Nel: Do you know the DSM5?
Nel: And all the disorders are listed in the DSM 5. And all on the panel stated that the accused did not suffer from any of the disorders listed in the DSM 5.
Nel: I just want to go back to the "running", when you asked OP why he mentioned "ran" he demonstrated something to you.
Nel: And what he demonstrated to you is what you demonstrated to the court on Thursday.
WD: No, my lady. I never moved from the box on Thursday.
Nel: You described to us.
WD: How he moved and then he demonstrated to me how he ran down the corridor in chambers.
Nel: So in fact he demonstrated how he ran?
Nel: He never moved cautiously?
WD: No, in order to run both feet need to be off the ground at the same time.
Nel: Was it every demonstrated to you that OP could walk backwards on his stumps?
Nel: Do you think it is possible?
WD: I don't see why it could not be possible.
Nel: Now, in your explanation of the demonstration the accused had his one hand against the wall?
WD: No, when I saw him, when I asked him to show me what he meant by run, I am not sure if he had both his hands against the wall while running.
Nel: Why are you not sure, you gave the evidence.
WD: I am not sure my lady.
Nel: At least we have this concession. "I don't know if he is able to run without having his hand against the wall"
Nel: Think back to the demonstration of that the accused showed you, he had the gun in the right hand?
WD: I think that is correct. I cannot remember if he held his hand out like in a gun.
Nel: You see, I find this answer interesting.
Nel: But let me just unpack it a bit. When he walked at least he had the gun in his right hand?
Nel: You see professor, let me just get to this evidence. My lady I am just paging through the record.
Nel: I will get to it during the break, my recollection is that when I am wrong I will apologise again.
Nel: You asked him a question, you wanted to clear up that you read in the record " I ran" and he demonstrated how.
WD: Yes, my lady I asked him to show me and that is what he did.
WD: No, I described how he moved down the corridor.
Nel: And that is what you described in court on Thursday?
Nel: You see I am going to refer you to the record.
Nel: I make the inference about running and you explained to me.
WD: My lady, this is quite confusing. When I asked him how he moved, there are two separate indications here. I asked him how he moved and how he ran.
Nel: Line 18, goes on further here.
Nel: So, this walking down with one hand on the side structure is not right?
Nel: Do you know when he ran that night?
WD: It is still not clear to me.