Recovered bullets and fragments were matched to the firearm Pistorius admitted using—a 9mm pistol. Cartridge cases found in the bathroom provided additional data on the firing position and possible movement during the sequence. Experts also considered ricochet marks and the final resting places of projectiles inside the small toilet cubicle. ## Trajectory Analysis and Height Determination Trajectory rods or laser systems were inserted through the bullet holes in the door to establish the paths the rounds followed. These paths were plotted in three dimensions relative to the toilet bowl, walls, and floor. The resulting angles indicated the height at which the muzzle was held when each shot was fired. A key point of contention was whether Pistorius was standing on his prosthetic legs or on his stumps. Lower trajectory heights supported the conclusion that he was on his stumps at the time of firing, placing the gun lower than if he had been wearing prostheses. Higher trajectories would have been expected if he had been standing fully upright on the prostheses. Reconstruction diagrams presented in court illustrated these height differences for the court.
Steenkamp’s body position was reconstructed from wound locations and blood evidence. The first shot appeared to have struck her while she was standing or rising near the toilet. Subsequent shots struck her as she fell or moved, producing wounds consistent with a changing posture inside the confined space. Ballistics findings were correlated with autopsy results showing the path of each projectile through soft tissue and bone. ## Sequence of Shots and Timeline Ballistics work helped establish a probable firing sequence. The pattern of holes and the distribution of wood splinters suggested the order in which the rounds passed through the door. Combined with acoustic evidence and the layout of the bathroom, experts estimated the short time span between the first and last shots. This timeline was used to evaluate whether Pistorius’s account of a single continuous reaction was consistent with the physical evidence. Bloodstain patterns and the final position of Steenkamp’s body further constrained possible shooter positions. The reconstruction showed limited space for either person to move once the door was closed, reducing the range of plausible scenarios.
## Expert Testimony and Differing Interpretations Both the prosecution and defense called ballistics experts. While they largely agreed on the basic trajectories and the number of shots, they differed on the precise implications for Pistorius’s height, the exact order of impacts on Steenkamp, and whether the evidence proved intent. Courtroom demonstrations, photographs of the reconstructed door, and scale models helped illustrate the competing analyses for the judge. These presentations allowed the court to visualize the scene without relying solely on verbal descriptions. The physical door, preserved as an exhibit, remained a tangible reference point throughout the proceedings. ## Limitations of Ballistics Reconstruction
Ballistics reconstruction is powerful but not unlimited. It can establish paths, heights, and sequences with high reliability when the scene is well preserved, yet it cannot independently prove a shooter’s mental state or exact intent. Variables such as slight movement of the door during firing, the precise grip on the firearm, and Steenkamp’s final movements introduce margins of interpretation. Expert opinions therefore carried weight but were weighed alongside other forensic disciplines, including pathology, bloodstain analysis, and acoustic evidence. The methods used—trajectory mapping, projectile matching, and scene diagramming—remain standard forensic practice. They continue to be applied in similar cases worldwide because they rest on measurable physical principles rather than changing technology alone. In the Pistorius case, ballistics reconstruction supplied the court with a clear geometric framework of the shooting. By converting bullet holes, projectiles, and wound paths into measurable trajectories and positions, experts transformed a locked-door shooting into a testable sequence of events that could be compared directly against the accounts given by the accused.
