Merged Continuation Part 2: Discussion of the George Zimmerman case

[Cylinder]

Looks like MO'M is getting desperate. If the defense really thought the voice calling for help was GZ, they'd fight tooth and nail to have it admitted.

I guess it was inevitable that someone made an appeal to pseudoscience in their search for truth. Before we have this discussion, I'm going to suggest some reading:

Frye v United States

The rule is that the opinions of experts or skilled witnesses are admissible in evidence in those cases in which the matter of inquiry is such that inexperienced persons are unlikely to prove capable of forming a correct judgment upon it, for the reason that the subject-matter so far partakes of a science, art, or trade as to require a previous habit or experience or study in it, in order to acquire a knowledge of it. When the question involved does not lie within the range of common experience or common knowledge, but requires special experience or special knowledge, then the opinions of witnesses skilled in that particular science, art, or trade to which the question relates are admissible in evidence.

Numerous cases are cited in support of this rule. Just when a scientific principle or discovery crosses the line between the experimental and demonstrable stages is difficult to define. Somewhere in this twilight zone the evidential force of the principle must be recognized, and while courts will go a long way in admitting expert testimony deduced from a well-recognized scientific principle or discovery, the thing from which the deduction is made must be sufficiently established to have gained general acceptance in the particular field in which it belongs.

Ramirez v Florida

According to Hart, a technician's ability to identify microscopic similarities in casts is developed by training and is passed on from one technician to another in the workplace.  
A “match” under his method is declared if there is “sufficient similarity” in the striated marks on the casts to eliminate the possibility of coincidence.   This determination is entirely subjective and is based on the technician's training and experience;  there is no minimum number of matching striations or percentage of agreement or other objective criteria that are used in this method.   No photographs are made of the casts, Hart explained, because lay persons and those not trained in this procedure would be unable to understand the comparison process;  similarly, no notes are made describing the basis for identification.   Once a match is declared under his theory, no other knives are examined because an identification under this method purportedly eliminates all other knives in the world as possible sources of the wound.   Under Hart's method of identification, a team of expert technicians trained by him would be virtually impossible to challenge notwithstanding the fact that his procedure is untested and yet to be accepted by the relevant scientific community.   There is no objective criteria that must be met, there are no photographs, no comparisons of methodology to review, and the final deduction is in the eyes of the beholder, i.e., the identification is a match because the witness says it is a match.

 

[Skeptic Tank]

Looks like MO'M is getting desperate. If the defense really thought the voice calling for help was GZ, they'd fight tooth and nail to have it admitted.

I think you may be missing another scenario where fighting against having the voice experts testify makes sense.

Let's say that it's simply beyond the capabilities (whatever they may actually be) of this science to compare a distant scream through walls/windows to a normal, calm speaking voice directly into a telephone receiver.

In that case, it becomes irresponsible to have dueling experts up there asserting certainty about who the screams are or are not from.

In that case, the only reason there would even be experts willing to claim it was/was not George or was/was not Trayvon, is that they are unprofessional, overly optimistic about their field's current capabilities, or just unethical and greedy. In most cases you can find experts who will testify on both sides of most evidentiary issues. Not always... and some times the credible expert testimony is fairly obvious and a stark contrast to the other side which is just up there on the stand to make a buck.

But in this situation, it's not going to be nearly so clear. I have no doubt that O'Mara can pay someone to get up there and testify it's George, because you can pretty much always find someone with some credentials who will say whatever it is you want the jury to hear, for the right price.

What if O'Mara and Zimmerman want to be ethical and truthful, though? In that case, the best they could do is get an expert up there testifying about how it's inconclusive and not really within what the science is capable of comparing?

Which looks better for the defense, having the prosecution call people who express certainty (even if that certainty is full of hot air and based on bad science) squaring off against their people saying "we just can't say for sure" or to not have anyone up there for either side testifying about this issue?

• Was it ethical for Tom Owen and the other guy to issue findings without having a sample fo Trayvon's voice?
• Was it ethical of Tom Owen to issue findings in direct contravention of his own science's governing body which states you must have a total of 10 comparable WORDS present in both samples?
• Was it ethical of Tom Owen to neglect to mention that he himself owns the company that publishes the software EasyVoice Biometrics, a new $5,000 version of which went on sale within days of those findings being given to the Orlando Sentinel?
• Does the fact that Tom Owen said he was getting a voice sample of Trayvon from the family, and would be issuing his follow up findings on how that sample matched the screams, about a year ago... and never made another peep about it, point toward him being ethical?

Here's some evidence that the defense is right in their contention that this testimony from Owen and the other guy has no place in front of a jury:

1.) The FBI saying it was inconclusive.
2.) The apparent lack of a good voice sample of Trayvon having been given to said experts, or the defense. No result can be meaningful without at the very least comparing the screams to both parties.
3.) This quote:

Dr. James Wayman, a San Jose State University expert in the field of speech science, told The Daily Caller that he questions the grounds on which Owen based his analysis.

Wayman also said he would be willing to testify against the admissibility of Owen’s findings on the grounds that they don’t meet the criteria required for evidence in federal courts.

“There is no history of, or data on, the comparison of a questioned scream to a known speech sample,” Wayman said.

The problem, he said, is that the two voice samples were recorded in difficult acoustic conditions over different cell phones.

“Even if we were to have Mr. Zimmerman recreate the scream under identical conditions with the same cell phone,” Wayman explained, “it would be difficult to attribute the scream to him without a sample of a similar scream from Mr. Martin under the same conditions. This is clearly not possible.”

Reached for comment, Owen told TheDC that he has conducted his own study — “The Owen Study” — of more than 400 different pitches, screams, and voice disguises. The study is unpublished.

He explained that he has attempted, without success, to obtain a “voice exemplar” from Zimmerman, consisting of recordings of both his speaking voice and a scream.

And Wayman, he said, “assumes that the voice software is not able to make a determination on each voice independently.”

Wayman fired back in a later email exchange. “There is no accepted standard regarding metrics for voice comparisons,” he insisted, “either if done forensically or using automated comparison software.”

Link

So it honestly seems like barring this sort of testimony is in O'Mara's client's best interest, and in the best interest of a fair and proper trial.

I imagine O'Mara and West are content to show the pictures of Zimmerman's injuries, and have the jury hear Witness 6's testimony, and the officers who heard Tracy Martin say it wasn't Trayvon's testimony... and let them make their own conclusions based on those things.

I think this is also in the best interest of the truth, since it seems very clear that it was Zimmerman screaming. I find it sort of remarkable that anyone doubts that, given the injuries and also given how the voice is clearly the same person to my, admittedly amateur, ear.

 

[batvette]

Note that CTH has another article detailing the police misconduct in handling juvenile crime reporting in the district Trayvon Martin attended: http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2013/04/12/part-2-the-trayvon-martin-cover-up-hurley-blows-a-gasket/ which again provides complete substantiation of its claims including images of official police documents and affidavits.
I don't think I've ever seen any blog or even mainstream media source be so thorough in laying out its case.

 

[batvette]

The question you should be asking is: how is this relevant to the night that Trayvon was killed? On that night was Trayvon in possession of any burglary tools? Stollen items? How about even a backpack?


Or, is the claim being made that George Zimmerman has some super ability to smell trouble when all he sees is a kid that looks black walking/standing in the rain.

George Zimmerman's call to the police that night described behavior like "he was on drugs" and "looking at houses" while he told the dispatcher there had been a lot of break ins in the area. It's been suggested this "kid" was just minding his own business and Zimmerman was wrong for following him.
If it can be established that Trayvon Martin likely was engaged in burglary crimes in the past then it suggests that Zimmerman's call that night was accurate and Martin was casing the neighborhood looking for any easy opportunities on his way back to the house he was staying at, making Zimmerman completely in the right for the basis used to follow him in the first place.
I'll wait for the possible replies that "you don't kill someone for burglary".

 

[Mumbles]

I really don't want to have a prolonged discussion about TCH, nor do I really want to be put in a position of 'defending' them. I have no clue what they do on the rest of their website, I only ever look at the TM section.
But I will ask ... what prior factual claims has the CTH made on about the TM case their website, that turned out to be false, that make the site so 'suspect' ?

Right here.

There's no real question on this one. You don't get to post a picture of a guy clowning around with his friends in a red shirt, and then claim that this is evidence that he's a Crip, and still be credible. Crips generally don't wear red, since it's the color of their rather famous rivals, the Bloods. It's a good sign that you're reacting to skin color, rather than shirt color.

 

[Unabogie]

Looks like MO'M is getting desperate. If the defense really thought the voice calling for help was GZ, they'd fight tooth and nail to have it admitted.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/05/07/us-usa-florida-shooting-idUSBRE94600120130507

George Zimmerman's lawyer challenges use of voice experts at trial
ORLANDO, Florida | Mon May 6, 2013 8:12pm EDT

(Reuters) - A lawyer for a Florida man charged in the shooting death of unarmed black teenager Trayvon Martin is asking a judge to bar voice-recognition experts from testifying at his murder trial on grounds their techniques are not scientifically valid.

Prosecutors are expected to call audio experts to testify in the trial of George Zimmerman to analyze a 911 call made during the night when Martin was shot and killed. Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch captain, goes on trial June 10 on charges of second-degree murder.

One potential piece of evidence is expected to be a 911 call in which screams for help can be heard in the background during an altercation between Zimmerman and Martin before the shooting.

Zimmerman's family and supporters claim the voice is his, while Martin's parents insist the voice belongs to their son.

Last year, an FBI expert said a voice analysis of the call was inconclusive.

Katie, I agree. This is what I was referring to when I said that the last court hearing was brutal for George.

First, George "formally" waived the immunity hearing. I say formally because everyone already knew he wasn't going to have one but keeping that hope alive seems designed to keep those donations coming in. The supporters of the defendant have been clinging to this fantasy that George was wrongfully charged and that a quick hearing would clear things up. Not going to happen and I bet his donations are way down because of it.

Second, O'Mara has just admitted that he doesn't have an expert who will say that the voice on the tape is George, screaming. That's huge. You can find an expert willing to claim just about anything, but no one will put their name on the line to back George up here. So O'Mara is shooting for the moon and hoping Judge Nelson saves his bacon. Is there any chance that voice recognition science will be ruled inadmissible? I suppose there's always a chance, but this seems like an old discipline and these guys have testified before.

I know certain folks will be along to try and spin this as good news for George, but this is a disaster.

Must all be part of God's plan.

 

[bynmdsue]

So it wasn't Witness 8 who misspelled Trayvon's name but someone else who actually wrote the letter? Does anyone have a link to this Francine business?

 

[johnny karate]

George Zimmerman's call to the police that night described behavior like "he was on drugs" and "looking at houses" while he told the dispatcher there had been a lot of break ins in the area. t' been suggested this "kid" was just minding his own business and Zimmerman was wrong for following him.

It hasn't just been "suggested", it's been established by all corroborative evidence.

Trayvon Martin was simply talking to his friend on the phone while walking home from the store.

Other then the word of the man who is now charged with his murder, there is no evidence that he was engaged in any nefarioous behavior of any type.

If it can be established that Trayvon Martin likely was engaged in burglary crimes in the past then it suggests that Zimmerman's call that night was accurate and Martin was casing the neighborhood looking for any easy opportunities on his way back to the house he was staying at, making Zimmerman completely in the right for the basis used to follow him in the first place.

It can't be established that Martin had engaged in burglary because there is no evidence that he did.

I can assure you, the musings of a right wing website biased against Martin will not be admissible in a court of law.

I'll wait for the possible replies that "you don't kill someone for burglary".

You'll probably be waiting a while then, because replies of "There's no confirmed evidence that Martin engaged in burglary either the night in question or ever, and this issue will not find it's way anywhere near the court room" will do just fine.

 

[johnny karate]

Utterly ridiculous, first off the basis for the story's root is a Miami Herald article which details that Trayvon Martin was in fact found with what police investigators determined WAS a burglary tool and a dozen pieces of women's jewelry which he could only say the source of was "a friend" he could not name who "gave it" to him- where are you getting this claim he "found" these items? Why are you casting aspersion on the CTH's credibility when this statement you just made is now the only dubious claim surrounding this issue?

Because it was never determined that Martin committed or was involved in a burglary. No charges were filed and he was never given the opportunity to defend himself against those charges.

That's how it works in America. You don't get to assert someone is a burglar just because you want to. It has to be proven.

And in Martin's case, it never was.

Secondly the story by CTH does not pursue the slander of Martin but instead focuses on the coverup within Miami Dade School District PD regarding crime stats, which results in the victim not being able to recover their property.
You people must have quickly scanned that page and saw your own bias reject any information which contradicted your position because you missed that it provided names of the police officers involved and links to scribd pages with images of the actual police reports and sworn affidavits provided by the officers.
The CTH blogger went far and above the standard of proof used by the mainstream media.
The argument you have used is that you believe the source has bias which contradicts your own, which is of no merit.
You are required to produce evidence which contradicts that which they have provided, and they provided plenty.

Really? Then please post the evidence that the jewelry found in Martin's possession was in fact the same jewelry reported stolen from a recent burglary.

Then explain how this "evidence" will find its way into a court of law.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

That was completely brutal for the defense. Watching BDLR doing his cross on West was just a taste of what's going to happen to George up there. After watching his own lawyer get shishkabobbed by Bernie, George had that deer in the headlights look and there's no way he takes the stand. Not a chance!

But in addition, the judge denied the motion to impose sanctions for discovery violations and pretty much everything else. The only thing she left open was the question of repaying the defense for time lost regarding the video depositions.

So we're still on track for a June 10th, and I just read that the jury will be sequestered.

This is not going well for the accused.

Katie, I agree. This is what I was referring to when I said that the last court hearing was brutal for George.

Oh, and I thought you were talking about all the motions you thought MOM lost that he actually didn't.

Or the 'shishkabobbing' you didn't provide any evidence for.

First, George "formally" waived the immunity hearing. I say formally because everyone already knew he wasn't going to have one but keeping that hope alive seems designed to keep those donations coming in. The supporters of the defendant have been clinging to this fantasy that George was wrongfully charged and that a quick hearing would clear things up. Not going to happen and I bet his donations are way down because of it.

Second, O'Mara has just admitted that he doesn't have an expert who will say that the voice on the tape is George, screaming. That's huge. You can find an expert willing to claim just about anything, but no one will put their name on the line to back George up here. So O'Mara is shooting for the moon and hoping Judge Nelson saves his bacon. Is there any chance that voice recognition science will be ruled inadmissible? I suppose there's always a chance, but this seems like an old discipline and these guys have testified before.

I know certain folks will be along to try and spin this as good news for George, but this is a disaster.

Must all be part of God's plan.

Did you miss the first thread, where it was discussed thate the lack of exemplars, poor quality, etc made it likely that voice experts would be useless ?

But somehow you infer the hilited above ?

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Right here.

There's no real question on this one. You don't get to post a picture of a guy clowning around with his friends in a red shirt, and then claim that this is evidence that he's a Crip, and still be credible. Crips generally don't wear red, since it's the color of their rather famous rivals, the Bloods. It's a good sign that you're reacting to skin color, rather than shirt color.

You are going to have to do better than that.

They didn't simply post a picture of him in a red shirt and say "he's a crip herp derp"

The post was about him covering up a tattoo, which he had covered shortly after TMs death, and what the tattoo might have meant. Let's hear your theory of what it meant and why it was necessary to turn it into praying hands around the time the media started paying attention to this case ?

 

[This is The End]

Second, O'Mara has just admitted that he doesn't have an expert who will say that the voice on the tape is George, screaming.

Forget entirely about the argument of who the person is yelling for help.

You are still left with what is an audio recording of the killing.

Therein lies the real reason why the Defense doesn't want it anywhere near the jury.

I would be very surprised if the Judge does not allow the only audio recording of the gunshot, the gunshot that caused the death that the entire case is about!!

Not allowing the voice experts? Maybe. But that doesn't mean the Judge will throw out the baby with the bathwater. There could be other ways the jury will hear that audio.

 

[KatieG]

George Zimmerman's call to the police that night described behavior like "he was on drugs" and "looking at houses" while he told the dispatcher there had been a lot of break ins in the area. It's been suggested this "kid" was just minding his own business and Zimmerman was wrong for following him.
If it can be established that Trayvon Martin likely was engaged in burglary crimes in the past then it suggests that Zimmerman's call that night was accurate and Martin was casing the neighborhood looking for any easy opportunities on his way back to the house he was staying at, making Zimmerman completely in the right for the basis used to follow him in the first place.
I'll wait for the possible replies that "you don't kill someone for burglary".

GZ didn't know anything about TMs past so that argument is invalid. TM has never been arrested for burglary so that doesn't work at all. TM was going home after going to the store to get Skittles for Brandi's son and an Arizona Watermelon drink for himself. He didn't not have any burglary tools on him at the time.

As for the CTH, they have only themselves to blame for their bad reputation.

 

[Cylinder]

Forget entirely about the argument of who the person is yelling for help.

You are still left with what is an audio recording of the killing.

Therein lies the real reason why the Defense doesn't want it anywhere near the jury.

I would be very surprised if the Judge does not allow the only audio recording of the gunshot, the gunshot that caused the death that the entire case is about!!

Not allowing the voice experts? Maybe. But that doesn't mean the Judge will throw out the baby with the bathwater. There could be other ways the jury will hear that audio.

You guys should read before trying the psychic reading spiel - Zimmerman isn't asking to exclude the recording. Read the motion and the cites.

 

[KatieG]

Forget entirely about the argument of who the person is yelling for help.

You are still left with what is an audio recording of the killing.

Therein lies the real reason why the Defense doesn't want it anywhere near the jury.

I would be very surprised if the Judge does not allow the only audio recording of the gunshot, the gunshot that caused the death that the entire case is about!!

Not allowing the voice experts? Maybe. But that doesn't mean the Judge will throw out the baby with the bathwater. There could be other ways the jury will hear that audio.

The non 911 call is evidence. I agree that the judge is not likely to allow only what MO'M wants as opposed to the whole tape. Since experts can't agree whose voice is screaming, the court will have to leave it to the jury to decide. But the whole tape will be admitted.

 

[KatieG]

Note that CTH has another article detailing the police misconduct in handling juvenile crime reporting in the district Trayvon Martin attended: http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2013/04/12/part-2-the-trayvon-martin-cover-up-hurley-blows-a-gasket/ which again provides complete substantiation of its claims including images of official police documents and affidavits.
I don't think I've ever seen any blog or even mainstream media source be so thorough in laying out its case.

Trayvon Martin is not on trial.

 

[Cylinder]

The non 911 call is evidence. I agree that the judge is not likely to allow only what MO'M wants as opposed to the whole tape. Since experts can't agree whose voice is screaming, the court will have to leave it to the jury to decide. But the whole tape will be admitted.

The motion doesn't even reference the NEN call. The motion doesn't seek to exclude any part of any call. The lack of agreement of expert opinion isn't what is being questioned - it's (among other things) the methodology used to form any expert opinion concerning voice identification.

 

[johnny karate]

Oh, and I thought you were talking about all the motions you thought MOM lost that he actually didn't.

I think when Unabogie said "the judge denied the motion to impose sanctions for discovery violations and pretty much everything else", the "pretty much everything else" part referred to sanctions, not motions.

And in case you forgot, the judge din't impose any sanctions.

Or the 'shishkabobbing' you didn't provide any evidence for.

How about the judge saying this:

The court does not make any finding that there was a discovery violation.

Whether or not we can characterize what happened as a "shishkabobbing" is purely subjective, but what is not subjective is the judge agreeing with the prosecution.

As for all those motions the defense won that you chalk up as a victory for them, how many of them were opposed by the prosecution?

 

[Unabogie]

Cylinder is right. O'Mara is asking to only prevent experts from testifying about the scream of the victim (the one George said didn't sound like him).

This fact has got to be confusing for Team George since the only explanation is that they couldn't find a single expert to say that the voice belongs to the killer. And when coupled with the waiver of the immunity hearing things must be pretty gloomy in Mudville.

Well wait, I guess there's another explanation: George and his wife spent so much donation money paying off their personal credit card bills and living that great life in posh hotels, that they don't have anything left over to put on an actual self-defense case.

 

[Mumbles]

You are going to have to do better than that.

They didn't simply post a picture of him in a red shirt and say "he's a crip herp derp"

The post was about him covering up a tattoo, which he had covered shortly after TMs death, and what the tattoo might have meant. Let's hear your theory of what it meant and why it was necessary to turn it into praying hands around the time the media started paying attention to this case ?

I don't have one, and I don't need one. I have no interest in Tracy Martin's tattoos, since they have no relevance to why Zimmerman decided his son was "suspicious", why Zimmerman chased his son down the street, or why Zimmerman shot his son. And frankly, I would have had little interest in any of that either, were it not for a police chief waving the matter off.

The simple point is, CTH has gone to extreme lengths to portray the Martins as some sort of criminal syndicate, and has hilariously posted strong evidence against their own claims when doing so. When you make a mistake that big, and then don't retract it, then it demolishes your credibility. Kinda like how their hero Andrew Breitbart posted an edited clip of Shirley Sherrod speaking before a local NAACP group, and continuously lied about the contents of the edited clip he showed.