05-08-2014, 10:56 AM
THE LAST MEAL
The defense called Christina Lundgren, an anaesthetist, as an expert witness. She was shown copies of the post mortem report and testified that there were many factors that could have delayed gastric emptying in Ms Steenkamp's stomach, including sleep, exercise, medication, and her age.
"In an ideal world, after six hours of fasting after [the] meal her stomach should probably have been empty. But there are so many unknowns about possible factors that might have delayed gastric emptying," she said.
"One cannot state it as being fact" that Ms Steenkamp's stomach would have been empty six hours after eating, Prof Lundgren said. "I would say it is purely speculative."
In his cross-examination, prosecutor Gerrie Nel indicated that Prof Lungdren's list of factors that could delay gastric emptying may not apply to Ms Steenkamp.
Nel added that in normal circumstances one would expect the stomach to be empty eight hours after eating food. He also point out to her that the state's expert, Saayman, was able to identify vegetables in the stomach content and asked her if that would be possible after 8 hours. She said, "no comment" and that she didn't want to criticize Saayman.
It's the prosecution's contention that Pistorius is lying about the time line because he and Reeva were up arguing late that night and early into the morning when she was shot and killed.
THE SURPRISE WITNESS
The defense called a social worker and probation officer who visited Pistorius in a police cell a day after he fatally shot Reeva Steenkamp to testify. The social worker's testimony was unexpected. She said she only contacted Pistorius' defense team two days earlier to say she was willing to testify.
Social worker Yvette van Schalkwyk said she observed an emotionally devastated Pistorius last year who was grieving for his slain girlfriend and concerned for her parents.
"I saw a heartbroken man. He cried 80 percent of the time. He talked to me about what they planned for the future, his future with her," said van Schalkwyk, who told the court that she decided to testify at the trial because she was upset by suggestions reported in the media that Pistorius was feigning grief to sway the judge in his favor.
Gerrie Nel, the chief prosecutor, objected to van Schalkwyk's testimony, saying it was not relevant to the charges against Pistorius, but the judge allowed her to proceed.
Nel countered that it was hardly surprising that Pistorius would be traumatized immediately after killing his girlfriend amid intense global interest in the case, and pushed van Schalkwyk to acknowledge that Pistorius never specifically said to her he was sorry he killed Steenkamp. That omission, according to Nel, supported his contention that Pistorius was feeling sorry for himself and was unwilling to take responsibility.
"It's all about him," the prosecutor said.
Sources:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-27321709
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/05/08/...last-meal/
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story...=310659483
The defense called Christina Lundgren, an anaesthetist, as an expert witness. She was shown copies of the post mortem report and testified that there were many factors that could have delayed gastric emptying in Ms Steenkamp's stomach, including sleep, exercise, medication, and her age.
"In an ideal world, after six hours of fasting after [the] meal her stomach should probably have been empty. But there are so many unknowns about possible factors that might have delayed gastric emptying," she said.
"One cannot state it as being fact" that Ms Steenkamp's stomach would have been empty six hours after eating, Prof Lundgren said. "I would say it is purely speculative."
In his cross-examination, prosecutor Gerrie Nel indicated that Prof Lungdren's list of factors that could delay gastric emptying may not apply to Ms Steenkamp.
Nel added that in normal circumstances one would expect the stomach to be empty eight hours after eating food. He also point out to her that the state's expert, Saayman, was able to identify vegetables in the stomach content and asked her if that would be possible after 8 hours. She said, "no comment" and that she didn't want to criticize Saayman.
It's the prosecution's contention that Pistorius is lying about the time line because he and Reeva were up arguing late that night and early into the morning when she was shot and killed.
THE SURPRISE WITNESS
The defense called a social worker and probation officer who visited Pistorius in a police cell a day after he fatally shot Reeva Steenkamp to testify. The social worker's testimony was unexpected. She said she only contacted Pistorius' defense team two days earlier to say she was willing to testify.
Social worker Yvette van Schalkwyk said she observed an emotionally devastated Pistorius last year who was grieving for his slain girlfriend and concerned for her parents.
"I saw a heartbroken man. He cried 80 percent of the time. He talked to me about what they planned for the future, his future with her," said van Schalkwyk, who told the court that she decided to testify at the trial because she was upset by suggestions reported in the media that Pistorius was feigning grief to sway the judge in his favor.
Gerrie Nel, the chief prosecutor, objected to van Schalkwyk's testimony, saying it was not relevant to the charges against Pistorius, but the judge allowed her to proceed.
Nel countered that it was hardly surprising that Pistorius would be traumatized immediately after killing his girlfriend amid intense global interest in the case, and pushed van Schalkwyk to acknowledge that Pistorius never specifically said to her he was sorry he killed Steenkamp. That omission, according to Nel, supported his contention that Pistorius was feeling sorry for himself and was unwilling to take responsibility.
"It's all about him," the prosecutor said.
Sources:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-27321709
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/05/08/...last-meal/
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story...=310659483