Forensic expert Roger Dixon points at the door through which Reeva Steenkamp was shot, during the trial of Olympic and Paralympic track star Oscar Pistorius at North Gauteng High Court in Pretoria. REUTERS/Siphiwe Sibeko

Pretoria - One of the defence's experts has spent the afternoon corroborating certain aspects of Oscar Pistorius' version of events of the night he shot and killed Reeva Steenkamp.

Images of Pistorius' prosthetics were also shown to the court from the night of the shooting, showing his blood drenched socks and the stains going up the legs.

Defence witness, Roger Dixon, a forensic geologist, was still explaining the marks on the bathroom door that Pistorius shot through the night he shot and killed Reeva Steenkamp.

Earlier he said the marks indicated that Pistorius had only used a cricket bat to break it down after the shooting.

He also identified a white coloured impact mark that he said proved Pistorius had tried to kick the door down with his prosthetic legs.

The grooves on the cricket bat also revealed to Dixon the force Pistorius had used when it made the deep marks on the door.

A scrape high on the door had been made by the bat compressing against the wood.

Dixon also showed shoe prints on the door that indicated investigators had walked on the door while it was on the ground. He said this could compromise forensic details as some of them fell on the bullet holes.

Images of these holes showed the large splinters blown out of the back of the door.

Dixon said that two sizes of splinters were created by the black talon ammunition that would have flown out of the door in different directions.

Dixon said after Steenkamp had been washed, he noted small discolourations on her body. These were not bruises but splinters from the door, which acted as secondary projectiles along with the bullets.

Dixon said that these sort of marks were found on Steenkamp's arm as it was facing the door.

An image of Steenkamp's wounds was presented to the court, showing two deep bruises on the model's back.

The skin around the lower bruise was slightly punctured.

The upper bruise showed striations that indicated they were created by Steenkamp falling against a hard object, like the magazine rack in the toilet cubicle.

Two small abrasions on Steenkamp's rear were probably created by falling on the rack as well.

The state's expert believed that the marks of Steenkamp's back were caused by bullet fragments ricocheting off the cubicle wall.

Dixon disagreed with this theory. Defence advocate Barry Roux mentioned a bullet core that had been found in the toilet after the police's investigation.

Dixon said this could have come from the fourth bullet that did not cause one of Steenkamp's major wounds.

The case continues on Wednesday.

The Star