Trayvon Martin, Vigilante Justice

[Monza]

Robert Zimmerman described the path his son took in an interview:



Looking at a map of the subdivision, it's clear that Zimmerman is talking about walking the path between two streets, then backtracking to get back to this truck. The sidewalk is clearly visible on Google's photo of the area.

The problem is that Trayvon's body wasn't found along that sidewalk. It was along the sidewalk heading south. The walk leading directly to where Trayvon was staying.

One thing bothers me about GZ's father's account of GZ's actions. He says that GZ got out of his truck to look at a street sign so he could tell the police where he was. From the map, there are only three street names in that neighborhood. If he lived there, and especially if he was on the neighborhood watch, he should know which street is which. He may not have known an exact address, but looking at a number on a house would tell him that. Regardless, the claim is he was looking for a street sign. Has anyone heard more about this?

 

[Dan O.]

Sure we are. But the involved parties aren't active participants in our discussion.

So, would you like to answer my questions ?

If you are limiting the involved parties to George and Trayvon then you are right. but if you extent involvement to family and lawyers then they are participating in the public debate as much or more than any of us.

If George was the one screaming that night, he can prove it by agreeing to be tested. So why isn't George insisting on being tested?

Of course, the downside for George is if he fails the test it might be just enough to open the criminal case against him.

 

[AlBell]

I would think that George Zimmerman would be eager to have the claims of this software tested. Has George or his lawyer ever proposed testing?

Until he's actually been indicted either criminally or civilly that sfaik would make no sense.

I don't think Owen could refuse that request.

And I'd say he'd at the moment be a fool not to refuse it.

In any case he and his lawyer would likely want the 10 previously suggested tests be successfully performed. Then, depending on actual truth they should both know, they could make a rational decision.

 

[triforcharity]

Have all you folks read the post Moss links to, as well as the associated links in it?!

In my opinion, if he is considered an expert witness by a court of law, and his opinion testimony is admissible in courts of law, then I will accept his opinion as being a professional opinion.

Good enough for the courts=good enough for me.

 

[Natural Born Skeptic]

Any suggestions here that GZ should want Owen to test him are so absurd it beggars believe anyone would make such an argument with a straight face.

1. You don't submit to testing to the person who has already pronounced you guilty and has every personal, professional and financial motivation to stick with that pronouncement.

2. Owen has no official association with the case.

And a bunch of other reasons too but those are enough. I know I've stated the above before but since the same people keep suggesting again and again that if GZ was innocent he should want to have Owen test him, I might as well repost again too.

BTW, doesn't it go without saying that his lawyers are likely already consulting their own experts on this subject?!

 

[johnny karate]

I watched the link. No, her story isn't changing, at all. Originally he looked at them twice before answering, now it's three times. Originally he was nonchalant, "like leave me alone," about saying call the police, now he is pacing in shock, "Like what did I do?"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=skNKVjSxQys

I'm not seeing any contradictions there that make me dismissive of her story.

But as I said, I'm not placing a lot of stock in the witness testimony as a whole since it doesn't quite create a cohesive narrative, and due to the general unreliability of eye witnesses. If you want to selectively choose which aspects of it to believe or not believe based on a gut feeling or whatever, that's certainly your prerogative.

 

[Beerina]

Immediately after the gunshot, Cutcher and her roommate reported seeing Martin face-down with Zimmerman straddling him two to three doors down from where the fight was reported to have taken place.

http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2012/03/20/neighbor-trayvon-martin-shooting-wasnt-self-defense/

Remind me again, how does that fit into Zimmerman's narrative?

Forensics should determine whether this was the position when the gun went off.

 

[Natural Born Skeptic]

What I am wondering about now (and researching) is if there have been other criminal cases were Owen's "scientific certainty" caused a miscarriage of justice.

I also stated that concern many pages back the moment I started reading about this joker.

I also find the fact that these articles all mentioned his software without him nor the article revealing that he's evidently distributing it in this country to be amazing. I wonder if he revealed that to the newspaper that did the story on him and they just omitted it, or he never told them.

Since you're in research mode, it would be very interesting to know if the claim made repeatedly that this software is "widely accepted in Europe" is true. Why is it I suspect that claim is questionable at best?

 

[Beerina]

The lack of evidence is making me inclined to introduce a third class of meme generation. In addition to religion and politics, we are seeing the rapid evolution of entire constructs of mental models of reality based on very few facts and many untestable theories.

 

[johnny karate]

Forensics should determine whether this was the position when the gun went off.

And waiting for hard evidence is exactly what I prefer to do as opposed to sifting through witness testimony to pick and choose the parts I like.

 

[RandFan]

The lack of evidence is making me inclined to introduce a third class of meme generation. In addition to religion and politics, we are seeing the rapid evolution of entire constructs of mental models of reality based on very few facts and many untestable theories.

On the other hand perhaps speculation is an evolved trait and discussion and debate are a good way to weed out bad ideas. People can be skeptical and have strong opinions. It's kinda what we do. See sig file. At some point if the facts don't mesh with our opinions then we need to change our opinions. If not then we are not skeptics.

I don't know, just an idea.

 

[leftysergeant]

One thing bothers me about GZ's father's account of GZ's actions. He says that GZ got out of his truck to look at a street sign so he could tell the police where he was. From the map, there are only three street names in that neighborhood. If he lived there, and especially if he was on the neighborhood watch, he should know which street is which. He may not have known an exact address, but looking at a number on a house would tell him that.

Any moron knows that you would look at house numbers from the STREET, not the backyard. Z's blather about going back to his vehicle makes no sense unless he was chasing Martin down the path between rows or had headed him off on the path. Either way of making contact would give Martin reason to believe that he was being pursued by a banger.

 

[johnny karate]

Have you listened to the audio closely? There is a tremendous amount of information about what going on in the background noise for 44 seconds before the gunshot.

What do you think is the context of the scream five seconds before the gunshot?

I don't know. And neither do you.

In determining wether or not Zimmerman, by your was own words, was just being a "pussy" I think these are some significant details to look at...

I've clipped the rest of your post due to its irrelevance and disingenuousness.

You've taken something I said out of context and used it as a basis for a ridiculous straw man argument.

You seem to be under the impression that determining it is Zimmerman screaming on the 911 tape tells us conclusively he was in mortal danger. It doesn't. I offered a hypothetical scenario as a counterexample.

Suddenly, the hypothetical I offered regarding one particular aspect of this case has been turned into a declarative statement I made as the underpinning of my entire narrative. And also, rape victims.

I would respectfully request that if you are going to respond to my posts, read them carefully and pay close attention to context in which I make my arguments. Your assistance in this matter would be greatly appreciated.

 

[johnny karate]

I am not bringing in the fact that Martin was not a criminal as a reason why it's okay to follow him. I just don't want to come across that I think Martin was actually doing something wrong.

Zimmerman decided to follow someone who had every opportunity for a confrontation and ran away. If he thought they were a part of the previous crime wave, there is no reason to assume that he was violent. Would I follow? Probably not. Does that mean I think it's a good idea? No. Does that mean that anyone with a lick of common sense would come to the same conclusion? No.

I think on this point, we are beginning to talk past each other. We seem to agree on most of the particulars, and for those that we don't, I am content to leave it at that.

 

[curi0us]

In my opinion, if he is considered an expert witness by a court of law, and his opinion testimony is admissible in courts of law, then I will accept his opinion as being a professional opinion.

Good enough for the courts=good enough for me.

As winner of the coveted Golden Ear award and president of the American Forensic Audio Standards Association I consider it my professional duty to warn people that Tom Owen and Ed Primeau are misrepresenting the technology and capability of forensic voice identification.

In my lab at the Berkeley Institute For Forensic Audio Research I have sonogrammotronically delineated the spectrographic matrix arrays of the voice biometric algorithms and proven them to be unable to do what Owen has claimed. For ten thousand dollars I can provide the detailed results of extensive testing of the Easy Voice Biometrics software explaining it's limitations. The results will also be delivered with fully functioning version of Easy Voice Biometrics so my results can be verified.

As far a Ed Primeau's abilities are concerned the issue of the racial slur was something the BIFAR devoted considerable resources to investigating. We have been working with specially trained parrots as avian augmented biometrics is the cutting edge of forensic technology, especially in phonemically disputed reconstructive interpretative analytics. Are determination is that there is 86% probability that Ed Primeau is dumber then a parrot.

 

[johnny karate]

If I had to explain Mary Cutcher in a word, it would be mistaken.

If I had to explain your opinion of Mary Cutcher's testimony in a word, it would be irrelevant.

Unless you've got some unique insight nobody else does, what witnesses in this case you deem to be mistaken has no bearing on reality.

Does she claim to be an eyewitness to who was screaming ?

No, then there are no eyewitnesses that contradict GZ claim he was the one screaming.

No, not that I'm aware, and I didn't mean to imply otherwise. However, Cutcher's testimony does contradict Zimmerman's overall narrative. It places him on top of a face-down Martin some distance away from the spot where the fight took place and Zimmerman was reported to be screaming.

If you prefer, you can dismiss Cutcher's testimony - for whatever reason you might want to do that - and pretend the witness testimony that corroborates Zimmerman's account is ironclad.

Personally, I prefer to be suspect of all witness testimony unless it can be substantiated with hard evidence.

 

[johnny karate]

The 'ridiculous line' began when you tried to connect Zimmerman's having the weapon on him with anything other than Zimmerman having the weapon on him.

So I see you've stopped arguing what "took" means. Smart move. That strategy was a loser.

However, this latest strategy you've adopted isn't much better.

Pro Tip: If you're going to argue that I made some kind of judgment regarding Zimmerman having a weapon on him, it might help if you quote me actually doing so, instead of bolding a statement I made where I don't even mention Zimmerman having a weapon on him:

But it does give a very plausible basis for a scenario in which Zimmerman was the aggressor in the ensuing altercation since we know this whole situation began with him being the aggressor.

Yes, I view Zimmerman as the aggressor. But not so much because he was armed as opposed to the fact the he was actively pursuing Martin.

I sincerely hope this ends the silly game of "You Tell Me What I Really Meant".

 

[johnny karate]

OK then.

I see what you did there. It was only slightly less dishonest than you trying to twist something I said into something you could more easily attack.

 

[Noztradamus]

Me too. That's not what I asked, though. As I said a few pages ago, the dispatcher, early in the conversations plainly says, "let me know if he does anything else." Is it possible that he took that as a request?

Who knows what the whacker would take.

But it's mildly amusing to read the dispatcher's words in a bored, sarcastic voice

19:11:55 Dispatcher: Oh, he's just walking around the area…
19:11:57 Dispatcher: Ah, ‘kay…
19:12:00 Dispatcher: Okay—you said it's 1111 Retreat View? Or 111?
9:12:05 Dispatcher: That's the clubhouse, do you know what the—he's near the clubhouse right now?
19:12:11 Dispatcher: Okay.
19:12:21 Dispatcher: Okay. How old would you say he looks?
19:12:25 Dispatcher: Late teens, okay.
19:12:39 Dispatcher: Okay, just let me know if he does anything okay…

 

[Natural Born Skeptic]

As winner of the coveted Golden Ear award and president of the American Forensic Audio Standards Association I consider it my professional duty to warn people that Tom Owen and Ed Primeau are misrepresenting the technology and capability of forensic voice identification.

In my lab at the Berkeley Institute For Forensic Audio Research I have sonogrammotronically delineated the spectrographic matrix arrays of the voice biometric algorithms and proven them to be unable to do what Owen has claimed. For ten thousand dollars I can provide the detailed results of extensive testing of the Easy Voice Biometrics software explaining it's limitations. The results will also be delivered with fully functioning version of Easy Voice Biometrics so my results can be verified.

As far a Ed Primeau's abilities are concerned the issue of the racial slur was something the BIFAR devoted considerable resources to investigating. We have been working with specially trained parrots as avian augmented biometrics is the cutting edge of forensic technology, especially in phonemically disputed reconstructive interpretative analytics. Are determination is that there is 86% probability that Ed Primeau is dumber then a parrot.

I hereby give you more credence as a voice identification expert that both Owen and Primeau put together. I haven't heard either of them make up words anywhere near as impressive .