Trial Discussion Thread #10 - 14.03.19, Day 13

[MeeBee]

Witness seems very knowledgable. Typical defense attorney stuff, trying to make the expert sound as if they lack knowledge through their own confidence and bravado when it is really they, the attorneys who don't understand.

 

[Trooper]

these two are totally in the zone of you are wrong.. .. its quiet but its effective..

Captain is making Roux expand his questions to fit the known parameters.. not theoretical flim flam.

the captain explains. the beveling of the wound .. the entrance wound, , the splinters will go IN to the wound the exit wound.. there will be beveling, powdered matter bone matter.

ok. sounds of cricket bat. re gunfire..

the CAP was not asked to investigate the sounds re cricket bat, gunfire.. he isn't a sound man. in that respect..

ROUX wants an adjournment..
'Roux has skipped the head wound entirely. its as if if never happened..

 

[sorrell skye]

WTH??? Roux is asking Mangena about sounds of a cricket bat?

Mangena: I don't specialize in sounds.

 

[Really?]

Roux takes a lot of adjournments."...

 

[zwiebel]

Cpt: I don't specialize in sounds. I won't be able to differentiate the sounds.

In reply to R asking if he conducted sound tests.

R asks for five mins to get something. I think he needs to regroup/rethink his cross. Swot up the entire history of ballistics maybe?

 

[Trooper]

skipped over very smoothly re the head wound and its sequence in the shots fired, is what I meant to write..

in previous x-examine Roux was adamant the head shot was first, hence no scream..

but in this x examine, he went right past the order of the shots as shown by the impact of each shot..

 

[*Indigo*]

court adjourned for 5 mins while roux scrambles to find something

 

[zwiebel]

There was a dodgy moment there where R was trying to dig dirt on what state based their ballistics evidence on at the bail hearing, as it is obviously rather different from what is being presented now....

 

[MeeBee]

Cpt: I don't specialize in sounds. I won't be able to differentiate the sounds.

In reply to R asking if he conducted sound tests.

R asks for five mins to get something. I think he needs to regroup/rethink his cross. Swot up the entire history of ballistics maybe?

He probably has an expert who knows the difference between the sound of a bat and the sound of a gun. Boo yah.

 

[BritsKate]

During this adjournment:
EWN Reporter@ewnreporter#OscarPistorius Roux and Oldwage consulting with their hired ballistics expert - pointing at elbows and lifting of arms. BB

https://twitter.com/ewnreporter

 

[MeeBee]

There was a dodgy moment there where R was trying to dig dirt on what state based their ballistics evidence on at the bail hearing, as it is obviously rather different from what is being presented now....

Probably because the state initially asserted that OP was on his prosthetics but is now saying he was on his stumps, probably because of this very expert.

 

[minor4th]

I don't think there's going to be too much to cross examine this witness about. His testimony seemed factual and backed up by solid reasoning. If Roux has expert witnesses that show something different, he should just mention it to this witness and move on IMO. He is not going to do any good arguing with an expert.

 

[Really?]

We r back

 

[canny]

From prior thread:



1. I was not praising her, but I did observe that she tended to favor the defense.

2. I am not a "CDA" as I have stated, and I believe that there have been admonitions about personalizing posts in such manner.

3. I have absolutely ZERO stake in whether OP is found guilty or acquitted of all charges. I am interested in what the evidence shows.

4. He did not refuse to call the police - he called Stander at 3:19 and asked him to call ambulance; he called Netcare at 3:20; He called security at 3:21. He was not trying to hide what had happened.

And a person's actions after the fact are not typically evidence of premeditation in any event - actions after the fact can be seen as "consciousness of guilt" if they are obviously designed to misdirect an investigation or to prevent the discovery of potentially criminal acts and evidence. That did not happen here - not even a little bit.

I had no intention of getting personal under anything circumstances. Honestly speaking I concede i enjoy reading your posts for its educative value as I get an insightful and panoramic view of how CDA Roux is so brilliantly defending his client for his life and freedom, even though the evidence is overwhelming against his client. Unfortunately that thread is locked I’m unable to delete ‘in you” from the post.

Stander and his daughter interact with the police daily as part of their careers, they do know what is within legal boundaries. Don’t you think that it was their duty to advice and caution him that he had to call the police as well as Reeva’s family as it would be a violation of the law, and weaken his contention that he mistook Reeva for an intruder?

Ambulance is not Police.
Netcare is not Police.
Estate Security is not Police.
The security guard who called him up got fired the next day.

All the above are IMO steps deliberately taken by OP and his dear friends to misdirect, delay and manipulate Reeva's cold blooded premeditated murder to his advantage.

 

[zwiebel]

They're back. Roux explaining what evidence defence experts will give.

Cpt: Milady, that will be their version.

 

[BritsKate]

Coupla tweets I found amusing:

Rebecca Davis ‏@becsplanb 18m
Sorry ladies, I spy a wedding ring on Captain Mangena's finger.

Rebecca Davis ‏@becsplanb 20m
I get anxious when Roux tells witnesses to "do the tests...and come back whenever". Whenever?! Will we EVER leave this courtroom??

https://twitter.com/becsplanb

 

[zwiebel]

R: re column of abrasion on top prt of the wound?

Cpt: In my version she was standing but I don't exclude the possibility she was leaning.....I still think it's unlikely the mag rack could have caused that wound......Milady, I still stick to my theory, my version.

 

[MeeBee]

They're back. Roux explaining what evidence defence experts will give.

Cpt: Milady, that will be their version.

It will be the battle of the experts. Just like every trial, ever.

 

[minor4th]

Good. Quick cross - really only getting the defense's version in front of the judge in advance of defense expert testimony.

This was a solid witness and he explained everything well - but didn't dogmatically rule out other possibilities. Credible IMO

 

[zwiebel]

Cpt repeats that two double taps pattern are impossible.

R tries to get him to admit IF the wounds were caused by mag rack, his theory WOULD be incorrect. Witness cuts him down. He is not accepting any airy fairy 'what ifs'. He is sticking to his theory, from his own tests.