you heard him screaming....Burger:Call for help. I heard him call for help. There was fear in the woman's voice. The man sound flat. After being pressed by Roux on why she thinks this could have been she says she'd wondered about this. Perhaps the man was mocking the woman? (Roux: Righteous Indignation! Nel: You asked her opinion. I mean, really. Paraphrasing here.)
Verrry interesting, this.