Trayvon Martin

[Balta1701]

Like I said earlier, I'm sure the NSA has a recording of her call, just release it already!

I dunno, they're black, but were they also Islamic?

[Y2HH]

I don't think when he put his hood up is relevant anyway, so I don't see any reason to discount her story.

 

Like I said earlier, I'm sure the NSA has a recording of her call, just release it already!

 

I agree, it's not relevant. And the odds of the NSA having any such recording are almost 0. Maybe in Hollywood.

[StrangeSox]

I dunno, they're black, but were they also Islamic?

 

NSA records us all.

[Y2HH]

NSA records us all.

 

Lol.

[CrimsonWeltall]

A review of police records confirms Taaffe’s account of crimes in the neighborhood. According to the Miami Herald, police were called to Twin Lakes 402 times in the 13 months before Martin’s death. According to the Herald’s review of police records, the community experienced eight burglaries, nine thefts, and a shooting over that period.

 

That's once a DAY...in a small gated community. Jebus.

[BigSqwert]

He only put the hoodie up after Zimmerman spotted him, supposedly.

So what difference does that make? What about the indisputable facts, like:

 

- it was raining

- the kid being stalked was unarmed

- the kid being stalked weighed 150 lbs and was 17 years old

- the kid being stalked was carrying a can of tea and candy

- the kid being stalked committed no crimes

- the stalker was 28 yrs old and weighed 50 lbs more than the kid

- the stalker was armed

- the stalker ignored instructions by dispatcher to avoid confrontation

- the stalker killed the kid

 

These are the only things we know to be 100% true. Everything else is guesswork. This list shows why 99% of people are outraged. I'm still wondering why there are people treating the stalker as if he's the victim.

[BigSqwert]

Because there's no proof that he did anything illegal or that he's racist.

What crime are you certain Treyvon committed where it was necessary that he be killed on the spot?

[Balta1701]

I'm not sure of anything yet. But being on top of a person and smacking their head off of the ground (or concrete) allows the person to respond with deadly force in the state of Florida. Is it possible that Zimmerman orchestrated this whole thing to get away with murder from the very beginning? Sure, but there's no proof (yet) and probably won't ever be, as the EMT's, Zimmerman's injuries, a witness, and Zimmerman's own story seem to gel enough to prevent proof without a reasonable doubt that he's a murderer.

Why do you continue to believe only Zimmerman's testimony so thoroughly?

[Balta1701]

I don't. I'm taking all of the aspects that we know into account. I'm sure that Zimmerman has skewed the story at least a little to make it sound like he acted in no way aggressively.

You also do refer to a "Witness" who I think others have suggested supported Zimmerman's case...I think this is the same one you're referring to, and that witness has talked to the press further and there are at the very least some issues with trying to say it lines up with Zimmerman's testimony...especially the fact that the "Witness" is depressed that Zimmerman isn't in jail after what he saw and his mother has kinda but not completely suggested that the police were trying to lead his answers.

"I picture myself back over where I saw it, and it sticks in the back of my mind," McLendon told HuffPost Black Voices on Saturday afternoon at his family's home. "Sometimes I'll, like, not be listening to the teacher, and I'll daydream or just think off about it. I've been feeling bad for him and his family."

 

According to police, George Zimmerman, 28, the self-appointed captain of the Retreat at Twin Lakes neighborhood watch, has admitted that he shot and killed Martin, 17, who Zimmerman described as "suspicious" in a 911 call made shortly before the shooting. He told the police that he shot the teen, who had come up from Miami a week or so earlier to visit his father, in self-defense. The police said he was licensed to carry the 9mm pistol he was carrying the night of the shooting. Zimmerman has not been arrested or charged in the killing.

 

"They still haven't arrested him yet," Austin said, his chin tucked low. "That's pretty much the main thing that's upsetting me."

 

Few of his friends at school understand why he's so upset.

 

"Not many middle school kids watch the news," he said.

 

...

 

Austin's mother, Sheryl Brown, said that the trauma from the night has not been limited to what her son witnessed. It also includes the way she says that the police and some media have twisted his account of the night to fit a self-defense theory, to say that a 13-year-old witness has claimed Zimmerman, and not Martin, was screaming for help. Both Austin and his mother are adamant that the teen could not see who was screaming, but they believe now that it was Martin.

 

Brown said in hindsight she feels the police investigator on the case attempted to lead her son to provide information that he didn't have. The investigator, she said, would nod yes when asking if it was the man in the T-shirt, who turned out to be Zimmerman, and not the one in the hooded sweatshirt, Martin, who was screaming out for help. And while the police have said that they don't have any evidence to refute Zimmerman's claims of self-defense, the investigators had a different story when they visited her family about a week after the shooting, Brown said.

 

"That investigator said flat out that we don't think it was self-defense," Brown said, recalling the day the police came to interview Austin. "Several times he said, 'I have kids, and I'm going to tell you something that I don't tell many people.' He looked at me and said, 'You have to read between the lines. There's some stereotyping going on.'"

 

She continued: "He stood here in my family room telling me that this guy [Zimmerman] is not right and it wasn't self-defense and that they have to prove that it wasn't. He was adamant about that. I don't know if that was to make me less uncomfortable or to make us feel that he was on our side."

This is also not the only "Witness" who has at least alleged that the police told them which of the 2 it was who did the screaming.

[Balta1701]

And even if that witness has his story recanted, is there proof that Zimmerman did it? No, it goes right back to nothing. Sorry, folks, this guy will walk.

I totally agree that this guy will walk. It's darn near impossible to prosecute anyone under that Florida law if the slightest bit of physical confrontation happened, and the guy's head was at least scratched somewhere.

 

And the fact that this guy will walk is a travesty. It is deserving of the nationwide outrage. Even if he took the shot in self defense because of something the kid did.

[Balta1701]

I wonder what's caused them to "now believe" that it was Martin.

The only reason why I look at these, of course, is just to illustrate how completely unreliable every "Eyewitness" statement is. You kept referring to a "Witness" supporting Zimmerman, and that's just as unreliable as the shooter's own statement is.

[Balta1701]

But her "quoting" another person will be accepted as complete fact.

You don't see the irony in having issues with that woman's statement but then repeatedly accepting the shooter's story and then saying that a witness has backed it up?

[Balta1701]

Again, take my posts as a whole, not a single sentence from each one.

You're the one, out of everyone here, so seems to me to be by far the most willing to accept the shooter's story and say that the kid was clearly the aggressor, to the point where you have said you wanted the kid to have triggered everything.

[Balta1701]

And I explained that by admitting that I was simply trolling on purpose to take the other side of the polar spectrum. And I still do hope that the kid triggered everything so that everyone looks like the jagoffs they are for automatically assuming the worst and jumping on the media hype.

Well, all I'll say in reply is that there are 2 witnesses who could give an accurate version of what they saw here, and it is wrong to just listen to only 1 of them. The other witnesses, they're at the very least a mess.

 

The big problem is that the other witness is dead. So yeah, any time someone tries to say that Martin clearly was the aggressor based on Zimmerman's statement and a bunch of other muddled and contradictory statements, I'm going to have a problem with it, because simply buying the shooter's story at face value is almost always a mistake.

[Y2HH]

Well, all I'll say in reply is that there are 2 witnesses who could give an accurate version of what they saw here, and it is wrong to just listen to only 1 of them. The other witnesses, they're at the very least a mess.

 

The big problem is that the other witness is dead. So yeah, any time someone tries to say that Martin clearly was the aggressor based on Zimmerman's statement and a bunch of other muddled and contradictory statements, I'm going to have a problem with it, because simply buying the shooter's story at face value is almost always a mistake.

 

And therein lies the problem.

 

Unless some additional facts arise, it looks like Zimmerman may be charged only to alleviate the mass media pressure, not because there are enough facts to actually make it stick (I don't see any such charges leading to a conviction), OR, Zimmerman pulled off the near perfect murder and walks, OR, Zimmerman is telling the truth, that while yes, he put himself into a bad situation, he was attacked and defended himself.

 

Almost every detail that could lead to an arrest/conviction that we have right now is circumstantial, because you said it...the only other witness that could shed light on the subject is dead. So right now people are guessing off of muffled phone recordings, crappy video that looks like something out of a late 90's nanny cam, a phone "witness", a "eye witness" that hardly saw or heard anything, who is now saying police told him to change his story, a police report, EMT reports (which nobody has seen), etc.

 

It all adds up to no conviction at the moment.

 

Where is Columbo when you need him?

[Balta1701]

And therein lies the problem.

 

Unless some additional facts arise, it looks like Zimmerman may be charged only to alleviate the mass media pressure, not because there are enough facts to actually make it stick (I don't see any such charges leading to a conviction), OR, Zimmerman pulled off the near perfect murder and walks, OR, Zimmerman is telling the truth, that while yes, he put himself into a bad situation, he was attacked and defended himself.

 

Almost every detail that could lead to an arrest/conviction that we have right now is circumstantial, because you said it...the only other witness that could shed light on the subject is dead. So right now people are guessing off of muffled phone recordings, crappy video that looks like something out of a late 90's nanny cam, a phone "witness", a "eye witness" that hardly saw or heard anything, who is now saying police told him to change his story, a police report, EMT reports (which nobody has seen), etc.

 

It all adds up to no conviction at the moment.

 

Where is Columbo when you need him?

I totally agree, I can't see any way you can get a conviction, and that is a travesty. This guy followed this kid, went after him on foot, the kid wound up dead, and he's going to walk.

 

Whatever mess of laws allowed that to happen...that's awful. That's more than sad, it's an outrage.

[BigSqwert]

It's not George Zimmerman crying for help on 911 recording, 2 experts say

As the Trayvon Martin controversy splinters into a debate about self-defense, a central question remains: Who was heard crying for help on a 911 call in the moments before the teen was shot?

 

A leading expert in the field of forensic voice identification sought to answer that question by analyzing the recordings for the Orlando Sentinel.

 

His result: It was not George Zimmerman who called for help.

 

Tom Owen, forensic consultant for Owen Forensic Services LLC and chair emeritus for the American Board of Recorded Evidence, used voice identification software to rule out Zimmerman. Another expert contacted by the Sentinel, utilizing different techniques, came to the same conclusion.

 

Zimmerman claims self-defense in the shooting and told police he was the one screaming for help. But these experts say the evidence tells a different story.

 

'Scientific certainty'

 

On a rainy night in late February, a woman called 911 to report someone crying out for help in her gated Sanford community, Retreat at Twin Lakes.

 

Though several of her neighbors eventually called authorities, she phoned early enough for dispatchers to hear the panicked cries and the gunshot that took Trayvon Martin's life.

 

George Zimmerman, a Neighborhood Watch volunteer, shot Trayvon, an unarmed 17-year-old, during a one-on-one confrontation Feb. 26.

 

Before the shot, one of them can be heard screaming for help.

 

Owen, a court-qualified expert witness and former chief engineer for the New York Public Library's Rodgers and Hammerstein Archives of Recorded Sound, is an authority on biometric voice analysis — a computerized process comparing attributes of voices to determine whether they match.

 

After the Sentinel contacted Owen, he used software called Easy Voice Biometrics to compare Zimmerman's voice to the 911 call screams.

 

"I took all of the screams and put those together, and cut out everything else," Owen says.

 

The software compared that audio to Zimmerman's voice. It returned a 48 percent match. Owen said to reach a positive match with audio of this quality, he'd expect higher than 90 percent.

 

"As a result of that, you can say with reasonable scientific certainty that it's not Zimmerman," Owen says, stressing that he cannot confirm the voice as Trayvon's, because he didn't have a sample of the teen's voice to compare.

 

Forensic voice identification is not a new or novel concept; in fact, a recent U.S. Department of Justice committee report notes that federal interest in the technology "has a history of nearly 70 years."

 

In the post 9-11 world, Owen says, voice identification is "the main biometric tool" used to track international criminals, as well as terrorists.

 

"These people don't leave fingerprints, but they do still need to talk to one another," he says.

 

'The home run'

 

Though the term "biometric analysis" may sound futuristic, it basically just means using personal characteristics for identification. A fingerprint scanner is an example of a biometric device.

 

Much as the ridges of a human hand produce a fingerprint, each human voice has unique, distinguishable traits, Owen says. "They're all particular to the individual."

 

Another benefit of modern biometric analysis, Owen said, is it doesn't require an "in context" comparison. In other words, Owen didn't need a sample of Zimmerman screaming in order to compare his voice to the call.

 

The technology Owen used to analyze the Zimmerman tape has a wide range of applications, including national security and international policing, he said. A recently as January, Owen used the same technology to identify accused murderer Sheila Davalloo in a 911 call made almost a decade ago.

 

Owen testified that it was Davalloo, accused of stabbing another woman nine times in a condo in Shippan, Conn., who reported the killing to police from a pay phone in November 2002.

 

Davalloo was convicted, according to news reports.

 

Owen says the audio from Zimmerman's call is much better quality than the 911 call in the Davalloo case. Voice identification experts judge the quality based on a signal-to-noise ratio; in other words, comparing the usable audio in a clip to the environmental noises that make a match difficult.

 

And the call on which the screams are heard is better quality than is necessary, Owen says.

 

"In our world, that's the home run," he says.

 

via

[SouthSideTeacher]

The girl on the phone said that she heard the confrontation between Trayvon and Zimmerman, "Why are you following me?"/"What are you doing here?" and further that she heard shoving between the men and the phone falling to the ground.

 

Nobody will be able to prove it, I realize, but if it was Trayvon who was pushed, (or grabbed, or whatever) in the exchange between himself and the guy who'd been stalking him in the dark-----long enough for the kid to even NOTICE, and then become creeped-out to the degree that he'd want to tell his girl about it---- wouldn't Trayvon be COMPLETELY JUSTIFIED in pounding this guy's head into the ground? I'm tired of hearing this bulls*** about Zimmerman's phantom head scratches and broken nose and his father's story that "If only Trayvon would have answered his questions [and done as he was told] the situation wouldn't have ended so tragically." As if the kid went crazy on Zimmerman OUT OF NOWHERE and Zimmerman had no choice but to shoot him in the chest.

 

I'm outraged. This confrontation wasn't out of nowhere. Zimmerman armed himself and went looking for a fight with someone half his size.

 

The police told Zimmerman not to follow Trayvon.

He continued to stalk the kid--and found a way to get off the phone with the dispatcher (something along the lines of "You know what, just call me when you get here... Bye.") so he could play Dog the Bounty Hunter without REALITY ("Yeah, we don't need you to follow him.") dulling the thrill of his chase.

In the few moments between the end of Zimmerman's 911 call and the police arriving on scene, the kid is dead.

The only real witness to the crime is the one guy with EVERYTHING to lose. That fact alone diminishes his credibility, which is why these grainy videos and witness(?) statements become so valuable.

 

[SouthSideTeacher]

And I explained that by admitting that I was simply trolling on purpose to take the other side of the polar spectrum. And I still do hope that the kid triggered everything so that everyone looks like the jagoffs they are for automatically assuming the worst and jumping on the media hype.

 

Faulty logic? Alright, you're entitled to your opinion.

 

For the record, I don't force my opinions or ideas onto my kids.

I prefer to facilitate a dialogue where they ask all the questions and put in work to find their own answers.

 

Not that anything YOU have to say here matters to me in the least.

Edited April 1, 2012 by SouthSideTeacher

[Y2HH]

Faulty logic? Alright, you're entitled to your opinion.

 

For the record, I don't force my opinions or ideas onto my kids.

I prefer to facilitate a dialogue where they ask all the questions and put in work to find their own answers.

 

Not that anything YOU have to say here matters to me in the least.

 

Perhaps you should try "facilitating a dialogue" instead of telling the person that nothing they have to say matters, merely because you don't agree with it.

 

And yes, to answer a previous question of yours, if Zimmerman attacked Martin, Martin has the right to "stand his ground" and defend himself.

[SouthSideTeacher]

Perhaps you should try "facilitating a dialogue" instead of telling the person that nothing they have to say matters, merely because you don't agree with it.

 

 

Normally, I'd wholeheartedly agree with you--except that you missed the part of my post where I quoted MM admitting to "trolling on purpose" and his hope that Trayvon was at fault "so that everyone looks like the jagoffs they are..."

 

So, yeah. I'm all for discussion, and even disagreement. I can hold my own. That's why I read & post here.

Dealing with trolls? That's just a waste of my time, no?

Edited April 1, 2012 by SouthSideTeacher

[caulfield12]

Isn't that what Greg does by always defending Ozzie?

 

Devil's Advocate.

 

Well, whatever the actual result, it's likely that the issue has become so politicized that very few will be satisfied with the conclusion. If Zimmerman eventually walks, which seems more and more likely, then it's just one more in a long line of miscarriages of justice to the African-American community stretching way back to Emmet Till and beyond.

 

If the Justice Department intervenes, or Attorney General Eric Holder, then they're abusing their Federal powers and railroading Zimmerman because Obama's black, that will be the argument.

 

Above and beyond that, you have the upcoming 2012 Presidential election and the precarious position the GOP has put themselves into (boxed into a corner) by the numerous inflammatory comments made during primary season. I'm not sure anyone on the political side of this sees an advantage in going after a conviction at this point. Maybe Keith Olbermann...

 

With George Bush, Latinos gave him 43% support. McCain was in the mid 30's. Romney's all the way down to the teens (in one poll that is claimed to be an outlier) but arguably bleeding at least 20% of the Hispanics who were trending GOP 8 years earlier because of all the harsh, tough on immigration rhetoric out there.

 

 

Edited April 1, 2012 by caulfield12

[Texsox]

I'm a little surprised that we are accepting the victim's girlfriend's unproven comments. Not saying she is lying, but it is his girlfriend, cannot be proven or disproved.

[iamshack]

I totally agree that this guy will walk. It's darn near impossible to prosecute anyone under that Florida law if the slightest bit of physical confrontation happened, and the guy's head was at least scratched somewhere.

 

And the fact that this guy will walk is a travesty. It is deserving of the nationwide outrage. Even if he took the shot in self defense because of something the kid did.

Why do you continue to post stuff like this? I've refuted this more than once, and Jenks has done it several times. The law isn't the problem here whatsoever. The problem is THERE IS NO EVIDENCE that says Zimmerman wasn't perfectly within his rights to defend himself. They'd have a difficult time convicting this guy in Illinois, without the SYG language. There is simply not enough reliable evidence (as it stands now), to prove that Zimmerman wasn't acting in self-defense, and therefore the Prosecutor has decided not charge him. It has nothing to do with the SYG codification, nor the common law for self defense in Florida, or almost any other state (there may be a few liberal states that do not allow one to use deadly force even in the face of certain and immediate harm or the presence of a forcible felony.)

Edited April 1, 2012 by iamshack

[Balta1701]

Why do you continue to post stuff like this? I've refuted this more than once, and Jenks has done it several times. The law isn't the problem here whatsoever. The problem is THERE IS NO EVIDENCE that says Zimmerman wasn't perfectly within his rights to defend himself. They'd have a difficult time convicting this guy in Illinois, without the SYG language. There is simply not enough reliable evidence (as it stands now), to prove that Zimmerman wasn't acting in self-defense, and therefore the Prosecutor has decided not charge him. It has nothing to do with the SYG codification, nor the common law for self defense in Florida, or almost any other state (there may be a few liberal states that do not allow one to use deadly force even in the face of certain and immediate harm or the presence of a forcible felony.)

If nothing else, the extra liability imposed on the state if they bring charges against people is a real hinderence as well.

 

But there's also NO EVIDENCE that says Martin wasn't perfectly within his rights to defend himself as well.