• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Trayvon Martin, Vigilante Justice

Status
Not open for further replies.
Information Analyst said:
If Zimmerman really was heading out of the complex, as his supporters claim, then it seems most likely that he first saw Martin as he was returning through the main entrance.
Click to expand...

First I want to call out the loaded statement, "his supporters." Wanting to know all of the availably details in the situation before condemning a person does not equate to supporting the person. Secondly, "it seems most likely," is not fact. That's us playing internet detective.

Either in the cut-though or - more likely - on Retreat View Circle, i.e. nearer to the back entrance he was (incorrectly) convinced Martin was heading for.
Click to expand...

A) why is one more likely than the other and b) you are still guessing.
This image appears to show the cut-through, with the crossing/Twin Trees Lane on the right. Even allowing for the TV/police flood lights, there's clearly lighting on the back of the houses, so it's not going to be pitch-black, how ever much rain, or little moonlight:[qimg]http://www.bet.com/content/betcom/news/national/2012/03/20/commentary-trayvon-martin-killing-places-needed-spotlight-on-terrible-florida-law/_jcr_content/featuredMedia/newsitemimage.newsimage.dimg/032012-national-trayvon-martin-killing-crime-scene.jpg[/qimg]
Click to expand...

I would imagine a few lights went on when the fighting began and more went on when the shot rang out. Porch lights being one when there is a police investigation in your back yard is not evidence that they were on before the circus started.

I suspect some people have more to be worried about the reality being the opposite of their preferred version than simply being "wrong." Too many, I suspect, have automatically sides with Zimmerman, because they do want any challenge to the idea that they can respond to a similar situation in the same way to the sort of threat Zimmerman only (and incorrectly) thought he was facing. By the same token, others are rightly concerned that someone completely innocent of any wrongdoing can end up dead in such a situation.
Click to expand...

Everything about this is just wrong. Those you accuse of "supporting Zimmerman," are not supporting Zimmerman, they are supporting the finding of facts. Don't project your need to be right on other people.

I asked for facts and got what you think happened based on your conclusion that he is guilty.
 
Last edited:
Dan O. said:
That's interesting, there appears to be a pickup parked In the exact same spot on the corner as it was in the Google maps view. Do we have any more information on the vehicle George was driving that night?
Click to expand...

The news referred to his automobile as an SUV, in the beginning, then it became a truck. I have no idea.
 
Just for the record, Mr. Owen agrees with WildCat - he's not able to compare speech patterns to screams.
 
Last edited:
sgtbaker said:
Either in the cut-though or - more likely - on Retreat View Circle, i.e. nearer to the back entrance he was (incorrectly) convinced Martin was heading for.
Click to expand...

A) why is one more likely than the other and b) you are still guessing.
Click to expand...

Because there is a measured time interval between the time Zimmerman got out of his truck/SUV/Volt and the encounter of Zimmerman and Martin. Zimmerman was doing something in that interval. Working that something out goes to interpreting Z's actions. Clearly he believed Martin was heading for the rear entrance, and he was trying to maintain a visual on Martin. It seems logical that he would investigate all possiblities in the time available. And he had more than enough time to reach Retreat View Circle on foot, even if he was "just walking around, looking about."
 
Noztradamus said:
Because there is a measured time interval between the time Zimmerman got out of his truck/SUV/Volt and the encounter of Zimmerman and Martin. Zimmerman was doing something in that interval. Working that something out goes to interpreting Z's actions. Clearly he believed Martin was heading for the rear entrance, and he was trying to maintain a visual on Martin. It seems logical that he would investigate all possiblities in the time available. And he had more than enough time to reach Retreat View Circle on foot, even if he was "just walking around, looking about."
Click to expand...

The highlighted shows you don't actually know while the underlined is all your speculation. None of that is evidence.
 
Keep plucking that chicken NBC!
NBC told the Washington Post that it has launched an internal investigation of the "Today" show's editorial process after its morning show aired an edited conversation between George Zimmerman and a 911 dispatcher recorded moments before the shooting. The investigation came after Fox News and others pointed out that the network spliced two parts of the call together, making it appear as if Zimmerman had said, "This guy looks like he's up to no good. He looks black." In reality, Zimmerman was answering a dispatcher's question:


Zimmerman: This guy looks like he's up to no good. Or he's on drugs or something. It's raining and he's just walking around, looking about.

Dispatcher: OK, and this guy--is he black, white or Hispanic?

Zimmerman: He looks black.
Click to expand...


http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/cutline/trayvon-martin-case-exposes-worst-media-210020839.html
 
If the media doesn't back off a bit Zimmermann won't be able to get a fair trial. He'll get off the hook like OJ Simpson.

Zimmermann may flee the country and make another life for himself in some south american country.
 
sgtbaker said:
The highlighted shows you don't actually know while the underlined is all your speculation. None of that is evidence.
Click to expand...

And your counterproposal is that George Zimmerman simple ceased to be, was no longer part of the universe for that period of time?
 
sgtbaker said:
First I want to call out the loaded statement, "his supporters." Wanting to know all of the availably details in the situation before condemning a person does not equate to supporting the person. Secondly, "it seems most likely," is not fact. That's us playing internet detective.



A) why is one more likely than the other and b) you are still guessing.


I would imagine a few lights went on when the fighting began and more went on when the shot rang out. Porch lights being one when there is a police investigation in your back yard is not evidence that they were on before the circus started.



Everything about this is just wrong. Those you accuse of "supporting Zimmerman," are not supporting Zimmerman, they are supporting the finding of facts. Don't project your need to be right on other people.

I asked for facts and got what you think happened based on your conclusion that he is guilty.
Click to expand...
Well, if you're going to be all like stick to the facts n stuff, and spoil all the fun...

:wink:
 
"The examiner can only work with speech samples which are the same as the text of the unknown recording. Under the best of circumstances the suspects will repeat, several times, the text of the recording of the unknown speaker and these words will be recorded in a similar manner to the recording of the unknown speaker. For example, if the recording of the unknown speaker was a bomb threat made to a recorded telephone line then each of the suspects would repeat the threat, word for word, to a recorded telephone line. This will provide the examiner with not only the same speech sounds for comparison but also with valuable information about the way each speech sound completes the transition to the next sound."

Thomas J. Owen
Chairman Emeritus of the American Board of Recorded Evidence
 
"For the most accurate results from the spectrographic voice identification method, a professional examiner

(1) will require the original recordings or the best quality rerecordings if the original is not available;

(2) will perform a critical aural review of the suspect and known recordings;

(3) will produce sound spectrograms of the comparable words and phrases;

(4) will produce a comparison recording juxtaposing the known and unknown speech samples;

(5) will evaluate the evidence and classify the results into one of five standard categories [ 1 - positive identification, 2 - probable identification, 3. - positive elimination, 4 - probable elimination, and 5 - no decision].

The final decision is reached through a combined process of aural and visual examination."

Thomas J. Owen
Life Member, The American Board of Forensic Examiners
 
"The spectrograms of the unknown speaker are then visually compared to the spectrograms of the suspects. Only those speech sounds which are the same are compared."

Thomas J. Owen
Audio/Video Authenticity and Voice Identification, Diplomate
 
Noztradamus said:
And your counterproposal is that George Zimmerman simple ceased to be, was no longer part of the universe for that period of time?
Click to expand...

Yes, that's exactly what I said. :rolleyes:

*hint* if you need to resort to inventing things I didn't say, to make a point, perhaps it's because you don't have one.
 
"The first step is to evaluate the recording of the unknown voice, checking to make sure the recording has a sufficient amount of speech with which to work and that the quality of the recording is of sufficient clarity in the frequency range required for analysis. The volume of the recorded voice signal must be significantly higher than that of the environmental noise. The greater the number of obscuring events, such as noise, music, and other speakers, the longer the sample of speech must be."

Thomas J. Owen
International Association for Identification, Life Member (New Jersey Division)
 
I have no idea, but maybe he made those comments relative to the old-tech?

Now perhaps there is some new-tech that makes his old comments obsolete?
 
"The worst exemplar recordings with which an examiner must work are those of random speech. It is necessary to obtain a large sample of speech to improve the chances of obtaining a sufficient amount of comparable speech."

Thomas J. Owen
Chairman Emeritus of the Board of Recorded Evidence - American College of Forensic
Examiners
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom