The cries for help

[KateNY]

Here (April 19):

New Account: Zimmerman Told Cops Trayvon <-well worth the full read.


(A side note: that source also said Zimmerman was so paralyzed with fear, he initially "forgot he had a gun." Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight. Who forgets they have a gun?? Give me a break.)

~snip~


For you folks that 'carry'...would you ever forget you had a gun?

I only have a rifle, so MHO doesn't count

:waitasec:

 

[Donjeta]

I wonder if the audio wizards at the FBI were able to enhance the 911 recordings and make out if Trayvon Martin's last words were "you got me" or "you shot me" or something along those lines.

 

[csziggy]

I don't buy that for a second. If they could match those screams to Trayvon why wouldn't he say so?

Detective Gilbreath would not say so because he did not do the comparison, he is not qualified to do that kind of analysis and possibly because he has not seen the actual report from the expert who was qualified and did do the analysis. He testified that he knew that experts hired by the Orlando Sentinel and the FBI had done analysis, but that does not mean he had any knowledge of their conclusions or was capable of testifying about the results.

O'MARA: Witnesses heard people arguing, sounded like a struggle. During this time, witnesses heard numerous calls for help. Some of this was recorded. Trayvon's mom reviewed the 911 calls and identified the cry for help and Trayvon Martin's voice. Did you do any forensic analysis on that voice tape?

GILBREATH: Did I?

O'MARA: Did you or are you aware of anything?

GILBREATH: The "Orlando Sentinel" had someone do it and the FBI has had someone do it.

O'MARA: Is that part of your investigation?

GILBREATH: Yes.

O'MARA: Has that given any insight as to the voice?

GILBREATH: No.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1204/20/cnr.02.html

O'Mara asked, "Did you do any forensic analysis on that voice tape?" Gilbreath asked him, "Did I?" because Gilbreath knew very well that was a 'fishing' question - he was not a voice expert and could not answer it. O'Mara then amended his question to, "Did you or are you aware of anything?" which Gilbreath could answer - he was aware of analysis done by the {Orlando} Sentinel and by the FBI and that those were part of the investigation.

But then O'Mara tried to push the point again and asked, "Has that given any insight as to the voice?" OF COURSE, Gilbreath answered "No" for the reasons I gave above.

IMO, JMO, etc.

 

[songline]

I have always believed that they were both on the bottom and on top at different times, and both screamed at different times.
I do not believe the screams indicate anything more then "there was a scuffle".

 

[Karmady]

Detective Gilbreath would not say so because he did not do the comparison, he is not qualified to do that kind of analysis and possibly because he has not seen the actual report from the expert who was qualified and did do the analysis. He testified that he knew that experts hired by the Orlando Sentinel and the FBI had done analysis, but that does not mean he had any knowledge of their conclusions or was capable of testifying about the results.



O'Mara asked, "Did you do any forensic analysis on that voice tape?" Gilbreath asked him, "Did I?" because Gilbreath knew very well that was a 'fishing' question - he was not a voice expert and could not answer it. O'Mara then amended his question to, "Did you or are you aware of anything?" which Gilbreath could answer - he was aware of analysis done by the {Orlando} Sentinel and by the FBI and that those were part of the investigation.

But then O'Mara tried to push the point again and asked, "Has that given any insight as to the voice?" OF COURSE, Gilbreath answered "No" for the reasons I gave above.

IMO, JMO, etc.

I read it the exact opposite. I see it as Q: Did you analyze? A: No I didn't, but others have. A: okay, now that we've determined that you didn't do the analysis, but it was done by others "has that given any insight [to anyone] as to the voice?"

Note that O'Mara doesn't frame that last question as a "you" question, and the witness doesn't answer it with a "me" response, imo, because they had already established that the witness did not do the analysis; the analysis had, in the past, been done by others; and the witness was aware of that although he did not personally participate in the analysis. If he wanted to respond only on his own behalf, he could have said "did it give ME insight?" Just like he did when he was asked about the analysis in the first place. I don't think he was being coy. I think the analysis was inconclusive. jmo

 

[Donjeta]

I don't know if the FBI had access to Trayvon Martin's voice samples, hopefully they did, but the Orlando Sentinel experts didn't.

IMO without Trayvon's voice sample "no" would be the correct answer to the question, if it means "did it give you insight as to whose voice it is". The only thing that the OS experts could conclude was that it wasn't George Zimmerman's voice but even if it is the correct result it does not mean that you should automatically get the insight that the voice is Trayvon Martin's. The test just eliminated one person from the universe of possible voices. The voice cannot be positively identified as Trayvon Martin's just because it may not have been George Zimmerman's. There could have been a third person screaming. Maybe one of the witnesses got scared and yelled. The tests say nothing about this possibility.

 

[sleonardelli]

I think once his gun was exposed GZ's gun was exposed he pretty much feared TM could have gotten ahold of it and used it against him. That may not have been true and it's possible TM was trying to keep from being shot. Either way had GZ not followed TM there would have been no chase, no fight, no shot fires and no dead body on the ground. We should be accountable for lives of others when we take risks. GZ had a choice, TM may not. jmo

IMO, this is why these laws need to change to protect citizens at large. NWP protocol "prohibits" weapons and CCW protocol indicates the CCW individual has a responsibility not to initiate a conflict and not act as LE. If an individual chooses, in either NWP or CCW capacity, to "violate" those protocols, they should not necessarily be protected by SYG or self-defense.

If GZ would've followed not only NWP guidelines (no weapons), but also CCW guidelines (not to cause a conflict/not act like LE), he would've never feared Trayvon accessing his weapon. Instead, GZ CHOSE to get out of his car to follow (again, against NWP protocol). IDK for sure where GZ was when he said "OK" to the advice not to follow but apparently, he and Trayvon did meet (according to the GF's "testimony"). I doubt we'll ever know who initiated the "scuffle" but, IMO, I think GZ, as the adult, should've done MUCH MORE (never began to follow or carried his weapon) to prevent this tragedy.

 

[sleonardelli]

Per RZ's statements regarding choking on copious amounts of blood and having difficulty breathing (broken nose), I cannot see how those screams could possibly be GZ's.

 

[sleonardelli]

I'm not sure what to make of "John". Let me show you why.

This is the floor plan for "John's" unit at 1221 Twin Trees. Notice the very small bathroom window I've circled:

http://www.407re.com/RetreatatTwinLakes

I'm fully aware of all that "John's" comments say. I've watched the video numerous times and read it several more. I'm aware that "John" says the fight/shooting was right outside his porch.

Now, with that said, I ran across a video last night with Francis Taaffe doing a walk thru with NBC, oddly enough on the same date as the Legislator's opinion piece on SYG, March 21.

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2...es-to-defense-of-trayvon-martins-shooter?lite

I snipped out a part of what Taaffe said because that was the first I knew of his saying anything about body location. Watch this short 16 second vid I posted a short while ago at YouTube:

Francis Taaffe Shows Where Trayvon Died - YouTube

Considering not only where Taaffe is standing and looking, notice the point RZ Sr. refers to as "where the sidewalks meet" is directly behind him.

Considering the exceptionally small size and "tight squeeze" placement of this bathroom window, look at the image in the attachment below. How likely is it that "John" would have the field of vision to even see where Taaffe and RZ Sr. say the deal went down?

I don't mind telling you, I can't see it, and that puts a quandary surrounding what Taaffe, Zimmerman Sr., AND "John" have to say. Add to that mix what George Zimmerman's OWN ATTORNEY and a State Investigator said at the Bond Hearing about the location of the body being, what would be, 170 feet up the sidewalk from where the aforementioned three said it was at:





I don't understand how something as straightforward as the body's location could be this convoluted, but I gotta tell you, my money's riding on the attorney and the Investigator to be shooting us straight as opposed to any of those three.

Wow! I just caught part of that article where FT says “I think any time you use a weapon, there are certain anger issues working,” Taaffe said. “I think he had fed-up issues. He was mad as hell and wasn't going to take it anymore.”

Seems to make the case for "depraved mind" doesn't it?

 

[csziggy]

I read it the exact opposite. I see it as Q: Did you analyze? A: No I didn't, but others have. A: okay, now that we've determined that you didn't do the analysis, but it was done by others "has that given any insight [to anyone] as to the voice?"

Note that O'Mara doesn't frame that last question as a "you" question, and the witness doesn't answer it with a "me" response, imo, because they had already established that the witness did not do the analysis; the analysis had, in the past, been done by others; and the witness was aware of that although he did not personally participate in the analysis. If he wanted to respond only on his own behalf, he could have said "did it give ME insight?" Just like he did when he was asked about the analysis in the first place. I don't think he was being coy. I think the analysis was inconclusive. jmo

If Detective Gilbreath had not read the reports of the FBI or the actual reports from the experts hired by the Orlando Sentinel (other than the general information published in the newspaper) then how could he have gotten any insight as to the voice? As to whether or not anyone else on the prosecution team might have insight, that would be hearsay as far as Gilbreath could say. It would be improper for him to testify about it under oath.

Gilbreath has been a law enforcement officer for a long time and has testified under oath enough times that he probably knew that it was something that he could not answer with anything other than a "No" response, no matter how O'Mara fished for an answer that would help Zimmerman's defense.

IMO, JMO, etc.

 

[Karmady]

If Detective Gilbreath had not read the reports of the FBI or the actual reports from the experts hired by the Orlando Sentinel (other than the general information published in the newspaper) then how could he have gotten any insight as to the voice? As to whether or not anyone else on the prosecution team might have insight, that would be hearsay as far as Gilbreath could say. It would be improper for him to testify about it under oath.
Gilbreath has been a law enforcement officer for a long time and has testified under oath enough times that he probably knew that it was something that he could not answer with anything other than a "No" response, no matter how O'Mara fished for an answer that would help Zimmerman's defense.

IMO, JMO, etc.

You can give hearsay testimony in court if there is no objection. In fact, imo, you can give any kind of inadmissible testimony or evidence in court if there is no objection. The court might not consider it, but rarely would a judge object for you.

But also, the the correct answer to the question, if the witness had no personal insight would be "I don't know" and maybe "[you'd have to ask XYZ]." Since he was answering a question that wasn't directed to his own personal knowledge, he also could have clarified that "he, himself, did not get any insight from the analysis." He had just clarified the prior question and answer in exactly that way, as I mentioned.

Anyway, that's just my take on it. We can agree to disagree

 

[Emeralgem]

I will admit this, I do believe that there is one "help" that was Zimmerman. I do believe that one "help" from Zimmerman came right before he fired his shot into Trayvon. I do not believe that the other screams and pleas are from Zimmerman, I belive those are Trayvon begging for his life. So technically, yes Zimmerman yelled "help". He just doesn't clarify that it was only once and more than likely for the benefit of those neighbors that were hearing the screams of Trayvon.

MOO

And I am in total agreement with your thoughts on the subject..JMHO

 

[saguaro]

The cries for help are confusing because GZ is so soft spoken.

He doesn't have a deep, masculine voice.

IMO!

 

[who]

And I am in total agreement with your thoughts on the subject..JMHO

I second that emotion.

 

[amymarie]

Well, according to this LEO source, they had Zimmerman recreate what he was supposed to have screamed that night and recorded it.

It's possible no expert technological voice forensics will be needed. Just the ears of reasonable people listening to two screams side by side, both screaming -- that are supposed to be of the same person - that sound nothing at all alike.

And to my hearing, just of the screams -- that is a teenagers voice, that ended the second the shot was fired.

No doubt about it.

I've never been attacked or in a gun fight before, but I can almost guarantee that if I was being attacked and I was screaming, and then I shot my attacker, I would still be screaming out of shock that I had just shot someone and because I don't think it would comprehend right away that the attack was over.

 

[lonetraveler]

Per RZ's statements regarding choking on copious amounts of blood and having difficulty breathing (broken nose), I cannot see how those screams could possibly be GZ's.

I've got to say that I agree with you. After reading GZ's brother's statement about GZ choking on copious amounts of blood and having difficulty breathing and then listening to the frantic screams for help, I just cannot put GZ as the one doing the screaming, how on earth could he scream that loud while choking on blood and having difficulty with breathing. The person screaming doesn't appear to have a choking or breathing problem.

 

[Nova]

Interesting article on this topic at link:

"Finally, published studies of voice identification under experimental conditions show very high rates of error. Indeed, a report by the National Academy of Sciences on forensic voice identification concluded that the scientific basis for making reliable voice identifications is weak. The FBI, as a result of the report, apparently does not use forensic voice analysis for courtroom evidence, although as with polygraph evidence, it continues to use it for investigative purposes."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bennett-l-gershman/george-zimmerman-screaming_b_1468761.htm

If this article is correct, then at trial we will see some non-expert witnesses testify that it is GZ screaming and others testify that it is TM screaming. Result: draw on this particular issue. JMO MOO etc.

Izzy, I couldn't find the article at that link. Probably my fault.

But I have to believe that the accuracy of voice identification testing goes up radically as the number of possible suspects falls. It's one thing to identify an unknown caller out of all the people with telephones in a city; it's quite another to identify which of two possible people were screaming.

I think we're going to hear that the latter is far more accurate.

 

[Nova]

He was.

And he answered to what he knew, then.

Doesn't mean more information is not out there, just that at that point, what they had did not provide "insight." That's all he had to answer at the time.

I'm sure detectives are taught to say "I don't know" rather than speculate in response to questions for which the detective has not prepared.

To do otherwise--to say, "Yeah, I think the FBI proved the screams didn't come from GZ"--is to open the door to further questioning for which Gilbreath was not prepared. He would have risked discrediting the entire FBI testing process by giving wrong answers on a subject he hadn't studied.

 

[Nova]

I read it the exact opposite. I see it as Q: Did you analyze? A: No I didn't, but others have. A: okay, now that we've determined that you didn't do the analysis, but it was done by others "has that given any insight [to anyone] as to the voice?"

Note that O'Mara doesn't frame that last question as a "you" question, and the witness doesn't answer it with a "me" response, imo, because they had already established that the witness did not do the analysis; the analysis had, in the past, been done by others; and the witness was aware of that although he did not personally participate in the analysis. If he wanted to respond only on his own behalf, he could have said "did it give ME insight?" Just like he did when he was asked about the analysis in the first place. I don't think he was being coy. I think the analysis was inconclusive. jmo

You might be right IF both parties involved used your hyper-aware with the benefit of hindsight analysis of the exact wording. But humans being the self-focused creatures we are, I think it's more likely Gilbreath heard "given any insight" as "given any insight to you".

It would be very odd for Gilbreath to assume O'Mara was asking, "Have those tests given insight to anyone in the world?" And in fact, the answer to that question would have to be, "Yes." At least two testers thought they got insight from their testing.

 

[RANCH]

Izzy, I couldn't find the article at that link. Probably my fault.

But I have to believe that the accuracy of voice identification testing goes up radically as the number of possible suspects falls. It's one thing to identify an unknown caller out of all the people with telephones in a city; it's quite another to identify which of two possible people were screaming.

I think we're going to hear that the latter is far more accurate.

It's a pretty interesting article Nova. Check it out.

Whose Voice Is Screaming for Help? Zimmerman's or Martin's?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bennett-l-gershman/george-zimmerman-screaming_b_1468761.html