Oscar Pistorius shoots girlfriend
Discussion
Rocksteadyeddie said:
TheSnitch said:
Bonefish Blues said:
Is he really the best the defence could get - Roux's more than experienced enough to understand the implications of calling him.
I can only assume the sole purpose of calling him was to have the grounds for Oscar's first appeal. In all seriousness, it was desperately shambolic. It did not appear that the prosecution had been provided with any of the man's reports and half of the tests had only been completed within the last week or so, meaning that nothing had been shared prior to court. He opined on every aspect of the case, yet appeared to have provided no visual aids of any description. He did a fibre comparison without having any fibres to compare and an ammunition test using different ammunition. I cannot imagine that Roux thought they were going to get away with this.
Edited by TheSnitch on Thursday 17th April 08:44
1) State Pathologist who disputed the digestion evidence and time of eating.
2) OP who shoots holes in his own defence left, right, and centre.
3) A ballistics, fibres, and audio “expert” who has fewer qualifications and less expertise than half the posters on this thread.
It’s not going that well thus far, is it?
And it continues this morning.
The only thing that is going to make this easier for Dixon is a good quality lube.
dfen5 said:
AJL308 said:
dfen5][b said:
Ref' holding the gun at your side - if you've had training of using a pistol at close quarters you don't hold it with your arms outstretched movie style (that's ok for aiming, longer shots).
You hold it close to your hip, arm back, other arm above. Too easy to be disarmed by a quick fella with it sticking out gangster style. Typical example would be when someone's 3-4 feet away and you keeping them at bay.[/b]
In the situation he was in, in a blind rage, he would have held it arms out, aimed down the sights and let the trigger go.
He let the safety off so it was premeditated murder.
Sorry but this is just total rubbish. This may be the case in every movive James Cagney ever made but not in the real world. At least not today in the real world. Tactical firearms training has come along way since then.You hold it close to your hip, arm back, other arm above. Too easy to be disarmed by a quick fella with it sticking out gangster style. Typical example would be when someone's 3-4 feet away and you keeping them at bay.[/b]
In the situation he was in, in a blind rage, he would have held it arms out, aimed down the sights and let the trigger go.
He let the safety off so it was premeditated murder.
I'm not claiming to be trained to professional levels in CQB, but I find it odd that anyone would allegedly fire 4 shots in this manner.
In fact, the only person I've ever seen demonstrate this is Mr Bond....
I've also watched video of OP live firing and he holds the weapon with both hands in a classic arms out front pose. Its marvellous that he seems now to be trained in house clearing with small arms.
ps, I couldnt hit the side of a barn at 30 paces with a Browning with both hands controlling the weapon. Not sure how the balance impaired Mr Pistorious managed 4 nicely aimed shots whilst holding it low in one hand in the dark whilst on his stumps. Impressive shooting. Whilst scared for his life. In the dark.
Well, we are an hour in and so far Dixon has contradicted both OP and another defence witness and disclosed that their ''reconstruction'' to demonstrate how much OP would be visible, on his stumps, to someone observing from outside, used a man on his knees who was a good 20cms shorter on his knees than Oscar on his stumps. Just for good measure, Dixon, who went outside to see how visible his kneeling assistant was, did not measure the distance from which he made the observation.
TheSnitch said:
Well, we are an hour in and so far Dixon has contradicted both OP and another defence witness and disclosed that their ''reconstruction'' to demonstrate how much OP would be visible, on his stumps, to someone observing from outside, used a man on his knees who was a good 20cms shorter on his knees than Oscar on his stumps. Just for good measure, Dixon, who went outside to see how visible his kneeling assistant was, did not measure the distance from which he made the observation.
I cant watch it today but this guy sounds like a clown. what are the defense thinking?TTmonkey said:
TheSnitch said:
Well, we are an hour in and so far Dixon has contradicted both OP and another defence witness and disclosed that their ''reconstruction'' to demonstrate how much OP would be visible, on his stumps, to someone observing from outside, used a man on his knees who was a good 20cms shorter on his knees than Oscar on his stumps. Just for good measure, Dixon, who went outside to see how visible his kneeling assistant was, did not measure the distance from which he made the observation.
I cant watch it today but this guy sounds like a clown. what are the defense thinking?TTmonkey said:
Floor plan for you. The majority of the living space is on the same floor, including many other rooms. If you couldn't find Reva in the main bedroom, would you walk back past the other door to the rest of the accommodation without checking there first?
It isn't. That's only a plan of the top floor. It's a two storey house.ajl.
Bonefish Blues said:
I think you well understand the point I was making, but for the avoidance of doubt, the threat in the middle of a lake when surrounded by close friends is negligible at best.
Why have a gun there when it would be more secure and safer locked in a vehicle?
The threat in the middle of a lake may well be negligible but you have to get to the lake and back from the lake. Hence, the point I was trying to make.Why have a gun there when it would be more secure and safer locked in a vehicle?
Once there it would be irresponsible to leave it in an unattended vehicle.
ajl.
Another summary OPs situation after being on the stand:
http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/Oscar_Pistorius/...
http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/Oscar_Pistorius/...
dfen5 said:
Rubbish something without demonstration of explicit experience or qualification. Care to put up?
I'm a firearms dealer, run two shooting clubs and I employ ex-police tactical firearms instructors. I've been involved with firearms in one way or another for over 25 years.Belive me - no one teaches anyone to shoot at anything from the hip. This is why firearms are fited with sights, after all.
ajl.
TheSnitch said:
Well, we are an hour in and so far Dixon has contradicted both OP and another defence witness and disclosed that their ''reconstruction'' to demonstrate how much OP would be visible, on his stumps, to someone observing from outside, used a man on his knees who was a good 20cms shorter on his knees than Oscar on his stumps. Just for good measure, Dixon, who went outside to see how visible his kneeling assistant was, did not measure the distance from which he made the observation.
He also took his photos from street level. The witness who testified he saw OP was at first floor level of his house. Other than that he did quite well on this point....
Rocksteadyeddie said:
TheSnitch said:
Well, we are an hour in and so far Dixon has contradicted both OP and another defence witness and disclosed that their ''reconstruction'' to demonstrate how much OP would be visible, on his stumps, to someone observing from outside, used a man on his knees who was a good 20cms shorter on his knees than Oscar on his stumps. Just for good measure, Dixon, who went outside to see how visible his kneeling assistant was, did not measure the distance from which he made the observation.
He also took his photos from street level. The witness who testified he saw OP was at first floor level of his house. Other than that he did quite well on this point....
This guy is taking time off from the Keystone Cops right?
Major error TheSnitch said:
Absolute madness. Dixon seems to have adopted the stance that anyone with some experience of basic methodology who has previously conducted a range of crime scene tests has a set of transferable skills which can be applied to any other forensic, pathology or other scientific discipline - and not only that but conveys upon him the status of ''expert'' in all those fields.
This is absolute madness.
Having time off work, I've been listening/watching 90% over the last two days.This is absolute madness.
I totally agree. Big case. Do we employ someone who is a Professor of forensic science, or geology?
As a location recording sound engineer myself, I picked up on the issues of the recording to demonstrate that hitting a door with a cricket bat can be misconstrued with gunshot.
If recorded and played back in a high-quality and scientific way to provide a true demonstration, even a layman could tell the difference.
That's the problem, it wasn't. As best it is a total misrepresentation by someone calling themselves an 'expert witness'. He has employed a 'music producer' whose name he has forgotten to make recordings that he did not oversee for accuracy.
That said, if I wanted to record and play back a cricket bat hitting a door and make it sound similar to a gunshot, that, would be very simple.
I thought Nel had twigged and was really going to press on this when he asked the 'expert' if he wore ear protection when the gunshot was recorded (yes, of course) and also when the cricket bat was recorded (of course, not).
That's the crux, the sound energy will be like a night and day difference - and those sound level differences were certainly not replayed to the court.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff