Perhaps that is her normal sleeping attire.

Pathologist outlines cold details of Reeva's injuries
2014-03-10 13:47

Pretoria – Oscar Pistorius retched loudly in the dock as the cold details of tissue damage, bone fragments and lesions on his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp's body were explained to the North Gauteng High Court in Pretoria on Monday.

"Mr Roux can you just attend to your client - I am not sure what's happening there," said Judge Thokozile Masipa.

Pistorius had already been granted a short adjournment when he broke down as pathologist Professor Gert Saayman started going through the two and a half page pathology report on Steenkamp's body after Pistorius shot her on 14 February 2013.

"... Upper arm somewhat deformed due to associated fracture..." set off a bout of loud hunched retching.

"The wounds were caused by multiple small fragments. There was bruising in skin around the wounds, there was also bluish discolouration surrounding the wounds."

Steenkamp was wearing grey Nike shorts and a black vest when shot.

Pistorius pressed his hands on his ears.

Flipping through a file of photographs, Saayman described penetrating injuries and superficial abrasions in a brisk manner.

"The overall appearance shows the entry point to be around 92cm from the ground," said Saayman, specifying that he was talking about a wound in Steenkamp's right hip.

He said a defect he had seen on Steenkamp's pants were in line with this wound. Steenkamp had also sustained injuries to her left groin but these were superficial, small abrasions.

"This was possibly caused by wooden splinters," said Saayman.

"These did not penetrate the skin," he said.

Saayman also spoke of a wound that he noted on Steenkamp's hand between two of her fingers.

Other than these wounds, Steenkamp sustained a gunshot wound to the head.

...more at link
http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/Oscar ... s-20140310

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

The wounds were horrific as we might have expected.... made worse it seems by the type of ammunition used. That is seen by some posters as another mark against OP but...... it is a standard type of ammunition, made in USA as it happens (Winchester). One can question the need to resort to "deadly force" but if one is to do that then you certainly do NOT want ammunition that bounces off, or merely tickles the target individual. Common advice is that if you do have to shoot... shoot to KILL... multiple shots to the centre of body mass.

Predictably the info that has been released has fired up the Lynch Mobs at "True Gossip Forums"


Every mention of the word "bruise" is taken as indication of prior injuries... OP beating Reeva prior to the shooting... OP likely a violent spouse beater and abuser! (Call in Alyce la Violette)
Notions of the cricket bat used to bash Reeva are still bubbling away?

Despite the horrific and sensational nature of this evidence... I don't see it adding to the prosecution case at all. It might have done if a Jury had been involved, but one hopes that Judges know that decisions should not be made out of sympathy for the victim and family.

The horrific damage done to Reeva does not address the central issue of "Is Pistorious lying" did he KNOW Reeva was behind the door, or did he genuinely think it was an intruder.

I do think the evidence CONFIRMS that OP shot through a shut door BEFORE bashing the door with a cricket bat.

To persist in denying that is delusional.

So it does seem that the two sets of noises, BOTH sounding like gunshots to Stipp, were first the shots, and secondly a couple of minutes later the sound of OP hitting the door with the bat. Burger and Hubby heard the cricket bat, despite what they imagine the bangs they heard to be.

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

I agree with you entirely. All that this evidence shows is that he shot her. Once again we come back to the situation which prevails in modern day South Africa, if you have a gun in your house, you will most certainly use it to kill or injure if you or your property is under threat.

The gun was fired before he hit the door with a cricket bat, I think that's patently obvious. Regardless of the evidence above and the evidence still to come, we know he shot her of course, but what has to be proved is that he intended to shoot Reeva and no - one else, and that it was therefore 100% premeditated. I don't think the prosecution have even come close to this. Only two people know what happened that night, and one of them survived.

Some of the shots as entering the body of Reeva would also indicate to me they were fired low down - just a thought with regard to whether he was wearing prosthesis or not!

_________________
Since we are destined to live out our lives in the prison of our minds, our one duty is to furnish it well~Peter Ustinov

I have read that the prosecution have conceded that he fired while NOT wearing prosthetics... of course I would like to see that confirmed by evidence presented in court. The ballistics evidence. Maybe they will show the actual door with ballistics dowels showing the angles of the bullet trajectories.

I am still around 50/50 on OP lying... perhaps leaning a little towards believing him. Nel needs to do a lot better

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

Let's suppose he's telling the truth about that night. Imagine if you are totally innocent of a crime such as this one, and you are a famous athlete - which he is, how awful it must be to think you may be facing at least 25 years in prison in a few weeks' time.

No wonder he was sick in court, I can't imagine what it must be like having something like this haunt you on a daily basis - if you're innocent. If you are as guilty as hell, I don't care how you're feeling or what's going through your mind. My sympathies will always be with the victim in either scenario, but I just found myself tonight wondering how all this must feel to him - IF HE'S INNOCENT.

_________________
Since we are destined to live out our lives in the prison of our minds, our one duty is to furnish it well~Peter Ustinov

More of the secret hidden stuff tonight I fear... but maybe we will get past that.

I will TRY and find any snippets of info to update the Trial Thread... but unless there is proper coverage from the court I wont unlock the thread.

Pistorius Trial
viewtopic.php?f=105&t=1210&p=71456#p71456


Feel free to post and discuss anything in this thread though.

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

WOW!!!

Although I have posted and discussed the bat sound being mistaken for a gun shot... I thought would not sound similar at all, but.....

I really was surprised how much the bat sounded like a gun. At some distance... from inside a house with reverberations etc... this is totally plausible.

BIG score for OP I would say.

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

I'm glad you found this clip - you know living in SA, I think most people hearing those noises will automatically assume it's a gun - you're right because it sounds very similar, and most would not assume it was the noise made by a cricket bat at all.

I'm quite amazed as I had nothing to compare the sound of a gun vs cricket bat before - good work R.

Looks like day 2 of no coverage as the Dr. is still giving evidence.

_________________
Since we are destined to live out our lives in the prison of our minds, our one duty is to furnish it well~Peter Ustinov

Hi Wroughead.

At 3:00AM .... NOBODY'S first thought when hearing 3 or 4 loud bangs is going to be....

"Damn the neighbours are hitting their toilet door with a cricket bat" (again)

If gun shots are "common"... at least as far as...
EVERYBODY in SA knows what a gun shot (at night) sounds like. (As the Burger+Hubby team alluded)

... then a "volley of bangs" will be assumed to be gun shots. The witnesses all assumed that.

Unless you were prompted I guess "cricket bat on toilet door" would struggle to make a Top 20 list of guesses


Which all goes to demonstrate that Ear witnesses should STICK to testifying as to what they HEARD and not what they imagine it was that caused the noise.


ASIDE:
Thank heavens SA does not have a Jury system... I shudder to imagine Michelle Burger (or her husband) being on a jury.
Not only have they shown how wrong they can both be (despite having been shown at least that as a strong possibility) they are both STUBBORN in their refusal to accept facts and concede that they are wrong. They wilfully refuse to absorb evidence that is contrary to their preconceived and fixed notions... to the point of denying reality rather than modifying their beliefs to fit new facts... delusional.

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

Yes and it is certainly to be hoped that in the place of a jury the Judge will reach the right decision - it remains to be seen.

It is turning out to be of more interest to me than I had first thought. Watch this space, more to come I think.

_________________
Since we are destined to live out our lives in the prison of our minds, our one duty is to furnish it well~Peter Ustinov

Glad you ARE interested Wroughead...

....otherwise I'd be posting to myself

Not as much interest in USA as for USA crimes/trials... and it is live at an unsuitable time for US peeps

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

I've been lurking.

Anyone know who the people beside the judge and the woman below the judge are?

Glad to have you "lurking" rovatek


Beside the Judge are two "assistant judges" for want of a better term... they do get to join the Judge for deliberations... but I gather it's still the Judge who has final say

I guess below is court clerks etc.

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

There is no jury system in South Africa, and there hasn't been since 1969. Instead in Capital trials such as this, the Judge reaches the decision. The two people sitting on either side of her are Assessors - they are legal experts.

The judge at this trial is interestingly a former crime reporter in the apartheid era, who went on to study law before becoming an advocate, she was 43 when she passed the bar in 1998, only the second black woman to sit on the High Court.

Judge Masipa has a reputation as a highly articulate but reserved presiding officer who has been known to hand down stiff sentences when it comes to crimes in which women have been victims.

She has previously sentenced convicted rapists to life terms.

_________________
Since we are destined to live out our lives in the prison of our minds, our one duty is to furnish it well~Peter Ustinov

Thanks Wroughead.

The testimony by Darrin is significant... not because of the gun incidents as such... they are piddling and almost irrelevant...

But... it is looking like the incidents happened as Prosecutor alleged... and OP has DENIED them adamantly. It brings OP's honesty into question. That is FAR more important than the incidents themselves.

I reiterate.. it is OP's honesty (about what happened when he shot Reeva) that is the critical part of this trial. Finally Nel is on the right track

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

Roux is doing great... I now have my doubts about Darrin's testimony.

I was kinda too good to be true for the prosecution and as they say "If it sounds too good to be true... it probably is"

He has very selective memory... only remembers bits that support what the prosecution would like to be true (rehearsed and coached). Can not actually remember events other than that..... and you have to be wary of the motive of immunity deal that he has done with prosecution. AND its always suspicious when court testimony has added stuff not included in previous statements.

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

It seems that in SA it is normal and accepted for prosecutors to rehearse testimony with witnesses. (May be same for defence... we will see) But obviously previous testimony is "massaged" to say the least... descriptive emotional adjectives added etc. Things are left out and then avoided on questioning. For instance the Burger twins went from hearing "screams" to hearing "Blood curdling screams". Nel was coaching Darrin Fresco openly in court.

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light