OSCAR Pistorius’s defence may have been dealt a crippling blow when its expert witness admitted he drew “layman” conclusions on vital evidence.
Eyes, ears and a camera were the tools Richard Dixon, head of the University of Pretoria’s geology laboratory, used to determine, among others, sounds and light emitted from Pistorius’s Silver Woods Estate home the night he shot his girlfriend, Reeva Steenkamp.
“I admit I am not a forensic pathologist … I look at marks and appearances … I used my layman’s understanding,” said the former police forensics analyst.
Dixon’s admission followed his earlier statement he was not an expert in ballistics, fibres, sound, light, toxicology and DNA; that he had failed to fully read the state pathologist’s postmortem report and he had to do an internet search to listen to the sounds of gunshots.
Pistorius’ neighbours, who are state witnesses, testified to hearing a woman’s screams between gunshots on the morning of the shooting.
The defence maintains that a second set of noises, which Pistorius’ neighbours claim were gunshots, were the sounds of Pistorius bashing open his toilet door with a cricket bat to reach Steenkamp.
Dixon also revealed the defence’s test to see if a cricket bat sounded like a gunshot when hit against a door was done at an outdoor shooting range and not indoors. Pistorius was inside his bathroom when he bashed open the locked toilet door.
It was during this test, which included listening to gunshots from different distances, that Dixon suggested to the sound recordist to simply repeat the sound of one shot being fired to emulate bullets fired in rapid succession.
Pistorius claims he fired at the door rapidly, believing an intruder inside was going to attack him.
“So you are telling us what was played to court was not correct,” asked Nel.
Dixon said he made the suggestion after the replica gun used in the test repeatedly jammed.
“I discovered if I clicked rapidly on a button on my computer I could emulate gunshots fired rapidly.”
Nel asked: “Interesting; you didn’t tell us this earlier. Do you have knowledge of a second test?”
Dixon said all he knew was that it was done.
Nel, questioning Dixon on his pathology and ballistics expertise, asked if he had seen any final reports.
“Yes, the ballistics one,” replied Dixon.
“Really, what’s in it? If you can’t tell us, does that mean you actually only saw the draft?”
Dixon said there were some differences, but he couldn’t remember.
“But you are testifying on ballistics, what can’t you remember?”
Dixon replied it was difficult to answer.
“Do you see how irresponsible it is to comment in a field in which you are not an expert,” said Nel.
Prosecutor deals Oscar’s defence a severe blow
Eyes, ears and a camera were the tools Richard Dixon, head of the University of Pretoria’s geology laboratory, used to determine, among others, sounds and light emitted from Pistorius’s Silver Woods Estate home the night he shot his girlfriend, Reeva Steenkamp.
“I admit I am not a forensic pathologist … I look at marks and appearances … I used my layman’s understanding,” said the former police forensics analyst.
Dixon’s admission followed his earlier statement he was not an expert in ballistics, fibres, sound, light, toxicology and DNA; that he had failed to fully read the state pathologist’s postmortem report and he had to do an internet search to listen to the sounds of gunshots.
Pistorius’ neighbours, who are state witnesses, testified to hearing a woman’s screams between gunshots on the morning of the shooting.
The defence maintains that a second set of noises, which Pistorius’ neighbours claim were gunshots, were the sounds of Pistorius bashing open his toilet door with a cricket bat to reach Steenkamp.
Dixon also revealed the defence’s test to see if a cricket bat sounded like a gunshot when hit against a door was done at an outdoor shooting range and not indoors. Pistorius was inside his bathroom when he bashed open the locked toilet door.
It was during this test, which included listening to gunshots from different distances, that Dixon suggested to the sound recordist to simply repeat the sound of one shot being fired to emulate bullets fired in rapid succession.
Pistorius claims he fired at the door rapidly, believing an intruder inside was going to attack him.
“So you are telling us what was played to court was not correct,” asked Nel.
Dixon said he made the suggestion after the replica gun used in the test repeatedly jammed.
“I discovered if I clicked rapidly on a button on my computer I could emulate gunshots fired rapidly.”
Nel asked: “Interesting; you didn’t tell us this earlier. Do you have knowledge of a second test?”
Dixon said all he knew was that it was done.
Nel, questioning Dixon on his pathology and ballistics expertise, asked if he had seen any final reports.
“Yes, the ballistics one,” replied Dixon.
“Really, what’s in it? If you can’t tell us, does that mean you actually only saw the draft?”
Dixon said there were some differences, but he couldn’t remember.
“But you are testifying on ballistics, what can’t you remember?”
Dixon replied it was difficult to answer.
“Do you see how irresponsible it is to comment in a field in which you are not an expert,” said Nel.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Register (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.
Trending Now
Latest Videos