Thanks for this Murphys_Law. I have seen that photo, but did not notice the mark on the wall. I suppose that the mark could have been caused by the tiles hitting there as they fell. More tiles could have come down when the door was removed by the police too. I see what you are saying about the arc shape though. Have you seen any photos of that wall taken before the door was removed?
WITNESS THREAD: Warrant Officer Barend Van Staden, Crime Scene Photographer
- Thread starter bessie
- Start date
New Posts
-
Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #182- Latest: girlhasnoname
-
Thanks for this Murphys_Law. I have seen that photo, but did not notice the mark on the wall. I suppose that the mark could have been caused by the tiles hitting there as they fell. More tiles could have come down when the door was removed by the police too. I see what you are saying about the arc shape though. Have you seen any photos of that wall taken before the door was removed?
Oscar Pistorius Trial Monday 17 March 2014, Session 3, part 2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-_JCifLpkI
05:14 Roux starts his cross examination
Roux asks if Van Staden was alone when he took the photographs.
Van Staden says he was.
Roux asks if anyone disturbed him upstairs.
Van Staden says there were other people there at some stage.
Roux asks: When was that?
Van S: After he'd photographed the scene for the first time, later in the day, there were members of the Provincial Task Team present.
Roux: You said you arrived 04:50
Roux: How many photographs did you take of Mr. Pistorius?
Van S says he's not sure. He will check his records.
Roux: Oscar said a great number of photographs were taken. Is that true?
Van S: Not correct.
Roux: How will you know how many photographs were taken of Pistorius?
Van S: I'll look in the album. And also on the original record because there is a possibility that there are photographs not used in the album. I'll have to check.
Roux: Do you have them here?
Van S: Yes.
Roux: Will you check? On the original photographs.
Van S: I will have to gain access to the photographs.
Roux: How long will it take?
Van S: 10 minutes
Roux: Says it is a quite significant aspect and asks for a 10 minute recess.
36: 30 After recess. Cross by Roux continues...
Roux: Did you manage to ascertain the number of photographs of Mr. Pistorius?
Van S: Nine.
Roux: We have, on a number of occasions, asked for the metadata. I don't want to waste time. (!) Please see to it that you bring it tomorrow.
Nel: With the utmost respect it is impossible to do it. They have it. If you right click on a photograph and the metadata is available. It is not something you can bring to court. It is part of the photographs that was handed, in electronic format, to the defense.
Roux: We'll look into it, m'lady.
38:00 About Hilton Botha
Roux says in order to determine time periods he looked at Hilton Botha's statement that said he (Van Staden) arrived on the scene between 05:00 and 05:05.
Van Staden: Not correct
Roux: How do you determine your time period for arriving?
Van Staden: By looking at my watch, m'lady.
Roux: And what did you see?
Van Staden: 04:50
Roux: Was it when you stopped or entered?
Van S: When I stopped at the scene.
38:57 Going through the crime scene again: Initial walk through
Roux takes Van Staden through his actions from the time he stopped step by step. Van Staden found Botha outside. Botha told him Oscar had shot his girlfriend. Van Staden asked Botha to take him through the crime scene. They went into the house. Botha showed him the foyer and the deceased. From there we went to the first floor to the main bedroom and to the bathroom.
Roux asks how long they were upstairs in the bedroom and bathroom. Van S. says it was minutes.
Roux asks what did they do there for such a short time? Van Staden says it was just to familiarise himself with the crime scene and no photos were taken. Botha pointed out certain things to him.
42:33 Downstairs again and to the garage
From there they went to the ground floor. Then he went to the garage where I found Pistorius.
Roux asks about OP's emotional state. Van Staden says very quiet and emotional, meaning he was weepy or "huilerig." He did not know if OP vomited. Van Staden repeats what he had told Nel before: Van Staden asked Botha if Oscar washed his hands. Botha was outside the garage in the foyer/kitchen area of the house. Botha said no at first. But then asked Van Rensburg who said that OP washed his hands. Van Rensburg was also in the kitchen. Van Staden said he waited for Botha at the garage door.
45:39 Roux tries to put words in Van Staden's mouth...
Roux: And now he comes back and tells you that he indeed gave permission to wash his hands...
Van Staden: W/O Botha came to me and informed me that the accused had washed his hands.
Van Staden then asked OP if he washed his hands. OP said yes, he did.
46:22 Primary residue tests (PR tests)
Van Staden did the PR tests using a PR kit consisting of two containers each with a little sticky paper on the bottom. It is marked left and right for each hand. Van Staden said that he'd brought the kit with him. Van Staden tested the whole arm because the accused had washed his hands. Roux then goes into minute detail about how the tests were done. Up. Down. All around.
Roux asks how long does it take for a hand? And an arm? Van Staden says seconds.
Roux asks him to demonstrate on his own hand. Van Staden dots random dots on the top of his hand, his palm, up the arm. As soon as one arm is done the container is sealed. A new container is then opened for other arm. Roux wants to know how it is sealed? The container has its own cover. Its put back in the cover and then placed back in the kit.
52:00 The judge asks a question
The judge asks about the pricking motion Van Staden made. What did he use to press? He explains that the sticky paper and is used to detect the primary residue.
Roux says if you use the same sticky paper for the hand and the arm, how do you know what was on the hand and what was on the arm?
Van Staden says usually an additional kit will be used for the arms, but under the circumstances he only used one container. Roux asks about minute details of how this was done. Van Staden explains.
Now Roux says it doesn't sound like seconds. Van Staden says the tests goes quickly because you press and press and then it is done.
56:00 Original photographs requested
Roux asks for the set of original photographs given to the clerk, or those in the archives.
Van Staden says those are stored by the clerk. He can request it from the clerk. Roux also asks for the "flash disks" Van Staden used.
Nel: I take it that the witness will be present at all times while the defense examines his disks.
Roux: Of course. We don't want to tamper with it...
58:20 No deleted photographs
Roux: Did you delete any photos, Warrant? Van Staden says no.
58:30 Still in the garage
Van Staden says he took nine photographs in total of OP.
59:20 Four/Nine photographs of Oscar.
Outside of house: he took one photo used in album, but he took more than one. Some photographs were not used.
Roux asks how he decides what to use. He says it was his decision and he chose the best ones and the ones that he thought was important. "I'm the one who decides." Roux asks how he decided which photographs of Pistorius to use. He says he used all of them taken in the garage. Nine photos. Roux asks where they are because they only have four photographs of Oscar, 155-158 and he doesn't know which album they are in. Van Staden gives the numbers: 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162 and 163. Roux says sorry, he didn't write it down, please repeat that. Van Staden repeats it. The defense confers.
1:03:35 So which is it four or nine?
Roux: Those photographs were taken shortly after the PR tests?
Van Staden: Some of them were.
Roux: I've asked you that before, Warrant, that specific question. How many did you take after the PR tests?
Van Staden: (checks album) Four photos.
Roux: What about the other photographs? When did you take that?
Van Staden: Those show the prosthesis and were taken at a later stage.
Roux: After you went through the house?
Van Staden: Correct.
Roux: So are you saying that after you did the PR tests you only took four photos of OP?
Van S: Correct
Roux: I'm instructed (by Oscar) that you took a large number of photos. Not just four.
Van S: No, m'lady.
1:05:35 After the garage...
Roux: And after you've been to the garage and took the four photos, as you say? You went outside and took one of the house and then?
Van S: Went into house. Took photos of foyer (porch), the ground floor sitting room, the area of the stairs, as well as the area where the deceased was.
Roux: You then went upstairs by yourself?
Van S: Correct
Roux: You were alone in the main bedroom, the passage and the bathroom.
Van S: Yes. Main bedroom. Passage. Bathroom. And at one stage W/O Botha was with me in the bathroom.
Roux: So he joined you for the first time while you were taking photos in the bathroom.
Van S: Correct
Roux: Do you know when?
Van S: I first photographed the bathroom overall and then he joined me. He was there to collect the phone that he pointed out to me before.
Roux: Where was Botha when he pointed out the phone to you?
Van S: During the initial walk through when he took me through the scene.
Roux: Not when you were taking phots.
Van S: No.
Roux asks that they end for the day.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-_JCifLpkI
Note:
Van Staden says not all the photographs he took are in the albums. There is an original record of all the photographs he took at the police station which contains all the photographs he took.
To me it looks almost as if Roux is playing for time during this session. He goes into minute detail and repeats the same details over and over again.
Important note: The defense has no idea how to access the metadata of the photographs. So the whole Motha thing (which is based on the metadata) was cooked up overnight. (See below.)
There is not a single mention of Col. Motha during this session.
Van Staden says not all the photographs he took are in the albums. There is an original record of all the photographs he took at the police station which contains all the photographs he took.
To me it looks almost as if Roux is playing for time during this session. He goes into minute detail and repeats the same details over and over again.
Important note: The defense has no idea how to access the metadata of the photographs. So the whole Motha thing (which is based on the metadata) was cooked up overnight. (See below.)
There is not a single mention of Col. Motha during this session.
05:14 Roux starts his cross examination
Roux asks if Van Staden was alone when he took the photographs.
Van Staden says he was.
Roux asks if anyone disturbed him upstairs.
Van Staden says there were other people there at some stage.
Roux asks: When was that?
Van S: After he'd photographed the scene for the first time, later in the day, there were members of the Provincial Task Team present.
Roux: You said you arrived 04:50
Roux: How many photographs did you take of Mr. Pistorius?
Van S says he's not sure. He will check his records.
Roux: Oscar said a great number of photographs were taken. Is that true?
Van S: Not correct.
Roux: How will you know how many photographs were taken of Pistorius?
Van S: I'll look in the album. And also on the original record because there is a possibility that there are photographs not used in the album. I'll have to check.
Roux: Do you have them here?
Van S: Yes.
Roux: Will you check? On the original photographs.
Van S: I will have to gain access to the photographs.
Roux: How long will it take?
Van S: 10 minutes
Roux: Says it is a quite significant aspect and asks for a 10 minute recess.
Note:
The defense has no idea how to access the metadata. This means their whole Motha argument (based on the metadata) will only take shape after Nel tells them how to right click.
The defense has no idea how to access the metadata. This means their whole Motha argument (based on the metadata) will only take shape after Nel tells them how to right click.
36: 30 After recess. Cross by Roux continues...
Roux: Did you manage to ascertain the number of photographs of Mr. Pistorius?
Van S: Nine.
Roux: We have, on a number of occasions, asked for the metadata. I don't want to waste time. (!) Please see to it that you bring it tomorrow.
Nel: With the utmost respect it is impossible to do it. They have it. If you right click on a photograph and the metadata is available. It is not something you can bring to court. It is part of the photographs that was handed, in electronic format, to the defense.
Roux: We'll look into it, m'lady.
38:00 About Hilton Botha
Roux says in order to determine time periods he looked at Hilton Botha's statement that said he (Van Staden) arrived on the scene between 05:00 and 05:05.
Van Staden: Not correct
Roux: How do you determine your time period for arriving?
Van Staden: By looking at my watch, m'lady.
Roux: And what did you see?
Van Staden: 04:50
Roux: Was it when you stopped or entered?
Van S: When I stopped at the scene.
38:57 Going through the crime scene again: Initial walk through
Roux takes Van Staden through his actions from the time he stopped step by step. Van Staden found Botha outside. Botha told him Oscar had shot his girlfriend. Van Staden asked Botha to take him through the crime scene. They went into the house. Botha showed him the foyer and the deceased. From there we went to the first floor to the main bedroom and to the bathroom.
Roux asks how long they were upstairs in the bedroom and bathroom. Van S. says it was minutes.
Roux asks what did they do there for such a short time? Van Staden says it was just to familiarise himself with the crime scene and no photos were taken. Botha pointed out certain things to him.
42:33 Downstairs again and to the garage
From there they went to the ground floor. Then he went to the garage where I found Pistorius.
Roux asks about OP's emotional state. Van Staden says very quiet and emotional, meaning he was weepy or "huilerig." He did not know if OP vomited. Van Staden repeats what he had told Nel before: Van Staden asked Botha if Oscar washed his hands. Botha was outside the garage in the foyer/kitchen area of the house. Botha said no at first. But then asked Van Rensburg who said that OP washed his hands. Van Rensburg was also in the kitchen. Van Staden said he waited for Botha at the garage door.
45:39 Roux tries to put words in Van Staden's mouth...
Roux: And now he comes back and tells you that he indeed gave permission to wash his hands...
Van Staden: W/O Botha came to me and informed me that the accused had washed his hands.
Van Staden then asked OP if he washed his hands. OP said yes, he did.
46:22 Primary residue tests (PR tests)
Van Staden did the PR tests using a PR kit consisting of two containers each with a little sticky paper on the bottom. It is marked left and right for each hand. Van Staden said that he'd brought the kit with him. Van Staden tested the whole arm because the accused had washed his hands. Roux then goes into minute detail about how the tests were done. Up. Down. All around.
Roux asks how long does it take for a hand? And an arm? Van Staden says seconds.
Roux asks him to demonstrate on his own hand. Van Staden dots random dots on the top of his hand, his palm, up the arm. As soon as one arm is done the container is sealed. A new container is then opened for other arm. Roux wants to know how it is sealed? The container has its own cover. Its put back in the cover and then placed back in the kit.
52:00 The judge asks a question
The judge asks about the pricking motion Van Staden made. What did he use to press? He explains that the sticky paper and is used to detect the primary residue.
Roux says if you use the same sticky paper for the hand and the arm, how do you know what was on the hand and what was on the arm?
Van Staden says usually an additional kit will be used for the arms, but under the circumstances he only used one container. Roux asks about minute details of how this was done. Van Staden explains.
Now Roux says it doesn't sound like seconds. Van Staden says the tests goes quickly because you press and press and then it is done.
56:00 Original photographs requested
Roux asks for the set of original photographs given to the clerk, or those in the archives.
Van Staden says those are stored by the clerk. He can request it from the clerk. Roux also asks for the "flash disks" Van Staden used.
Nel: I take it that the witness will be present at all times while the defense examines his disks.
Roux: Of course. We don't want to tamper with it...
58:20 No deleted photographs
Roux: Did you delete any photos, Warrant? Van Staden says no.
58:30 Still in the garage
Van Staden says he took nine photographs in total of OP.
59:20 Four/Nine photographs of Oscar.
Outside of house: he took one photo used in album, but he took more than one. Some photographs were not used.
Roux asks how he decides what to use. He says it was his decision and he chose the best ones and the ones that he thought was important. "I'm the one who decides." Roux asks how he decided which photographs of Pistorius to use. He says he used all of them taken in the garage. Nine photos. Roux asks where they are because they only have four photographs of Oscar, 155-158 and he doesn't know which album they are in. Van Staden gives the numbers: 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162 and 163. Roux says sorry, he didn't write it down, please repeat that. Van Staden repeats it. The defense confers.
Note:
Roux is definitely playing for time.
Roux is definitely playing for time.
1:03:35 So which is it four or nine?
Roux: Those photographs were taken shortly after the PR tests?
Van Staden: Some of them were.
Roux: I've asked you that before, Warrant, that specific question. How many did you take after the PR tests?
Van Staden: (checks album) Four photos.
Roux: What about the other photographs? When did you take that?
Van Staden: Those show the prosthesis and were taken at a later stage.
Roux: After you went through the house?
Van Staden: Correct.
Roux: So are you saying that after you did the PR tests you only took four photos of OP?
Van S: Correct
Roux: I'm instructed (by Oscar) that you took a large number of photos. Not just four.
Van S: No, m'lady.
1:05:35 After the garage...
Roux: And after you've been to the garage and took the four photos, as you say? You went outside and took one of the house and then?
Van S: Went into house. Took photos of foyer (porch), the ground floor sitting room, the area of the stairs, as well as the area where the deceased was.
Roux: You then went upstairs by yourself?
Van S: Correct
Roux: You were alone in the main bedroom, the passage and the bathroom.
Van S: Yes. Main bedroom. Passage. Bathroom. And at one stage W/O Botha was with me in the bathroom.
Roux: So he joined you for the first time while you were taking photos in the bathroom.
Van S: Correct
Roux: Do you know when?
Van S: I first photographed the bathroom overall and then he joined me. He was there to collect the phone that he pointed out to me before.
Roux: Where was Botha when he pointed out the phone to you?
Van S: During the initial walk through when he took me through the scene.
Roux: Not when you were taking phots.
Van S: No.
Roux asks that they end for the day.
minor4th
Verified Attorney
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2013
- Messages
- 8,152
- Reaction score
- 2,110
The problem I have with the crime scene photos is that Motha was clearly there taking pictures and milling about the crime scene at the same time Van Staden was supposed to be taking pictures of an "untouched" crime scene. VS was so adamant that he was alone the whole time he was taking the first set of pictures - but he wasn't alone.
Lying about it is what is troublesome. If he and Motha had both testified and acknowledged that they were both on the scene and both took pictures and they were up front about exactly what had been moved and at what time, then I wouldn't care that there were two photographers and would be a whole lot more inclined to believe the testimony about the crime scene and the photos. The fact that they are trying to hide it makes it look like they actually have something to hide - and that calls into question the accuracy and reliability of the photos as an "undisturbed" scene.
While Van Staden was taking the initial photos, Motha was there with him at 6:04 and maybe earlier. Botha was there at 6:14 holding the cell phones for pictures and retrieving them. Motha handled the gun while the pictures were being taken and so did the fingerprint guy - and all of that happened at a time that Van Staden insisted that he was completely alone and didn't see anyone other than Botha there collecting the gun.
Lying about it is what is troublesome. If he and Motha had both testified and acknowledged that they were both on the scene and both took pictures and they were up front about exactly what had been moved and at what time, then I wouldn't care that there were two photographers and would be a whole lot more inclined to believe the testimony about the crime scene and the photos. The fact that they are trying to hide it makes it look like they actually have something to hide - and that calls into question the accuracy and reliability of the photos as an "undisturbed" scene.
While Van Staden was taking the initial photos, Motha was there with him at 6:04 and maybe earlier. Botha was there at 6:14 holding the cell phones for pictures and retrieving them. Motha handled the gun while the pictures were being taken and so did the fingerprint guy - and all of that happened at a time that Van Staden insisted that he was completely alone and didn't see anyone other than Botha there collecting the gun.
Van Staden vs Motha. Let's look at what we know.
We have Van Staden's original, unaltered, sequential photographs. Verified independently.
We have no such record for Motha. All we have from Motha are a few images cherry picked by the defense in an attempt to test Van Staden's reliability and credibility.
Van Staden, as the official photographer, presented his evidence in court. He was cross examined in court. His evidence was tested. Motha did not testify. He was never cross examined. His photographs were never presented to the court as the official record, never mind tested.
Because Van Staden was the official photographer, and Motha was not, there is a chain of evidence for Van Staden's photographs. But no such chain of evidence for Motha.
Because Motha was not the official photographer he had no reason to ensure the date and time on his camera was correct. But the date and time of Van Staden's original photographs were independently verified image by image by the admin clerk. So we have proof that Van Staden's camera's time and date was correct. Not so for Motha.
If the metadata of an official image is incorrect, that metadata can not be used as evidence in court. During Van Staden's cross the defense questioned him about a photograph. Nel said: Look at the metadata. Van Staden didn't take this photograph. Then Nel laughed and said that the year was incorrect. So no further questions.
We have no verified record of Motha's metadata. The metadata of every single image Van Staden took were verified by the admin clerk.
Van Staden had no reason to lie about being alone. He was the official photographer and it was his decision to be alone. If he was a liar why didn't he just lie and say he wanted Motha there?
Thank you so much for your summaries liesbeth
Thank you, minor4th.
I want to tell you how much I enjoy your posts. They are interesting and always a challenge. They stretch my mind. When I log on I can't wait to see what you'll say next because I value your opinion very highly. I don't want to sound like a fangirl, so I'll stop now and just say thank you.
Thank you for thinking so carefully about the evidence. Thank you for not accepting things at face value. Thank you for forcing me to think. And thank you for all the hard work you've done. It is very much appreciated.
minor4th
Verified Attorney
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2013
- Messages
- 8,152
- Reaction score
- 2,110
minor4th
Verified Attorney
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2013
- Messages
- 8,152
- Reaction score
- 2,110
But these were pictures that were given to the defense by the police, and you can see Motha's photos for yourself and see that they are depictions of the same crime scene that VS was photographing and at the same time.
VS was examined about whether he viewed the metadata on Motha's photos and he acknowledged that the time stamps appear to be accurate due to the sequence and subjects of the photos.
The prosecution didn't call Motha, and considering the damning photos, you kind of have to wonder why. Hopefully the defense will have Motha subpoenaed.
The judge has seen the photos for herself and she specifically allowed their admission, over Nel's objection, because they were relevant to VS' testimony. I do not think she will just dismiss the Motha photos because they are relevant to the reliability of VS' crime scene photos, they do speak for themselves, and the whole way it was handled by VS and the prosecution really undermines the reliability of VS' testimony and his photos.
Motha's camera time was never verified. And without first verifying that the time on the camera is correct, the metadata that camera allocates to a photograph can not be verified. The admin clerk first checked Van Staden's camera time and date and then confirmed the metadata of the images on his camera.
The point being that metadata can be manipulated by changing the date and or time of the camera. So without verification of the camera's time the metadata is useless.
Edit: Van Staden did not verify Motha's metadata. He just said it looked okay. Without verification of the camera's time metadata means nothing.
Edit: And since the judge is an ex-journalist, I'm betting she knows this.
minor4th
Verified Attorney
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2013
- Messages
- 8,152
- Reaction score
- 2,110
It doesn't matter if the metadata was verified - the pictures themselves demonstrate that they were taken within the same time frame as when VS was taking the original first set of photos. Look back at the timeline with pics that I posted - he was taking pictures before the bat was moved. He was taking pictures before the gun was removed, etc.
Motha was ballistics. It makes sense that ballistics moved in just after the official first round of undisturbed photographs was done. Van Staden's ballistics album has photographs from Mangena in it, so it makes sense that Motha was taking his own pictures.
Col. van Rensburg saw Motha upstairs. Motha was handling the gun without gloves and was then reprimanded by Van Rensburg.
Anyway. Without Motha's testimony, and in the absence of official records, all Motha's pictures prove is that Motha, the ballistics guy, was on the crime scene that morning. Perhaps just after Van Staden was done? Which, given normal crime scene procedure, is quite normal.
minor4th
Verified Attorney
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2013
- Messages
- 8,152
- Reaction score
- 2,110
It proves that he was in the crime scene while Van Staden was taking the pictures of a so-called "untouched" crime scene. Look at the time line of his photos.
Like I said, it wouldn't bother me except that Van Staden was so insistent that Motha wasn't there - when he clearly was.
Motha's camera's time was not verified and the records presented (and tested) as evidence in court. Van Staden's was. So Motha's timeline (metadata) is literally useless until his images have passed the same tests that Van Staden's did.
minor4th
Verified Attorney
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2013
- Messages
- 8,152
- Reaction score
- 2,110
I disagree that it's useless since it was presented to the judge, even over Nel's objection. The judge wanted to hear and see the evidence - she admitted it, so it's part of the evidence. She'll look at the timing of the photos and determine whether they were taken at the same time or not. From the photos, they had to have been taken within the time period VS was photographing the bathroom for the first time because he took very similar pictures and before items were moved and collected - e.g. the cricket bat, the gun, and the towels moved to the bathtub
Good point. I'm doing Van Staden's cross at the moment. Slow going because I'm also following the trial. So if I find anything in the cross, I'll argue it here.
I put it on record that this edit was done after minor4th thanked the post. So it was thanked as it is above, without the edit below. Just to be fair.
Edit: I just realized I don't need the cross to argue this.
The judge will indeed weigh the evidence. And she will ask herself if Van Staden had any reason to lie about Motha. (No. Van Staden was official photographer in charge and if he wanted Motha there it was his decision.)
And she'll ask herself who's camera time and metadata was verified. Van Staden.
And then she'll ask herself who is the most credible witness. Van Staden or Motha. Well, Motha never testified, so it's a no brainer.
minor4th
Verified Attorney
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2013
- Messages
- 8,152
- Reaction score
- 2,110
It's worthwhile to listen to the cross because there are additional photos that are discussed as well as the Motha photos. I think you might see might point better if you see it for yourself.
I'm not saying that Van Staden's metadata was wrong or that his pictures are wrong or anything like that. All I'm saying is it is suspicious that Van Staden is so adamant that he did not see Motha when Motha was clearly there in the crime scene when VS was taking the original bathroom pictures.
Have a look.
I will listen again.