Oscar Pistorius, das Model, der Valentinstag und das war dann Notwehr

Van Staden vs Motha. Let's look at what we know.

We have Van Staden's original, unaltered, sequential photographs. Verified independently.

We have no such record for Motha. All we have from Motha are a few images cherry picked by the defense in an attempt to test Van Staden's reliability and credibility.

Van Staden, as the official photographer, presented his evidence in court. He was cross examined in court. His evidence was tested. Motha did not testify. He was never cross examined. His photographs were never presented to the court as the official record, never mind tested.

Because Van Staden was the official photographer, and Motha was not, there is a chain of evidence for Van Staden's photographs. But no such chain of evidence for Motha.

Because Motha was not the official photographer he had no reason to ensure the date and time on his camera was correct. But the date and time of Van Staden's original photographs were independently verified image by image by the admin clerk. So we have proof that Van Staden's camera's time and date was correct. Not so for Motha.

If the metadata of an official image is incorrect, that metadata can not be used as evidence in court. During Van Staden's cross the defense questioned him about a photograph. Nel said: Look at the metadata. Van Staden didn't take this photograph. Then Nel laughed and said that the year was incorrect. So no further questions.

We have no verified record of Motha's metadata. The metadata of every single image Van Staden took were verified by the admin clerk.

Van Staden had no reason to lie about being alone. He was the official photographer and it was his decision to be alone. If he was a liar why didn't he just lie and say he wanted Motha there?

Conmen cash in on Oscar

http://www.iol.co.za/news/crime-courts/conmen-cash-in-on-oscar-1.1698026#.U444yPldOna

KlaraFall schrieb:Link hast du noch?

Interested schrieb:Oh mein Gott, sollen die Fans jetzt tatsächlich Geld spenden???

Interested schrieb:Roux, Roux, what did you do? :D

Interested schrieb:Vielleicht bereitet Roux derweil drei, vier verschiedene Plädoyers vor :D

Looking at pictures from the scene including blood spatter and ballistics, Van Staden says pictures marked as being taken on February 15 were actually taken on March 8.

But these were pictures that were given to the defense by the police, and you can see Motha's photos for yourself and see that they are depictions of the same crime scene that VS was photographing and at the same time.

VS was examined about whether he viewed the metadata on Motha's photos and he acknowledged that the time stamps appear to be accurate due to the sequence and subjects of the photos.

The prosecution didn't call Motha, and considering the damning photos, you kind of have to wonder why. Hopefully the defense will have Motha subpoenaed.

The judge has seen the photos for herself and she specifically allowed their admission, over Nel's objection, because they were relevant to VS' testimony. I do not think she will just dismiss the Motha photos because they are relevant to the reliability of VS' crime scene photos, they do speak for themselves, and the whole way it was handled by VS and the prosecution really undermines the reliability of VS' testimony and his photos.

Tussinelda schrieb:(eine hier anerkannte Quelle, wie ich hoffe)

The judge will indeed weigh the evidence. And she will ask herself if Van Staden had any reason to lie about Motha. (No. Van Staden was official photographer in charge and if he wanted Motha there it was his decision.)
And she'll ask herself who's camera time and metadata was verified. Van Staden.
And then she'll ask herself who is the most credible witness. Van Staden or Motha. Well, Motha never testified, so it's a no brainer.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=10517921

Van Staden is back on the stand. Roux is cross-examining.
Roux reviews some photos of the cricket bat and the gun on the shower mat and points out that the items are lying in different positions from photo to photo, yet these are supposed to be images of how the scene was found (album 1).

He also introduces photos to Van Staden that were taken by another investigator (Motha) on the scene. These images appear to have time stamps that are similar or the same as the time stamps on Van Staden’s photos, therefore indicating that they were both in the same rooms together. Yet, Van Staden had stated that he was photographing alone. He claims to not have seen Motha in these rooms at the same time that he was photographing which seems like it would be impossible. Roux is trying to illustrate that the integrity of the scene may have been jeopardized if multiple people were photographing and moving items.

Nel then counters to save Van Staden on a few points. He did bring up that Motha is not seen in any of Van Staden’s photos. And Van Staden is not seen in any of Motha’s photos. Although, there was one photo that Roux pointed out did have a hand in it, but it was not Van Staden’s photo so he couldn’t confirm whose hand it was.

(...)

Overall, it seems as if Van Staden has delivered albums containing quite a bit of detailed information but the question that Roux raises is what elements of that information have been compromised. The early police investigation at the direction of Botha certainly was not as tight as we all would like to have seen. This is a hurdle that the State will have to continue to get past and Roux is doing a good job of making their missteps known. Van Staden is excused.

http://juror13lw.wordpress.com/2014/03/19/oscar-pistorius-trial-days-12-and-13/

CRIME SCENE PROCEDURES

The discoveries, inventions, and theories of our forensic science fore bearers have all culminated into what we know today as the criminal investigation. Often, that investigation begins upon discovery of a crime scene. The information on criminal investigations, and crime scene procedure, is covered in scores of books. A basic overview of crime scene procedures is covered below.

http://harfordmedlegal.typepad.com/forensics_talk/2006/10/crime_scene_pro.html