yes, I think the person with someone on top of him striking him is most likely to be the one yelling for help.
You still avoid the question like it’s the plague. How did Martin get to the intersection of the T. It doesn’t matter where Martin is in this scenario. He can be at his house or hiding behind a bush. It’s such a simple question. How does Martin come to be at the intersection of the? Zimmerman is where he said he was at. His account is reinforced by the audio tape, a witness who heard people running by, and the location of his flashlight. Martin was in close proximity to his house by his own statement to Dee Dee. He’s not visible to Zimmerman. Zimmerman walks to the end of the sidewalk and back. He comes back into view of Martin. Regardless of the exact location of Martin he now finds himself at the intersection of the T where the evidence shows the fight started (consistent with Zimmerman’s account).
How does Martin go from hiding behind a bush (the closest is 50 feet away) to verbally confronting Zimmerman? The logical answer matches Zimmerman’s account. Martin approaches Zimmerman. Instead of going inside his house when he loses sight of Zimmerman he is now standing out in the open in a confrontation. Given the location it appears Zimmerman was indeed walking back toward the location he expected the police to be coming from.
It would make more sense if the flashlight was next to a bush but it wasn’t.
He doesn’t have to be Usain Bolt. He’s on record as stating clearly there is no need for him to run. He never mentions he’s hiding. His entire conversation implies he walked back to his house. Dee Dee then says it picks up minutes later. So if you want to believe Martin was lying then it ignores the evidence. Your faith is based on both people lying about what happened.
Bricker,
Hurry up with those manslaughter elements…
Why can’t you provide them? Is your internet broken? Why are you incapable of doing your own research? You were handed elements for 2nd degree. It should be a piece of cake to find elements for manslaughter if you only put in the effort.
Maybe there are some here who assume GZ pulled the post out of the ground and carried it along as he sprinted after TM??? It would then be more than obvious to those persons that the PD had returned the post to its original position in order to take the crime scene photo’s. This would fall under the “speculation” part of the thread. hehehe.
This is not a correction of any “legal” issues but only my take on the “audio experts”. Originally, the Orlando Sentinal had hired two experts to listen to 9-1-1 recording(s). (I’m not sure how the Sentinal “acquired” those recordings.)
The 1st, Owen Forensic Services, is pushing his “new” technology out of his start-up basement business. It returned a 48 percent match to TM’s voice. Owen himself said a positive match with audio of this quality would require a higher than 90 percent match. Not exactly a positive match, even if it were legally admissable.
The 2nd was Ed Primeau, a recognized, Michigan-based, audio engineer and forensics expert. At that point in time, Primeau said the cry for help was the voice of a “young man”. He also admitted that he had never heard TM’s voice let alone TM’s voice under stress and his method required a duplication of the words and the stress levels of the subject to provide a court admissable positive match. That’s not even possible at this point.
I also remember Primeau saying he was not a believer in the technology’s Owen used, especially in a courtroom setting. I was left with the impression that Primeau would testify for the defense against Owen’s findings for the prosecution.
Can I assume you’re praying that GZ will be found guilty and not that the truth will come out during the trial?
These “audio experts” are not dealing with some sound-proof recording studio provided recording. Cellphones recording voices from a distance and in the rain. Transmission via wireless and land line connections. Did the PD have a brand new, calibrated, 9-1-1 recording machine? New Hotness or Old and Busted?
I’m not an audio expert but I know that audio experts have been proving AND disproving the same sounds that were recorded at the JFK assaination.
So if I follow transmission of the Martin/Zimmerman recording correctly;
- While two people struggled outside, one of them cried out for help.
- Someone called 9-1-1.
- The sound traveled thru walls or open/closed windows (it was raining).
- The sound was picked up by either a cell phone (or an old fashioned handset).
- The sound was converted to a digital signal by the phone.
- The digital signal was either transmitted to the closest cell tower
or - via multiple repeaters (signal regenerators) to the near end phone company office.
- The digital signal was then transmitted to the far end telephone office closer to the police station.
- The digital signal was then transmitted over a land line to the police station.
- That digital signal was converted to “voice” plus it was transferred to a recording device.
I would say the audio experts certainly have their work cut out for them. Personally, I hate cell phones because the voice quality is not very good. Landline to landline calls are much clearer.
They also compress the data on cellphones by taking out the high and low tones.
Good point. There are also upper and lower reception limits on corded phones.
Many also employ noise reduction algorithms to reduce handling noise and also filter wind noise up to around 5mph, which is fast walking speed.
Sorry for the delay.
The following are based on the culpable negligence theory. There is also an intentional act manslaughter which is, I believe, also a possibility, but I am going to give you these because this fits my personal belief of what happened.
If anyone wants the elements for manslaughter by intentional act, let me know.
1. Martin is dead.
-
The death of Martin was caused by the culpable negligence of Zimmerman. -
The killing of Martin was not necessary to resist an attempt to murder or commit a felony upon Zimmerman. -
The killing of Martin was not committed by accident or misfortune while doing any lawful act by lawful means with usual ordinary caution and without any unlawful intent. -
The killing of Martin did not occur by accident and misfortune in the heat of passion as the result of upon any sudden and sufficient provocation.
-
The killing occurred in the state of Florida, in the county of Seminole.
What would happen if the jury decided that despite Zimmerman admitting he intentionally shot Martin, that it was actually an accident?
Then he’d be acquitted.
That would be, in effect, jury nullification: despite plain uncontroverted evidence, the jury makes a finding that runs contrary to that evidence.
It’s in their power to do. And since their finding has the effect of an acquittal, the action is unreviewable by a higher court.
A jury can also do the reverse: find guilt even when no evidence on the record supports it. In those cases, however, the trial judge has the power to set aside the jury’s verdict, and if he fails to do so, an appeals court can do the same thing.
But if the jury uses its power to acquit where it should convict, the criminal benefits with no real way to undo the miscarriage of justice.
Whew..this is about the most interesting thing this thread has seen in PAGES.
Thanks
This is, in my view, not a fair criticism. It’s easy to search for the statute, and post those elements. But a completely correct listing will also involve searching for the standard jury instructions and the caselaw interpreting them, and of course Shepardizing the case law to make sure you’re not quoting a case that was subsequently overruled.
Thank you bricker…I didn’t want to get nasty and receive another warning.
\Some people don’t know when to lay off–that was a completely inappropriate comment.
To add to that, if those taps are from Zimmerman’s flashlight, plus the fact there’s no recorded wind noise or heavy breathing at that point in time, than he logically couldn’t possibly have known Trayvon was still around. Why would he be just standing there if he knew where Martin was? He would have had to run into Trayvon by accident, or Trayvon came out of hiding like Zimmerman said. It seems apparent enough that when the dispatcher said he didn’t want Zimmerman following the suspect he stopped. Did he start again after the phone call. I personally doubt it.
His own words to the cops indicate he thought Martin might still be in the area. This is why he didn’t want to give his home address to the cop, remember?
So what do you think he was doing during the two minutes after the call ended? Why do you think Zimmerman asked that the cops call him for directions when they got there rather than meet them at the mailboxes as originally agreed upon? Why didn’t Zimmerman give them an address while on the call, after all the work he supposedly put in looking for a street sign? If his intent was to stay put and not go searching for Martin, that would have made the most sense, ya think?
I don’t know where he went after the phone call, but why would he search for someone after a two minute head start by Martin (during the phone call)? You’d think Martin would be long gone by than. Zimmerman likely didn’t have unusual powers of ESP.
\
Zimmerman might have thought the kid was bound and determined to rob someone’s house that night, and was not exactly in the hurry to leave the neighborhood.
If Zimmerman was convinced the kid was a lost cause, then that makes it even weirder that he didn’t ever give an address to the cops.