Oscar Pistorius ‘on stumps’ when smashing down door

Oscar Pistorius was on his stumps when he smashed down a toilet door to get to his fatally wounded girlfriend, a forensic analyst said at the athlete’s murder trial in Pretoria on Wednesday, contradicting the accused’s statement that he was wearing prostheses at the time.

The toilet door from the double amputee Paralympic star’s home – and the cricket bat used to break it in – were both brought to court on Wednesday as Police Colonel Johannes Vermeulen wielded a bat to demonstrate the state’s case.

The fact that Pistorius beat the toilet door with a cricket bat on the night Reeva Steenkamp was killed is agreed by both defence and the state.

If he had enough balance to hit the door with a firearm (on stumps), then he would have had enough balance to hit the door with a cricket bat Colonel Vermeulen

But whether he was wearing prosthetic legs, and whether the cricket bat was used before or after the bullets were shot, is what is contested. Further forensic evidence on the grouping of the shots, where Pistorius was standing and when the bat was used, will be heard during the trial.

Pistorius has said that he felt extremely vulnerable to potential threats from intruders, because of his disability, and shot because he thought Steenkamp was a burglar. He said he put on his prosthetic legs and beat the door with the bat after firing four shots through the door.

The prosecution argues that the Valentines Day death last year was premeditated murder, following an argument between the couple. Earlier in the week, a pathologist told the court that Steenkamp had eaten a meal at around 1am, around two hours before she died, contradicting the athlete’s account that they were both in bed from 10pm the night before.

Read more: One law for the rich? What the trial says about life for South Africa’s elite

‘The marks are consistent with him not having his legs on’

Wielding the cricket bat in his hands, Colonel Vermeulen demonstrated beating the bullet-marked door with a cricket bat in various positions to show what movements would have resulted in the marks on the door. The court reconstruction showed the position of the marks and suggested they could only have been made by someone much shorter than the colonel – or someone on stumps.

The mark on the door from the cricket bat is at 1.53 metres high, the court heard. When standing, the colonel hit the door with the bat, and made a mark at 1.85 metres high.

Col Vermeulen said: “The marks on the door are actually consistent with him not having his legs on and I suspect they must be similar to the height that he was when he fired the shots.”

Initially there was some confusion in court, as the state’s position on whether Pistorius was wearing prostheses has changed since the evidence it presented at the bail hearing last year.

#OscarTrial Effectively Roux cross-examining the procedures used for preserving evidence

— Debora Patta (@Debora_Patta) March 12, 2014

#OscarTrial Roux scornful and incredulous over failure of police to investigate whether prosthetic legs kicking the door caused the mark

— Debora Patta (@Debora_Patta) March 12, 2014

#OscarTrial The impression being given is that police were careless and forensic evidence was not properly collected and preserved

— Debora Patta (@Debora_Patta) March 12, 2014

Police investigation under scrutiny

And Pistorius’s defence lawyer, Barry Roux, questioned why the colonel’s findings were not in the original police report, casting doubt over the thoroughness of the police investigation and the way that it was carried out. He has previously accused the police of oversights and slip-ups in their initial handling of the evidence during the bail hearing last year, and Hilton Botha, lead detective at the time, was dropped from the case in the middle of the hearing.

Under cross-examination, the colonel admitted that a certified tool mark examiner had attended the autopsy, but as far as he knew, had not been asked to examine the door. He insisted that evidence from the scene of the killing was securely guarded, but admitted that photos shown in court appeared to show that something had happened to the door after it was collected.

‘He would have had enough balance’

With regard to the conclusions about Pistorius’s prostheses, Mr Roux asked the colonel to stand further away from the door while hitting it with the bat, to see if the resulting mark would be closer to the mark made by the accused.

But the colonel rejected his supposition, saying he would have to be in an “uncomfortable” and “unnatural” position to make the marks while standing.

When questioned about the balance Pistorius may have had while on his stumps, the colonel added: “If he had enough balance to hit the door with a firearm, then he would have had enough balance to hit the door with a cricket bat”.

Pistorius said in his bail application that he shot his girlfriend by mistake, fearing she was an intruder, and then broke the door with a cricket bat to get to his girlfriend when he realised what had happened.

It reads: “I put on my prosthetic legs, ran back to the bathroom and tried to kick the toilet door open… I went back into the bedroom and grabbed my cricket bat to bash open the toilet door.”

The case continues.