It seems to me as though many people –monstro, in this thread-- are deriving their technical expectations from “NCIS,” because if Abby and McGee had that phone for longer than three seconds, they would handed a complete call history to Gibbs.
If I am wrong, then I would love to know what monstro IS basing her analysis on.
Why isnt the fact that it wasn’t until day 5 that they attempted to ID the phone’s number an indicator that they didn’t try very hard to follow up on this evidence?
It’s only with the benefit of hindsight that we can dismiss this as trivial. The chief of police was going to the press defending Zimmerman as someone who had acted in self defense, and all along they had a piece of unexamined evidence from Martin that could have potentially contradicted this claim and embarrassed them. As much phones are used to take videos nowadays, it’s not out of the realm of possibility that Martin could have taped some portions of his encounter with Zimmerman. Or he could have recorded audio of it.
You’d think it wouldn’t take a ESP-having genius to figure out that Martin might’ve been on the phone right before the conflict started, and that the person he was talking to might provide some insight into what went down. Especially when you look at the timeline of events and realize that he could’ve made it home in the time it took Zimmerman to find him after initially seeing him. So if the cops were in the process of waiting for permission to hack into his phone and get access to the logs, you have to wonder why they didn’t wait for these records to come through before defending Zimmerman’s credibility. The simplest explanation is that they weren’t waiting for any records. They already had their minds made up.
How do you know how Zimmermans mind works? If he’s the type to act first and ask for forgiveness later, it greatly increases the likelihood that he’d be willing to do something unlawful if he thought he wouldnt get in trouble for it.
I already quoted a defense attorney in Florida that advised his clients to lock their cell phones so police officers won’t look through their phones. He certainly seems to think that the average police officer doesn’t know how to break the password.
http://www.theadvocateforyou.com/Cri…ourt-Says.aspx
BTW, it is pretty silly to use the iPhone as an example, since t-mobile is the only major carrier that doesn’t carry the iPhone. The only way an iPhone would be on a t-mobile network would be a jailbroken phone.
Yes, accessing the contacts would useful for identification.
Bricker, is there a reason to assume it was a smartphone? Who knows what the cops did with it? Finding out if there was an open phone connection during the incident seems pretty important, though.
NBC was smart, but that was hardly a act of moral courage when they throw a junior employee under the bus and pretend no one up the food chain looked at the footage before it aired. The fired a producer in Miami, not at 30 Rock.
I wondered about that myself. I checked and t-mobile doesn’t actually sell dumb phones anymore.
http://www.t-mobile.com/shop/phones/?pricerange=0-0
Unless the phone was a hand-me-down or a SIM only account, there is a pretty good chance Martin had a smart-phone.
You can still get basic phones pre-paid. How did you know it was t-mobile? This is all rather pointless without knowing the model. It could have been a brand new smartphone or a 3 year old piece of crap.
Yes.
Kind of my point.
If you say the police were incompetent for failing to break into the phone, then you must know it was an old piece of crap. That’s at least statistically unlikely …although obviously quite possible.
So I am trying to learn how those who are making the claim have learned the phone’s model. (Or, as I said above, I suspect that some posters are using the “NCIS” school of forensic theory.)
Yes, don’t you hate it when people do that?
It was mentioned it was t-mobile in multiple places and they actually show part of his bill showing the call from his girl friend. A prepaid account is unlikely based on the number of hours he spend talking to his girl friend that weekend.
http://abcnews.go.com/images/US/ht_trayvon_martin_phone_call_dm_120320_main.jpg
My thought is not that the lawyer is getting paid too much, but that this whole defense strategy is wack and will probably be good for a few laughs as the days creep on.
Why are they playing up the severity of Zimmerman’s injuries when that is nonessential to a legitimate self defense claim? Given the underwhelming evidence of injury captured on that video and in the police report (plus his delay in seeking medical care) you would think the defense would now choose to play up Zimmermans fear of serious injury, as opposed to portraying him as actually being a victim of serious injury.
Now that he’s making his injuries the centerpiece of his claim, he’s making it easier for him to lose. All the prosecution has to do is cast doubt on his claim that Martin inflicted all this egregious harm on him, and he risks losing in court.
I have no idea what kind of phone Martin had, but out of curiosity I called my cell provider to ask them what would happen if I forgot the password to my Blackberry Curve. The rep told me that they could have to reset it for me, losing all my internally saved information in the process. When I asked if there was a way to reset the password without losing the info he said that “may be possible” but I’d have to contact Blackberry directly, as their company doesn’t take responsibility for that kind of thing and urges customers to write down their passwords.
That led me to wonder about my memory card, so I checked the settings on my phone. Turns out that setting a password only protects usage of the phone; I had to check two boxes to encrypt the memory card and the media saved on it. Up until that point, anyone could have popped out my card and accessed the music, pictures, videos and audio recordings I’ve saved on it using another Blackberry or a memory card reader. (Not anymore!)
That’s what I found out using a telephone and curiosity, and it took less than ten minutes. I would presume that it would occur to a police department investigating a shooting death would make even more of an effort that I just did. I’m just wondering: did they?
This is old. Please get new material already.
You keep thinking all this is a court proceeding. It isn’t. The attorney’s remarks to the press have no relevance in court. In fact, they cannot even be brought up in court. So who cares what he says?
This is PR and has no relevance to whatever they claim in court. Their best strategy is not to be charged by the DA, but I doubt she is listening to Zimmerman’s attorneys. If she decides she doesn’t have enough evidence to convict Zimmerman, in theory she could plea bargain or decide not to prosecute, but I doubt that is politically possible in this case.
Fair enough. But I fail to see how the Shaken Baby angle helps Zimmerman even if we limit this to the court of public opinion. It just makes him look even more like someone who is willing to stretch the truth to justify the death of an unarmed person. If I didn’t know any better, I’d think Zimmerman likes hearing people crucify his name in the press. Shit like this only encourages that.
This goes back to my original point that Zimmerman’s lawyers are idiots.
If it was Zimmerman who was bringing it up, you’d be right. Was it?
The “shaken baby syndrome” was not brought up by attorneys to say that Zimmerman got it. They never said it. They brought it as an example of serious injuries that can happen from seemingly non-life-threatening actions. It was stupid of them to say it just because of the word “baby” in it. But then no one said lawyers are geniuses. I bet you it won’t be brought up in court.
As it stands NOW. Based on what has been presented so far. We know Zimmerman stated he was attacked and the police report states acknowledgement of injuries. We could guess that Zimmerman described injuries to his knees but logic suggests that he would talk about the injuries to his head.
I’m not making any claims. this is my opinion. You however, seem to have a problem with someone’s opinion to the point you’ve called me names. This is IMHO.
I’m drawing a conclusion according to everything I’ve read up to NOW. My conclusion is my opinon at that’s what we do in IMHO. I’ve done it in a rational manner without attacking other posters. You however, seem to have difficulty with this process.
If you want to make the obvious point that we don’t know all the facts then make it leave. It’s a self-ending statement that requires no other input from you. But some of us can consider both sides of the issue and believe it important to discuss it in an environment where news agencies have deliberately mis-reported facts, celebrities are posting erroneous information, and hate groups are offering rewards for the capture of Zimmerman.
