Based on your logic it's just about as reasonable to say the two sets of sounds were 1) Bat strikes 2) Unknown. Not that reasonable in my view. But anyway. As you know, the determination of which came first did not depend on sound, so your logical leap on the certainty that can or can't flow from that is irrelevant. I only addressed the screaming that was testified to occuring during and slightly after the second sounds. It's not an assumption that Reeva was shot through a closed door in the toilet. It's not an assumption that the state's case is that Reeva was shot at around 3:17 and that it was her screaming at that time. What is a wild assumption is that prying out a panel necessarily made no sound(!). This is exactly what I mean. There is virtually nothing you said here that is relevant and not at least slightly non-sensical.
Bottom line is that the state's testimony is that the door was broken through with a bat strike and that the wedged bat was levered to split apart the panels and break the door. Many, many people haves substituted their own judgement for that with no basis in reason. I'm still waiting for somebody, anybody to explain why their judgement should be accepted over the state's own witness, the defence witnesses and, yes, Pistorius' unchanged story on this aspect of events.
Hi June
Firstly, I wasn't listing gunshots and bat sounds in the order I think they occured...although it does look like that. Apologies. I was very tired last night. I just meant...two sets ouf sounds, one set certainly gunshots, the other possibly the cricket bat.
With no evidence to clue us in, we have no reliable way of determining which set came first, because to the only witnesses they sounded identical. Plus, there is actually no forensic or scientific way of knowing either.
All we know for certain is:
OP fired 4 shots
Reeva was behind the door when he did
A panel was prised out of the door after the gunshots
That's it.
Every other part of your theory is assumption.
Yes, the State said "around 3.17". That was because Mrs Stipp's clock said that time when she heard them, so that's how they were identified...and this separated them from the earlier bangs.
Bottom line...the State does not know what time the shots were fired, because the State was not there.
There seems to be this idea that if the State cannot using their gift of second sight to tell us all exactly what happened that night, then they have somehow failed. This is daft. One living person was there and he doesn't seem inclined to tell the truth, so we will never know.
All we have is a jumble of witness testimony that simply does not fit together. Not even the defence can allign the testimony of Johnson & Stipp, which is why they demeaned themselves by calling Dr Stipp a liar.
So the only logical, reasonable POV currently is agnosticism....we don't know. Frustrating, but that's where we're at.
There are some things we do know, however.....
The four people who heard a woman screaming also heard a man's voice at the same time. All of them. This is massively significant.
The other witnesses who used the word "crying" only heard one voice, and almost all of them said it was unmistakably male.
It stretches the bounds of all credibility to suggest that one distinct set of witnesses were simultaneously making exactly the same mistakes in what they were hearing, while another set were doing the same but with a different mistake.
I would also like to add that, with regard to the smashed in bath panel, you are logically wrong to dismiss it as irrelevant. It is neutral evidence - yet another big question mark. It is therefore just as likely to be extremely significant as it is to be totally irrelevant. We don't know.
To be clear, I am not saying you are wrong, we are right. You may well be bang on the money - gun/oscar screams like a girl in two distinct tones/bat. But equally, you might not.
The evidence does not exist to prove it one way or the other.
I don't know specifically what happened that night...but looking at the evidence in it's totality, I don't believe Pistorius. I think the female screams were female and the male cries were male. I don't believe the police tampered with the scene before photographing it, I do believe that his phone was on charge in the kitchen.
All of these things prove that he is a liar.
lease:
