Again, this time with feeling, evidence of injury doesn’t tell you when the injuries occurred.
In his second interview, the same eyewitness said that he couldn’t tell if there was any hitting or if the person on top was just holding the other person down.
There is nothing about the injuries which suggests multiple blows - we know that he was struck once in the nose, and that his head was in contact with the ground. The lacerations could as easily be explained by thrashing on the ground.
This nice young man was punched just twice in the face by a 72-year-old. How does his police-station photo compare with Zimmerman’s?
When do you think he was beaten, then?
Regards,
Shodan
I suspect Martin hit him when the conflict started. (Who started the conflict remains unknown.) I don’t believe the fighting continued up until the gun went off, because the yelling on that tape doesn’t go in and out in volume the way we would expect it would if a fight was in progress. Particularly one that involved the elements that Zimmerman’s claims it did.
At least one person who studies sound for a living agrees with my assessment. Any expert agrees with yours?
It is in Zimmerman’s best interest to insist that Martin hit up until the very end, because his claim to self-defense becomes weaker if Martin backed down. The yelling is probably the strongest evidence the prosecution has this isn’t true.
Yeah, that’s exactly what I’m saying. :rolleyes:.
Ok, perhaps I went too far, but you’re certainly saying that people of that age shouldn’t be held responsible for their actions. Which is nonsense.
Voice recognition experts who spoke to The Daily Caller questioned the methodology and conclusions of a voice-identification analysis published by the Orlando Sentinel on March 31.
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.
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.”
One voice authentication expert whose work is commercial in nature told TheDC that screaming, stress, and a recording’s audio quality can “wreak havoc” on voice biometric software and its ability to interpret data.
And speaking of Owen’s findings, another industry insider said that “a legitimate biometrics expert would likely refute the contentions” and suggests that these were “incendiary publicity plays.”
That was nice info, but it misses the mark. His opinion doesn’t address whether that yell is consistent with the source simultaneously having their face punched, head banged, and/or mouth covered in an attempt to suffocate.
Neither is your expert’s.
Did you have a cite from “someone who studies sound for a living” who says that the screams on the recording are not consistent with someone having their face punched?
Regards,
Shodan
The words recorded are consistent with a person being assaulted. It’s just common sense. you keep coming up with conspiracy theories in an attempt to explain away the obvious.
Zimmerman was obviously injured. Martin was not. The eye witness accounts are consistent with Zimmerman’s story as is the physical evidence of assault.
You’ve apparently misunderstood the discussion here (to judge you favorably).
The question is how likely is that TM initiated the violence versus GZ. To that end, someone pointed to GZ’s past history as evidence, and Shodan noted that this was countered by TM’s own history.
Whether TM is less culpable if indeed he did initiate the violence is not relevant to Shodan’s point, which was about how likely it is that TM did in fact initiate it.
But FWIW, to the extent that you’ve shown that teenagers brains are not fully developed etc., it only supports Shodan’s point, in that it provides additional reason to believe it was the teenager who initiated the violence rather than the adult.
In sum, you had no point, and to the extent that there was one to be made from your cite, it argued against you.
That’s why in general it would be a good idea if you actually stated what point you were making rather than just link to a source with a lot of long words and then accuse your opponents of stupidity. Unless of course that’s the best you can do. Something in that.
Sure, I do. But I doubt it’ll change your opinion, so I’m not sure why you’re asking me this.
From the cite:
Make of that what you will. Not expecting it to change your mind.
Martin punched Zimmerman because he tried to detain him. It’s just common sense. No evidence needed.
Martin was on top of Zimmerman because he was threatened with a gun. It’s just common sense. No evidence needed.
Zimmerman murdered Martin because was a scary Negro. It’s just common sense. No evidence needed.
One of the voice experts claimed the voice cracked like someone undergoing puberty. I think he’s several years off the mark. Martin was 17, not 12 or 13. From my high school days, and I suspect everyone’s high school days, all the black kids had achieved puberty before the white and asian kids.
THAT’S your evidence? Some guy “thinks” he hears a younger voice?: "One of those experts is Alan R. Reich, and his answer is that he is certain he can hear a young man he concludes is Martin pleading for his life, from the start of the 45-second recording until the end. "
Seriously? In lieu of physical evidence showing Zimmerman was assaulted and far more likely to utter words begging for help. Your evidence is a guy who thinks he hears a young voice therefore it had to be Martin. That would get shredded in court.
I know it’s hard to get your mind around, but there is a whole field of study dedicated to this topic.
What is your evidence that this tape poses no problems for the defense?
That’s pure speculation on your part. It isn’t backed up by any evidence. It’s more likely that Martin was insulted by Zimmerman’s response. Zimmerman on the other hand would have been foolish to assault Martin with the police on their way.
That’s pure speculation on your part. All that we know is that Martin assaulted Zimmerman.
That’s pure speculation on your part and racist to boot.
How in the hell are you getting that (bolding mine)? I mean, dude, who has the history of resisting arrest, who has a history of not following authority, who has a history beating women? If anyone has the violent past it’s Zimmerman. Additionally, Zimmerman was the only adult in the situation. Quick story: I just moved to Chicago a few weeks ago. While walking through Edgewater neighborhood, a black guy (whom looked under 18) bumped into my shoulder, when I stopped in mid-stride and looked back with a grim stare. He turned around and asked me in a nasty voice “What the fuck I was looking at.” I smirked, pulled my headphones over my ears, and kept walking. You see, when you’re a mature adult, you don’t get into fistfights with teenagers.
- Honesty
It was already shown to you.
From this site: Ryan is the retired head of the FBI forensic audio, video and image analysis unit. He said even the best audio forensic expert in the world using the most sophisticated equipment available would have a difficult time determining much at all from a recording of such degraded quality.
Ryan also questioned the basic idea that the age of the person or persons screaming during the 45 seconds — and thus whether it was 17-year-old Martin or 28-year-old Zimmerman or both — can be determined by measuring frequency, or pitch.
“To my knowledge, there are no scientific studies of pitch as an indicator or anything else in a scream that would give someone confidence to say how old somebody was,” Ryan said.
When it comes to emotionally charged situations, especially a life-or death situation, the range of the human voice is simply too wide and varied to correlate it accurately to age, Ryan said.
A 28-year-old might scream like a 17-year old. A 17-year old might yell like a 28-year-old.
The audio was made from a phone inside a home. It represented seriously degraded quality. All you can reliably hear is that there was repeated cries for help. The idea that anything else can be gleaned from it will be destroyed by experts like Ryan (who is a retired head of FBI audio forensics).