Barry Roux, defense attorney for Oscar Pistorius, sits in court. Picture: DANIEL BORN

Pretoria - Jackie de Wet, a forensic criminologist and forensic psychologist at the University of KwaZulu-Natal, said defence lawyer Barry Roux’s cross-examination of crime scene photographer Bennie van Staden had been an attempt to establish time lines which he could contrast against other evidence at a later stage.

“There is a possibility that subsequent to this, they will then attempt to plug in other photos and maybe debunk certain aspects of testimony.”

He said this type of tedious and meticulous testimony was about further establishing doubt in the mind of the court.

De Wet said possible changes to physical evidence had also formed a major part of testimony.

He said the defence’s goal was not just to show evidence might have been tampered with, but to try to make the evidence point towards Pistorius’s version of events. “They want to show the evidence doesn’t point to an intentional, but an accidental killing.”