Nelson’s ruling does not say anything about defense presenting their experts.
Because the “experts” were quacks, hearing nonsense like “These shall be!” in the noise.
What makes you think the defence won’t call the witnesses who say the screaming is unidentifiable?
Firstly, the legal sense is the actual sense. If the court says he’s not guilty, he is actually not guilty. Regardless of what actions he may have taken. Secondly, he’s not tried to stop experts weighing in, he’s tried (successfully) to make sure that only legitimate experts - that is, those who meet the legal standard of an expert - can do so.
Yes, I’m sorry; I didn’t mean to imply otherwise. IRL I’ve reached the point where nearly everyone I talk to is a lawyer, so I forget to fill in some of the explanatory details.
No, not necessarily. The whole concept behind Frye is that it requires the technology to be generally accepted. For example, IIRC the Supreme Court of Minnesota, in the late 1980s, upheld a ruling barring the use of DNA evidence.
Obviously they’ve since changed their minds, but the future employment of Owen and Reich hinges on what kinds of verifiable, proven results their technology can produce down the road; if they can show solid results this ruling won’t hinder them later.
Damn it Jim! This is a message board, not a trial. There is more than one definition of ‘innocent’. It was clear what ‘actual’ meant in that context.
I don’t see where the judge’s ruling prevents the defense expert from testifying. Can you explain this reasoning?
On the contrary. The position taken by the defense team is that experts Owen and Reich’s technology was unreliable as a matter of law. Anyone who is actually innocent, but on trial anyway, would absolutely be interested in ensuring the jury did not hear unreliable conclusions.
Given the CSI effect, it absolutely helps the defense. As Judge Nelson wrote in her order, citting Ramirez III:
Owen and Reich testifying would have been gut feelings leading the way, not science. That is why they were excluded, their methods didn’t meet a fairly low bar of scientific acceptance.
Not all experts, these two hacks, because he didn’t want to be railroaded by junk science.
It would seem to me the State based it’s case on evidence like this against what was already established by the FBI to be inconclusive.
If this is the type of evidence the state moved forward on (again discounting something new and meaningful) then it appears to be a house of cards that never should have been built in the first place. In other words, nothing has changed from the original decision NOT to prosecute. The Prosecution by-passed the Grand Jury process to make this case happen and they’re left with nothing but inflammatory suggestions of what might have occurred.
They apparently had three bits of allegedly inculpatory evidence, Reich and Owen, DD’s testimony, and the fact Zimmerman changed Trayvon’s exit from running to skipping. The rest of the evidence, from witness statements, plus the nearness claimed by the witnesses, the incident starting less than half a minute from path leading to the T, allegedly where Zimmerman’s truck was parked, four minutes AFTER Zimmerman got off the phone, Zimmerman’s factual injuries, Trayvon’s grass stained knees, Zimmerman’s grass stained back and pants, the lit penlight found at the T, etc, is not inculpatory., DD is going to get skewered if she testifies, because she has Trayvon walking and running at least part of time, from a short trip, approximately ten minutes, but having George see him and phone the dispatcher forty minutes after Trayvon leaves the 7-11. Why Trayvon would hide, which DD didn’t claim, since any dolt should know they could be home before George even got out of the truck, or a few feet past it, in a quick run if he was scared,and with hundreds of townhouses to search, there’s no way he could have been found. Since the parents aren’t claiming Trayvon is special, what would he be doing at the T? Beyond arrogance, since there’s no evidence that Zimmerman was physically dragging him back there.
.
Zimmerman said in his original statement that he was screaming for help. This is significant because at that point he wasn’t aware of the 911 recording’s contents. I’m interested in seeing how the defense gets this point made in the trial. Do they use it in rebuttal during the prosecution case? Or save it for the defense case?
I’m very relieved the Frye hearing excluded that bad voice expert. He lost all credibility claiming to hear words within those screams. That’s going to be hard for him to live down in future trials.
Zimmerman statement to the police.It is hand written.
He wasn’t aware of ANY of the evidence such as where Martin lived or his statement to Dee Dee that he was there prior to the event. It matches the direction that Zimmerman says he comes from.
When Zimmerman spent 5 hours with the police immediately following the event he should have assumed someone recorded it with a camera phone considering almost everybody has one now.
I believe he expressed relief when (falsely) told that the incident had been recorded. If that’s backed up by a witness or by the police statement, then it demonstrates at minimum that he believes his story, and so was not lying. The totality of his statements seem far more like those of someone who regrets being put in a position where they had to kill than someone who regrets getting caught, and I believe that the jury will see it the same way. If, of course, there’s nothing presented at the trial to counter that.
Order Excluding the Opinion Testimony of Mr. Owen and Dr Reich.
http://media.trb.com/media/acrobat/2013-06/244865880-22065440.pdf
The judge did a nice job summarizing the Frye hearing. Very interesting read.
I have to believe that if Martin was anywhere in the back yard area he would have heard Zimmerman on the phone and seen him walking on the sidewalk. There was no attempt by Zimmerman to lower his voice based on the phone call and he’s heard banging his flashlight. Martin on the other hand DID lower his voice per Dee Dee’s account and was at his father’s house. He is attempting to conceal his position and knows the general location of Zimmerman who is out in the open. If Martin meant to remain concealed then he need only remain wherever he was or simply enter the house when he could no longer see Zimmerman which would correspond to when Zimmerman walked to the end of the T. but in order for the fight to occur at the location it was known to occur Martin has to come out in the open and move toward Zimmerman’s last known location which is well away from the house.
It is in the interrogation transcript.
It is in the interrogation transcript.
https://www.txantimedia.com/?p=1025
Serino: OK. Gotta ask that. Um, like I said, this child has no criminal record whatsoever, ah, good kid. A mild-mannered kid. Part of what I’ve been doing the last couple days is trying to get into his head, a psychological profile, and find out what his likes are, dislikes are, his hobbies, all the rest of that stuff. And one of his hobbies happens to be the videotaping of everything he does. OK. He has, has a library, very impressive, going through his phone, we got a little bit, but the battery died. We’re still working on that. There’s a possibility that whatever happened between you and him is caught on videotape. And this is going to be our final interview. I’m not gonna talk to you any more after this. We’re good, you know what I’m saying? That right there, that’s his cell phone.
Zimmerman: Yes, sir.
Serino: OK. That’s a camera. Um, there’s a very strong possibility that what’s on there is either gonna help you or, you know, not help you. And that’s why I gotta clarify a few things about what happened out there. Um, how tall are you, how much do you weigh?
Zimmerman: Ah, 5-8, ah, 194.
Serino: OK. Trayvon’s about 6 foot, about 150 pounds. (Gets out a photograph)That’s him, that’s the gunshot you put in him, it went right through his heart. OK, um, a skinny kid. Obviously, like I said, a lot of questions are being brought up, um, he was unarmed. Ah, he… But like I said, because of, I mean, obviously you passed a lie detector test and you’ve done all that, but, like I said, if there’s anything that you haven’t said, that might be in that phone…
**Zimmerman: I prayed to God that someone videotaped it
Serino: Would be videotaping this.
Zimmerman: Or the neighborhood had put up a video camera that I didn’t know about or something.**
Serino: Listen, it’s not a guarantee, but like I said a strong possibility, I’m hoping myself.
If they’re allowed to have witnesses give testimony regarding whose voice it is then they should be allowed to hear the voice on the video taken by Martin’s phone.
It would be interesting if the testimony of that voice could then be entered into court but I doubt it. At least the Jury would hear Martin’s deep voice.
Thanks, that’s the part I remembered, except that it seems that the investigators did think there was a possibility Martin recorded some of it.
There have been comments in several threads about how the prosecution doesn’t have much hope unless they have an ace in the hole somewhere that we aren’t aware of.
Would that even be possible? I thought the days of ambush prosecution and defense were well behind us and pretty much guaranteed to get you in the judge’s bad graces. Shouldn’t the defense be aware of any and all possible evidence that can potentially be used against Zimmernan?
I know it’s possible that there was a witness with an HD low-light video camera recording the whole episode and just holding on to it until the trial starts before offering it up to the networks for a big payday. Unlikely, but possible. What effect would that have on proceedings?