(05-14-2013, 01:15 AM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: I'm anxious to find out what Judge Nelson allows in.

If she allows them both, we'll see the battle of voice technologies, each with inherent margins of error that could be easily exploited by the other side. Right or wrong, the perceived credibility or likability of the expert witnesses could determine which side wins the battle.

Or, the expert witnesses could simply cancel each other out in the minds of the jurors. I suspect that happens frequently with expert testimony related to less definitive sciences. Lots of time and money invested with little return on investment when it comes to verdict impact. JMO.

With or without the voice experts, it's gonna be an interesting trial, that's for sure.

I agree, it would be an interesting dynamic to see those technologies played out.

Anything open to that degree of interpretation though probably shouldn't be allowed IMO. It's precisely why they don't allow polygraph tests in either...

(05-14-2013, 11:27 AM)Jimbone Wrote: I agree, it would be an interesting dynamic to see those technologies played out.

Anything open to that degree of interpretation though probably shouldn't be allowed IMO. It's precisely why they don't allow polygraph tests in either...

I think Nelson might let the voice analysts in because, unlike lie detection technology results, the screams captured on the audio tape were part of the sequence of events leading up to the killing. Evidence, albeit open to interpretation.

It's possible that the "help" audio could be viewed more like a grainy surveillance pic or an impaired eye witness from the scene. If the prosecution is willing to take the risk of presenting it, Nelson might just allow it.

I really have no idea which way Nelson will decide on this and don't think voice technologies will be significant deciding factors in this case anyway (JMO); just pondering.

(05-14-2013, 01:15 AM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: I'm anxious to find out what Judge Nelson allows in.

If she allows them both, we'll see the battle of voice technologies, each with inherent margins of error that could be easily exploited by the other side. Right or wrong, the perceived credibility or likability of the expert witnesses could determine which side wins the battle.

Or, the expert witnesses could simply cancel each other out in the minds of the jurors. I suspect that happens frequently with expert testimony related to less definitive sciences. Lots of time and money invested with little return on investment when it comes to verdict impact. JMO.

With or without the voice experts, it's gonna be an interesting trial, that's for sure.

I agree, it would be an interesting dynamic to see those technologies played out.

Anything open to that degree of interpretation though probably shouldn't be allowed IMO.

Evidence of deletion noted.

WTF is up with my double post?

Weird. I dropped the polygraph line because it was superfluous... so how did the edited post end up a separate post?

(05-14-2013, 12:49 PM)Jimbone Wrote: WTF is up with my double post?

Weird. I dropped the polygraph line because it was superfluous... so how did the edited post end up a separate post?

I thought that you did it on purpose to make a point with me.

We had a ghost post yesterday by CN, and now a mystery partial double post.

Mote it be the Maytee hex is kicking into gear?

P.s. I'm glad it was just a duplicate because the legal aspects of this case are really interesting and educational to me; enjoy exchanging thoughts in that regard.

We've had more weird shit happen since our upgrade than we've had the last couple years altogether.

I can't explain what happened, Mr. Bone.

HLN legal analysts were just having the exact same discussion that Jim and I had about the "help" audio.

The 4 lawyers on the panel agreed that:

1. The "help" audio will be played to the jury and is the key piece of evidence in the case (I don't agree with the second part, but been wrong before).

2. Judge Nelson will most likely not allow the voice analysis experts to testify for the state because the sample (length of screaming time) is too short for anyone to render a reasonably conclusive opinion.

3. The jury will have to decide for themselves whether it's Trayvon or George crying for help, based on the defendant's testimony, the prosecutor's theory, etc...

P.s. Vinnie Politan is betting that Zimmerman will testify.

Interested to see how accurate their predictions turn out to be.

(04-10-2012, 01:41 PM)Midwest Spy Wrote: I'd like to know how soon we can expect the Revs Sharpton & Jackson to arrive in North Minneapolis to profess their outrage over this crime that occurred yesterday.

This was not your usual 'gang-bangers killing each other' type of crime. A 59 year old woman and her elderly parents were gunned down in their home. Even worse, there were children present because it was a day-care.

However, since the suspect is also black, I'm sure I'll be waiting many moons to hear the Revs say anything.

http://www.startribune.com/local/north/146644095.html

Verdict handed down today for the piece of shit that did this ^^^.


http://www.startribune.com/local/north/207757631.html

^ Good news, MS.

A sexual assaulter, druggie, and a triple murderer. Menace to society doesn't even begin to describe Mosley.

According to KAALtv, he was found guilty by the judge (not a jury trial) of nine murder counts related to the three killings; the sentencing phase will begin Friday.

New Voice Analysis and Possible Request for Trial Delay

In a new evaluation, forensic analyst Alan Reich wrote that he believed the cries came from Trayvon, "the younger of the two male speakers."

Reich's report indicates he heard things others haven't in the call, including Trayvon screaming, "I'm begging you."

He also claimed Zimmerman can simultaneously be heard making "a seemingly religious proclamation, 'These shall be.' " That comes about a second into the 911 audio, Reich reported.

Another report, by Harry Hollien and James Harnsberger of Forensic Communication Associates, said the audio quality was insufficient for a definitive voice match. But they found some of the cries came close to matching Trayvon's voice, while others came close to matching Zimmerman's.

Reich earlier concluded the voice was Trayvon's in May 2012 analysis for the Washington Post. The Post said Reich has a doctorate in speech science and "has worked ... in hundreds of criminal and civil cases over a period of more than 35 years."

Two other analysts who studied the recordings for the Sentinel in March 2012 said the screams were not Zimmerman's. At the time of their analysis, and Reich's for the Post, there were no available voice samples of Trayvon.

The reports by Reich and Forensic Communication Associates show the state provided samples of Trayvon for the newly revealed analysis.

Previous records showed FBI analysts were unable to identify the source of the cries.

Full story here:
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2013...ark-o-mara
---------------------------------------------------------------
If she allows the voice analysis experts to testify, O'Mara made a statement that he'll likely file a motion for trial delay.

I don't think he'll have much luck with pushing the trial back if he files a motion; Judge Nelson has made it pretty clear that trial will begin on June 10^th without further postponements.

I would hate to be the judge in this. If Zimmerman is found not guilty there may very well be a riot. If he gets manslaughter there might be a riot, if he gets prison time there may be a riot.....

(05-18-2013, 04:29 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: If she allows the voice analysis experts to testify, O'Mara made a statement that he'll likely file a motion for trial delay.

I don't think he'll have much luck with pushing the trial back if he files a motion; Judge Nelson has made it pretty clear that trial will begin on June 10^th without further postponements.

O'Mara will have to come up with a better argument than the expert reports if he wants a continuance. All of the witness stuff had a March deadline. O'Mara asked for an extension. The State didn't oppose, and now O'Mara wants to complain that he's not ready because he just got the reports? The scheduling order clearly states no continuances based on not meeting the specified deadlines.

And where is George's voice expert? I know he has one because Judge Nelson mentioned it in court. So who is it and what does he/she have to say?

Next court date may 28 tick tock tick tock

(05-18-2013, 09:33 PM)Maggot Wrote: I would hate to be the judge in this. If Zimmerman is found not guilty there may very well be a riot. If he gets manslaughter there might be a riot, if he gets prison time there may be a riot.....

Well most Zimmerman supporters believe that GZ was only arrested to appease the riotous mobs. That it was political. And that George had every right to shoot Trayvon after being ambushed and savagely beaten.

Do you feel that way Maggot? Do you feel that Zimmerman was unjustly charged?

(05-19-2013, 11:47 AM)Adub Wrote:

(05-18-2013, 09:33 PM)Maggot Wrote: I would hate to be the judge in this. If Zimmerman is found not guilty there may very well be a riot. If he gets manslaughter there might be a riot, if he gets prison time there may be a riot.....

Well most Zimmerman supporters believe that GZ was only arrested to appease the riotous mobs. That it was political. And that George had every right to shoot Trayvon after being ambushed and savagely beaten.

Do you feel that way Maggot? Do you feel that Zimmerman was unjustly charged?

As in any murder case be it accidental or motivated, getting charged with murder is appropriate. I believe that break-ins were happening and the general blame was leaning towards the blacks. This guy went over the top and picked the wrong black to target. Not the sharpest tool in the shed, that's for sure.
I think he will get 2^nd degree murder and get out in 8-10 yrs.

I find it fascinating that the sentencing guidelines for manslaughter could give Zimmerman a longer sentence because of the fact that Trayvon was a minor. Aggravating circumstances.

And I like your answer Maggot, we are in agreement. George Zimmerman is an idiot.

(05-19-2013, 09:18 AM)Adub Wrote: The scheduling order clearly states no continuances based on not meeting the specified deadlines.

And where is George's voice expert? I know he has one because Judge Nelson mentioned it in court. So who is it and what does he/she have to say?

Next court date may 28 tick tock tick tock

Haven't seen any of the current voice analysis experts identified in media reports as having concluded that the voice is that of Zimmerman, or that the voice was the older of the two men, or that the voice could not have been that of Trayvon. If the defense has such an opinion on hand (and the expert is credible), not sure why O'Mara would be trying so vigorously to exclude voice analysts from testifying.

If the voice analysts are allowed in, I could see O'Mara being able to really tear into the state's experts on cross-examination though. He could attack the lack of certainty in their conclusions, the nature of the technology, the limited duration of the audio screams, and the fact that, unfortunately, the only sample of Trayvon's voice available for comparison was pulled from a cell phone recording.

Still, without a defense rebuttal expert to testify that the voice is George's (or at least not Trayvon's), the state could score some important points with the jury.

Anxious to hear Judge Nelson's rulings. The legal analysts at WESH and The Sentinel believe that she'll allow the voice analysts in, while the HLN pundits say "no". I think they should be allowed in.

There are two voices. So say the experts. And Trayvon saying ... I'm begging you ...just before the gunshot. One of the reports says that it is Trayvon yelling/crying/screaming at the beginning of the 911 call, and Zimmerman at the end. With a 70% accuracy. The screaming on the 911 call was like 20 seconds long.

The bigger problem for GZ is his previous statements. No voice analysis has heard Trayvon saying "... you are going to die tonight motherfucker." That is what George said that Trayvon said. As Trayvon savagely slammed his head into the cement sidewalk. It is all fabrication on George's part. Shades of Yo, Homie. Never happened. Zimmerman is a big fat liar.

(05-19-2013, 05:13 PM)Adub Wrote: The bigger problem for GZ is his previous statements. No voice analysis has heard Trayvon saying "... you are going to die tonight motherfucker."

Hadn't even thought about that aspect; IIRC it was even in his written statement.

Bet he'll claim that happened before the 911 call. But, if the timeline can be narrowed down enough, he'll be so screwed if it's not reasonably possible that statement was made without being captured. In that case, Zimmerman would have to contradict his previous statement (also screwed).

I don't think there's any question as to whether the 911 tape is part of trial evidence; it's in (correct me if I'm wrong). So, even without the voice analysts, the tape could potentially hurt him badly if there's no way the jurors could reasonably interpret the fuzzy words on the audio to contain that statement.

Dying to see how narrowly the sides have been able pin point the sequence and timeline based on forensics and witnesses.

Well, seconds before the shot, Zimmerman said that Trayvon was smothering him. Trayvon had one hand over George's mouth and the other hand pinching George's nose. All while bashing George's head into the cement. A dozen times or so. Then George felt Trayvon's hand sliding down George's side, going for the gun.

But, George was quicker and got to that gun in a split second and pop, Trayvon was shot in the chest just about where the doctor puts the stethoscope to listen to a heartbeat.

And I would think that Trayvon would have had George's blood all over his hands, seeing as the EMT said 45% of George's head was covered in blood, and that when Trayvon slid his head down and around George's chest some transfer would have occurred. But, the evidence shows no DNA, blood or otherwise, from GZ on Trayvon's hands, and no blood smear on Georges jacket, just some drops. If George wasn't such a big fat liar, I wouldn't care as much as I do.