O’Mara Really Just Needs to Stop Talking

As if I needed more ammo, now I get a wishy-washy O’Mara who makes it seem like George is guilty to criticize.

I just don't know who is yelling - Copy

In the last hearing we got to hear of a hearing O’Mara wanted he feels will take up most of a day to go over. Because of the interrupting judge we never got to hear what that hearing he wants is going to be on.

Thanks to the media, ugh that’s rare, we know. It’s a hearing on W11’s 911 call with the yells for help from George on it. It seems pretty clear that what O’Mara wants is to allow the call to be heard by the jury without any argument or testifying from witnesses and experts as to who is yelling, which is George.

Fine, whatever, it’s a wash with witnesses anyway because one side will say it’s Trayvon and the other George, no surprise.

The science; the FBI already told the state why a comparison can’t be done so no need to regurgitate that here.

None of that concerns me. If this is what O’Mara wants then that doesn’t concern me either.

What concerns me is apparently O’Mara can’t open his mouth and sound like he’s actually defending George and worse still here in this interview we get “Gee willikers I thought it was George screaming but golly gee I guess I’m just not so sure anymore”. That’s me paraphrasing of course but go ahead and listen for yourself especially @1:10 of the video.

I get what he’s trying to say but damn, better to just say the science can’t prove it either way, so we’re just going to let the jury decide, listen to the call and take away from it what they will. He could even go on to say that though the science can’t prove it, logic does, so in that it was George screaming for help. Is that really so hard O’Mara?

http://www.hlntv.com/video/2013/04/30/george-zimmerman-trayvon-martin-cries-help

Update

Motion for Evidentiary Hearing
http://gzlegalcase.com/index.php/court-documents/157-motion-for-evidentiary-hearing

Advertisements

146 thoughts on “O’Mara Really Just Needs to Stop Talking

  1. Any chance this is some sort of legal eagle jujitsu to force revelation of any recordings of Trayvon’s voice if they exist?

    • Seems to me O’Mara already must have a sample from the subpoenas or else how is the other side making a comparison to say it’s Trayvon? Perhaps that will be mentioned at the hearing if that is the case.

      • Maybe the prosecution is just comparing Zimmerman samples and saying “See, it’s only like maybe 50%, and needs to be much higher to be reliable.”

        But if they’ve gotten any Martin exemplars to do a comparison with, could this “let’s skip the experts” motion somehow force them to reveal that if they try to fight the motion, at which point O’Mara can say “We’ll take a copy of those Trayvon recordings, too, thanks, to let our own (not necessarily in actual existance at this time) experts do a comparison.”, and that way they learn for certain if The Trayvon Tapes exist or not, and can prepare if they do?

        • Consider what the “experts” engaged by the Orlando Sentinel said (both have been added to the state’s witness lists:

          According to the Sentinel, (Tom) Owen (of Owen Forensic Services) used software “to compare Zimmerman’s voice [heard on another 911 call, which Zimmerman made earlier the evening of Feb. 26] to the 911 call screams” recorded during a neighbor’s phone call to police. The software, the Sentinel says, “returned a 48 percent match. Owen said to reach a positive match with audio of this quality [ackbarsays – of this quality? What call was he listening to?], 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.”that he knew it was Trayvon Martin because he was certain that it was a young man’s voice.” It wasn’t possible for Owen to determine if the voice was that of Martin, the newspaper adds, because he didn’t have a recording of the teen’s voice to compare to the shouts for help.

          Not all experts rely on biometrics. Ed Primeau, a Michigan-based audio engineer and forensics expert, is not a believer in the technology’s use in courtroom settings. Ed simply listened to the recordings. Then he decided the noises were Trayvon Martin because of the “tone of the voice.” “I believe that’s Trayvon Martin in the background, without a doubt,” Primeau says, stressing that the tone of the voice is a giveaway. “That’s a young man screaming.”

          So, you’ve got one state witness who says that there is a 48 percent match between the 911 call screams for help and George Zimmerman’s voice. That’s right – he says the two voices MATCH 48% using his software, and he’s claiming that it would need to be 90% for him to say that it was indeed a positive match. Therefore, he concludes that it must be Trayvon Martin, since he knows it was a young man’s voice. Of course, what he doesn’t know, or didn’t at that time before D-Man isolated the voice of young Mr. Martin on the 7-Eleven tape, was that Trayvon Martin’s voice was MUCH deeper than George Zimmerman’s voice.

          Hilariously, O’Mara could pit the state’s witnesses against each other, since Ed Primeau doesn’t believe that the software Owen used is reliable enough to be used in a court of law. He prefers to just go with his gut feeling, apparently.

        • That could be part of their strategy, but I think there may be something bigger. If “experts” are excluded, then of course MOM will still say he wants the 911 tape played for the jurors, to let them decide. And the reason for saying that is twofold: One, of course, is because just using common sense will tell anyone it IS George. But just as importantly, we know that Bernie realizes that too…. and so what might HE say about playing the tape in court? That’s right…. Bernie may come right out and say he does NOT want it played. And so then we’ll have dueling motions. MOM/West/George say absolutely YES, play the tape; Bernie/Corey/Crump say absolutely NO, do NOT play the tape! And then suddenly all the people who’ve been assuming all this time it was little boy Trayvon screaming, are gonna be like, “Umm… huh?! Why doesn’t Bernie want people to hear Trayvon screaming?!”

          That could be huge.

      • Maybe the people on the “other side” who are saying it’s Trayvon (or NOT George) are just those original two “experts” (hahaha!!). If so… well, we all know there are MAJOR problems with them.

    • I think O’Mara is just alluding to the FBI Audio Lab conclusions – that the recording is of too poor quality to make a comparison, that the recording does not contain information that could be enhanced and that there is no practical way to obtain an expemplar to compare it to given the highly stressful circumstance under which the recording was made.

      • Did the FBI try to determine who was screaming on the 911 tape(s) or were they only trying to solve the ‘coons / punks / goons’ issue?

        • They tried to do a voice id – or at least came to a conclusion about their ability to perform one.

          http://cfnews13.com/content/dam/news/static/cfnews13/documents/ZIMMERMAN-FBI-911-0517.pdf

          “Critical listening and digital signal analyses further revealad that the screaming voice on the 911 call is of insufficient voice quality and duration to conduct meaningful voice comparison with any otherr voice samples primarily due to the screaming voice being: (1) produced under an extreme emotional state, (2) limited in the number of words and phrases uttered, (3) superimposed by other voices most of the time, and (4) distant, reverberant and very low signal level.”

          Hirotaka Nakasone was the FBI Examiner that performed the voice comparison analysis.

  2. Trayvon carried his father on his head out of a burning building and is a shape and afe shifter. Do not doubt his ability to sound like a high pitched man when taking a whooping tha leaves bruises on his face. A face apparently made of steel but very delicate since he could not stop crying during fat george’s fists of fury.

  3. O’Mara is laboring under a belief that the state will accuse him of making prejudicial statements out of court, so he goes out of his way to make balanced statements, as in “we won’t know until the jury decides.” IOW, he goes out of his way to NOT defend Zimmerman on any particular piece of evidence – not until he presents rebuttal to the state during trial.

    If those are the ground rules, then I agree completely with your conclusion. O’Mara just needs to stop talking. The case isn’t balanced (and neither is the evidence about which of the two was screaming), and any suggestion that it is has the effect of undermining Zimmerman.

  4. Both sides know what the other side’s experts opinions are, and how they reach them. The deadline for filing motions is May 10, so we’ll know, later this week, the basis that O’Mara will assert for excluding expert testimony. I don’t know what basis he might have for excluding fact witnesses like Tracy, Sybrina, Robert Sr. and so forth; but his remarks suggest that he wants to exclude those, as well.

    The judge will adopt the conclusion that the state suggests. I don’t think it hurts to move to exclude the experts and/or the fact witnesses as to voice ID, and my opinion is that all of that testimony amounts to “noise” in the trial. There is enough other evidence to allow a jury reach a finding as to who was screaming for help, with high reliability. The state, OTOH, benenfits from making the case confusing.

    • “The state, OTOH, benefits from making the case confusing.”

      I don’t agree with your last statement. Confusion causes reasonable doubt, which would be in the defenses favor.

      Without having a recent clear voice recording of Trayvon, of which for the jury to listen, I don’t see how the screams will be allowed. When Trayvon said, “Hello” and “plastic” he sounded like his father, with his deep bass vocal tones. If MOM/West can’t get any of his voice recordings, I don’t see how the screams should be allowed, period.

      Maybe there is a recording saved in ooVoo?

      • I don’t mean that the state makes an assertion that the case is confusing, the state will always assert that the only reasonable conclusion is the one that they suggest; and “here are our experts who support our conclusion.” What I meant by “making the case confusing” is that the state won’t stipulate ANYTHING, and will attempt to shift the burden to defendant to disprove (the unproven) state contentions. The state contends that Martin is the one screaming. It’s part of the affidavit of probable cause. The state will claim it proved that Martin was the one screaming for help.

        I’m sure you’ve had arguments with progressive liberals. They tend to make tangential accusations and claims, and otherwise muddy the water in an effort to prevail in argument. De la Rionda is reasonably competent at that style of argumentation, often saying “do you have any evidence of _____” (see his argument about when he knew about Witness 8’s written statement – he doesn’t answer the question, he shoves it right back at West, “do you have any evidence?”), and often raising strawmen. That style of argument is effective, as viewed by many people in the public.

        If the state made this case simple for the jury, the state would have no chance at a guilty verdict. I don’t think its chances are much better by making the case with confusing arguments, but I think its chances are at least a little bit better.

        • Like the photos of Trayvon riding the horse on Sybrina’s birthday, but he was never videoed doing that? There could be hundreds; the question is will the jury ever see them?

          So at this point there are none (wink, wink). It doesn’t sound like MOM has any.

      • Normally confusion does cause reasonable doubt in a jury.

        But this is a case of opposites.

        The fact that the prosecution would even dare to make such a claim as to TM being the screamer gives some (unwarranted) credibility to the very false claim in the eyes of a jury.

        Unless you have one principled person on the jury, a less focused bunch could be swayed by non-factual matters and any confusion about who was doing the screaming could be applied to GZ detriment if you get the wrong type of jury.

  5. Very weak OMara. Very weak.

    I do agree the screaming is the entire case. The rest barely matters. Simple logic tells you it was GZ. Let alone the witness, thee beating GZ took (and TM’s knuckle injury). GZ told everyone and anyone who would listen he was screaming for help within seconds of the incident. You don’t just think up that lie within seconds. They were wrestling in a public space within view of multiple homes and many people. It just doesn’t happen.

    It would defy logic that it was Trayvon screaming.

    If OMara can’t convince a jury of this, he is the worst laywer in the history of the world.

    • ” (and TM’s knuckle injury).”

      The autopsy mentions a very small abrasion on the side of one finger in the area between joints, but says nothing about a knuckle injury.

          • That joint may also be referred to as a knuckle, so it can get confusing as to exactly what is meant, but the drawing in the autopsy shows the abrasion being right where a wedding ring would be on the average married person wearing a wedding ring.

          • The drawing in the autopsy looked like it was on the top between the two knuckles. So is it your belief the injury was unrelated to the assault?

            • Of course. And georges injuries were also unrelated to the assault. They were from a fall, or a tree, or he did it to himself, or he wasnt injured at all, or witness 6 did it, or the police faked them.

            • ” So is it your belief the injury was unrelated to the assault?”

              The autopsy does not speculate on how long ago, pre-mortem, the abrasion occurred, so I’m going with “maybe it happened during the struggle, maybe it happened earlier”.

              My aversion to having it referred to as a knuckle injury is in part because I don’t want the “Trayvon’s knuckles were all busted up and bloody” rumor (for which the autopsy provides no support whatsoever) to get even a scintilla more support or traction, just like I don’t want the “George’s father was a powerful judge with the governor in his pocket” to keep persisting despite being utter hogwash.

              • OT: Unitron, do you remember posting an explanation (I think on Leatherman’s blog) for why the defense might want the surveillance videos they subpoenaed? IIRC it was related to Diwataman’s “Like a shed” video. One of the surveillance cameras might have picked him up going through that complex? Sorry if not, my memory sucks.

                  • I think I linked to the “like a shed” video in a thread about the LLMPapa video that came about in response to the “letter” to Sybrina, the video that talked about someone in the neighborhood immediately to the west of TRATL (Colonial Village?, that someone supposedly being George’s sister.

                    I thought the “guard shack” looking thing in the “shed” video (which is at the entrance to the neighborhood just west of the neighborhood just west of TRATL, and IS gated), might satisfy the “shed” and “gated area” parameters of W8’s statement (the one to BDLR, I think)

                    As for having the link handy, well, let’s just say that I managed to locate it:

                    http://frederickleatherman.com/2013/04/07/did-mark-omara-advise-the-hoa-to-settle-the-fulton-martin-lawsuit/#comment-99240

                    That’s the comment where I actually included the link to D’Man’s “shed” video, but the conversation leading up to it starts a lot farther (further?) up the page.

                    • Noticed the variation of your user name. Are you absolutely sure you never posted at Susan Simpson’s blog on the minute by minute time line thread?

                      What is your honest opinion of Leatherman’s site?

                    • Heh. From what I’ve read he gets treated pretty badly there. Anyone that doesn’t have a full hate-on for GZ or even tries to look objectively at anything is. But granted, there are some pro-GZ sites that are almost as bad.

                    • Apologies if I inadvertently mislead you.

                      I posted extensively on Susan’s timeline thread.

                      Last spring Leatherman’s site was a good place to discuss the case.

                      As I mentioned, in August I (and others there) started getting “impersonated”, so I discontinued posting there, since I didn’t understand how it was being done and how to deal with it (which I have since learned).

                      The professor even expressed regret that I was leaving.

                      Somehow I stopped getting notification of new threads, so I kind of didn’t keep up with what was going on there. Even missed the whole “ajamazin blows up in his face” fiasco.

                      Then in December I checked back in and he had a column about how Crump fighting being deposed and everybody stonewalling the defense on getting a decent copy of his recording of Witness 8 was just a “tempest in a teapot”.

                      So I jumped in and said:

                      “Crump was saying she was a 16 year old minor and now it looks like she was 18 at the time.

                      He apparently copied the original recording via the “air gap”, i.e., speaker to microphone, with we have no way of knowing what if any edits or ommissions.(sic)

                      ABC apparently has better audio quality copies of at least some of the interview than what Crump has made available.

                      Possibly through no fault of her own her credibility as a witness and the admissibility of any testimony by her may be in question.

                      I think that tempest may grow too large for a teapot before all is said and done.”

                      I should have caught up on the columns and comments that I had missed first.

                      It wasn’t the same old Leatherman’s Lounge.

                      Going back over the intervening months, it seems about September several new commenters arrived and, in concert with some of the older hands, had started a “who can hate the defendent and his lawyers most” contest.

                      Considering the evidence had somewhat taken a back seat to gleeful anticipation of the un-enjoyability of the defendant’s future prison accommodations, or making catty remarks about his and his wife’s appearance, and stuff like that.

                      So anyway my comment was received “warmly”, but not well.

                      They stopped moaning and groaning about how unethical O’Mara and West are, or had been, or would be in the future if they actually did the stuff the commenters were sure they were going to do (like putting W8’s picture and address on billboards or something) long enough to have a fit about me not being properly worshipful of Crump’s “Officer of the Court” halo.

                      However, I refused to let them run me off, having been there before a number of them, and had various conversations of varying levels of contention with various of the posters there in the following months.

                      However in mid-April, in the comments attached to an article by a reader about cyber-security, in response to a suggestion not to use one’s real name online, I pointed out that, in that thread from last December, when I mentioned my own reluctance to go beyond consistently being “unitron” for the past 15 years and endanger relatives and friends by posting under my real name (you never know what kind of nuts are out there getting mad at you online who might decide to try to get to you in the real world), I was accused by Leatherman of being a paranoid racist.

                      So he posted back something (other than a denial that he had said that) which I interpret to mean that I am banned from commenting there anymore.

                      So I’ll just say that my opinion is that his site has gotten busier in the last 12 or 13 months, but, in some ways, not necessarily better.

                    • Thanks for the detailed explanation of your experience at his site. I never go there now but I did early on and thought it was one sided and filled with hate toward George. Not sure if I was banned or what but the few comments I made were ALL deleted. They were mostly questions. I expressed no opinions.

                      And yes, I realize that some sites which support George are also racist.

                      I remember you at Susan Simpson’s blog. You seemed to be on the fence about the case and Susan was convinced of George’s guilt. She had strict rules and would not let people even mention CTH and DeeDee was off limits she was a minor child.

                      Is she still covering the case?

                    • Are you sure you aren’t confusing Susan with Jeralyn Merritt of talkleft?

                      Susan insisted upon proper decorum, but I don’t remember her specifically taking sides to the extent Jeralyn has.

                    • Ok, thanks for that (and thanks Jordan for asking). Because as I was reading through the first part of your comment, including the “professor” title for Freddy, I was getting kinda worried. But once you admitted, “they started a ‘who can hate the defendent and his lawyers most’ contest”… yeah now THAT is the Leatherman site we all know and love. Like other similar places (the DogPound, JQ, etc) I could deal with the idiotic theories about the case, and their refusal to see the truth. But what I CAN’T deal with is the vile hatred they spew at George and his friends and family. And Fred himself often jumps right into that. Most of those people on those sites really are disgusting individuals. So anyway, thanks for clarifying.

                    • Jello: Do you know if it’s true that the state can only use one of George’s statements at trial? I read an extensive discussion about that issue but not sure where… either talkleft or CTH. The conclusion was that they were so similar that only one would be allowed.

                    • Yeah, that’s what I’ve heard too. But sorry… I really don’t know much more than that. All I know is it’s obvious Bernie is VERY upset that he has to go first, and that there’s no way he can force George to get on the stand! 😉

                      { Waving… Hi Bernie! }

                    • There are places where I’ve seen that same level of hatred directed at Trayvon and the people associated with him, and I can’t say I’m particularly comfortable with that, either.

                    • I didn’t pay much attention here:

                      corrected version: Basically I am with you, that it sounds very unlikely that if they recorded at all they only kept that passage.

                      But do we have an official statement that they have recorded all? Could the passage be some type of test run with a different cell phone that has some type of on board recorder?

                      Could it have been Crump’s demand that they only use a passage of his recording. Could it be that at one point they signaled to him, that was the passage they would like to have, but could he get her to speak more clearly and not swallow up or slur endings?

                      Why did they not try to depose Gutman and his aide? Journalist’s privilege?

                      I can see why defense would love to see DeeDee go away, but I also doubt that prosecution can risk to put too much weight on her as an ear witness. Remember she is an ear witness only, and only came forward rather late. If I were defense I would not put too much weight on her shoulders.

                      And that in my own words was the crust of the debate over at Frederick Leatherman’s blog modified slightly with my own perspective on matters.

                    • I think the comment in question is very likely either north, south, east, or west of here…

                      jello3333, depending on where you live it is slightly North West if you live East and slightly North East if you live West. You can of course travel first to the East Coast and from there further West if you are on the West-Coast or somewhat in the center and from there further West, may make a shorter trip. Besides I’d advise to take a close look at my avatar which gives you a hint about my specific location.

                      if this is a somewhat political allusion beneath it’s directional surfaces, yes it escapes me. Not all people in the world can be geniuses, you know.

                      Sorry for messing up the bold html closing tag. Shit happens, we say over here.

                  • long enough to have a fit about me not being properly worshipful of Crump’s “Officer of the Court” halo.

                    The impression that we worship at the altar of “Crump’s ‘Officer of the Court’ halo” shows me you did not pay much attention to the debate.

                    Strictly, it may be true, that Frederick Leatherman responded over the top concerning your comment about anonymity or your aka, but if you ask me, that was only the last straw that broke the camel’s neck. Slightly before that you made a remark about him that irritated me highly, notice I think everybody deserves a minimum of respect.

                    ABC apparently has better audio quality copies of at least some of the interview than what Crump has made available.

                    Basically I am with you, that it sounds very unlikely if they recorded at all they only recorded that passage.

                    It’s true, that it would be much easier as it usually is in such a scenario that some type of ear witness enters the stage. But it is also a fact that I can think of many scenarios that resulted exactly in that little snippet of information being recorded with the different cell phone maybe even as some type of quality test, since the media people had signaled to Crump that is exactly the passage they would like to have again, ideally more clear.

                    Fact is that it is strange that a supposedly coached DeeDee corrects Crump in that audio file, where he asks her to repeat a same passage again more clearly. Shouldn’t it be either or, either she corrects him or he coached her, and she repeats what he told her? Or do you think that at that point she already had learned what she was supposed to say by heart, but he forgot about what he coached her to say meanwhile himself?

                    I could transcribe you in phonetic alphabet exactly what I hear DeeDee say at the point where both Jeralyn and Diwataman hear her saying exactly what GZ claimed he said. I am afraid no one with a little expertise in phonetics will confirm what they hear. The phonemes are simply too different. And I am no expert in phonetics but was trained a bit in this part of linguistics too.

                    Sony Sourgeforge may help to filter out noise you don’t have, or enhance sound, but it does not help you to hear. What about your ears, unitron? Mine are still quite good in spite of my advancing age. Let’s hope it stays that way.

                    Concerning Crump, I think he made some mistakes. But who of us is faultless? Is that the type of halo worship you allude to? I also agree with you that quite possibly SYG did not allow the SPD to arrest GZ, and I think he should have known. But I also think he was under pressure from Trayvon’s family and helped them as best he could. Or is this the type of statement what feels like hero worship to you?

                    • “Slightly before that you made a remark about him that irritated me highly…”

                      Would you happen to recall what the remark was?

                    • I tried, but have you ever tried to get below the list that shows on your WordPress notification bar. I do not have follow-up comments sent to an email address. I would be curious myself. If there is a chance I should be able to find it, since I am sure I responded to it.

                    • I have no idea what a WordPress notification bar is, but overall it sounds like your wish is that as soon as I remember what it is that you forgot, I should let you know.

                      : – )

                    • Yes, sounds about right. You put that very well. 😉

                      The word press notification bar shows below the task bars on top of the respective blog I responded to. It also notifies me of responses to comments on other WordPress blogs. It shows as Notification and adds an arrow to comments I respond to, if I use this interface instead of going to the blog directly and answer there, which I can if I click on the link your comment/b> above, but then I have so scroll down to the respective comment and it does not immediately follow the comment, if I get it right. I am using this interface at the moment.

                      There is a “View Archive” link, which at least theoretically should lead me to my archived comments. Maybe too many by now.

                      Convenient tool for people with not always enough time to follow 1,000 plus comments. Gives me a chance to notice responses and respond to them.

              • (for which the autopsy provides no support whatsoever)
                Yes it does! Are you crazy. It says right in the autopsy he had an injury around the knuckle area!!

                Yes, it is possible the injury was unrelated to the assault. How often do you have cuts on your knuckle area? It is more than a distinct possibility. It is the likely explanation.

                • A small abrasion in the area where a ring would have been if there had been a ring is not “Trayvon’s knuckles were all busted up and bloody”, no matter how much you want to believe it.

                  However Zimmerman’s injuries were inflicted or acquired, Trayvon’s hands were not, to an extent and in a manner detectable during the performance of the autopsy, damaged in the process, with the possible exception of that one small abrasion.

                  By itself that does not prove or disprove anything about who did what to whom that night, but that is no reason to eschew accuracy.

                    • It should come as a surprise to no one that “… violently assaulting someone with your fists for a sustained period of time…” might result in injury to one’s own hands, but I think some might find it curious that the level of injury incurred would be that minor.

                    • “might result in injury to one’s own hands, but I think some might find it curious that the level of injury incurred would be that minor.”

                      Unitron, I’m not sure your point. Are you claiming GZ’s injuries were sustained in another way other than by the direct result of Trayvon Martin? I didn’t think that was even in question. Even Crump admits that Trayvon was :”fighting for his life” and he caused the injuries.

                    • “Unitron, I’m not sure your point.”

                      The point is that you referred to a knuckle injury and there is no knuckle injury. There is a “somewhat near one of the knuckles” injury, but the autopsy makes no mention whatever of any injury to the knuckles themselves.

                    • Ok “knuckle area” injury. I do find it very likely that the abrasion was related to the assault. I would think most interested in an objective analysis would agree.

                    • “I do find it very likely that the abrasion was related to the assault.”

                      I find banged up places on my hands all the time and I don’t think I’ve punched anyone in at least the past half-century or so (and probably never), so I don’t share your certainty about the origin of the abrasion, but it seems that that one abrasion would, at best, be evidence of Martin striking Zimmerman one time, and that one time could have been a reflex reaction to Zimmerman grabbing Martin by the other arm prior to Martin touching Zimmerman in any way, so even under an electron microscope you aren’t going to be able to look at that abrasion and discern intent just from it.

                      “I would think most interested in an objective analysis would agree.”

                      I think anyone actually attempting an objective analysis would stop far short of agreeing or disagreeing, citing a lack of enough information and evidence to make the call.

                    • Maybe I misunderstood things I read a while back but MMA fighting usually means using the sides of your hands. Didn’t one of the witnesses say that George was being attacked MMA style? Do I have that wrong?

                    • “Didn’t one of the witnesses say that George was being attacked MMA style?”

                      Well, that was, as I recall, the first version of Witness 6’s account, but he seems to have amended it somewhat since then.

                      Discussion of that witness and his various versions here.

                    • I think when I did the anchor and href tag I may have forgotten the closing quote mark after the actual URL, which is why the word “here” is a link to nothing.

                      (Curse you, WordPress, and your lack of a preview feature)

                      I just put it into the next post “as is” without wrapping the tags around it, and that should be “clickable”.

                    • I got it. Is NOT your fault NOR is it a WP issue. It is a Yahoo email issue. If a link or vid appears at the end of a comment, Yahoo does not show it in their email notification. So I probably miss some links because I would not always know that. In your case, I figured out that you had posted something that did not appear in Yaho email .

                    • I’m pretty sure that this time around was my fault, because when, in Firefox, I mouseover the word “here” (which is supposed to be the link), it underlines itself, but there’s no actual URL there, so I must have screwed up the anchor and href tag.

      • And some people have said that there were pictures taken of Trayvon’s hands at the scene that evidenced a lot of damage, and that those pics were shown to George, which upset him.

        • Do you know where you heard that? I had never heard that before. I read the autopsy report a long time ago but I only remember the abrasion. I also thought the abrasion had been on his knuckle.

          • A person who is personally acquainted with several key individuals in this case. I’m not sure whether this person is still willing to be open about their relationships, and what they know, since they have received threats over the past few months. If they are, I’m sure they’ll chime in.

          • The drawing in the autopsy report (where they start with a pre-printed front and rear drawing of a body and add the stuff they find) shows the location to be where a ring would have been on the ring finger of his left hand if he had been wearing a ring.

            I can’t swear that he wasn’t wearing a ring (Having one pulled off in the struggle might explain the abrasion), but there’s no evidence of one being found in the area of the shooting, and I’ve never seen anything about the family saying he wore one.

            • I am a teeny bit confused. Didn’t SPD show George some pics of his “bloody” hands? IDK, so I am asking.

              • “Didn’t SPD show George some pics of his “bloody” hands?”

                I wasn’t in the Sanford cop shop that night, or at any other time, so I can’t swear it didn’t happen, but I don’t remember ever reading anything anywhere about them showing him pictures of anyone’s hands, bloody or otherwise.

                • I agree with you uni, I never read that before today. Also, why would the SPD do that? That wouldn’t make sense. (like that mattered anyway)

                • Strange how rumors on both sides can take roots even if they are not balanced.

                  You clearly go out of your way to be skeptical and/or objective. That is good because it makes ME open my eyes and take another look but I cannot speak for the rest of our crowd here.

                  I applaud you for that even though I admit that it was not easy when I first starting following your posts.

                  Anyway, I cannot even remember the source of the bloody hands.

    • The law here is a double reasonable criterion. Zimmerman is not guilty providing the jury thinks it reasonable that Zimmerman was reasonable in fearing great harm to himself when he shot Martin. Whomever was screaming certainly had a fear of great harm to himself. The prosecution has to convince the jury either that it is unreasonable to believe Zimmerman the screamer or that he didn’t have a reasonable fear of great harm. Witness #6’s testimony that before he turned away to call police, Zimmerman had his back on the concrete with Martin on top straddling him is evidence of the latter. Besides the clowns Owen and Primeau, I wonder who the prosecution might have to convince the jury it is unreasonable to believe that Zimmerman was the screamer.

      • Primeau is selling the same snake oil dealt with in Ramirez v Florida. In that case, it was a tool mark expert claiming to be able to match soft tissue injuries to a specific knife:

        According to Hart, a technician’s ability to identify microscopic similarities in casts is developed by training and is passed on from one technician to another in the workplace.   A “match” under his method is declared if there is “sufficient similarity” in the striated marks on the casts to eliminate the possibility of coincidence.   This determination is entirely subjective and is based on the technician’s training and experience;  there is no minimum number of matching striations or percentage of agreement or other objective criteria that are used in this method.   No photographs are made of the casts, Hart explained, because lay persons and those not trained in this procedure would be unable to understand the comparison process;  similarly, no notes are made describing the basis for identification.   Once a match is declared under his theory, no other knives are examined because an identification under this method purportedly eliminates all other knives in the world as possible sources of the wound.   Under Hart’s method of identification, a team of expert technicians trained by him would be virtually impossible to challenge notwithstanding the fact that his procedure is untested and yet to be accepted by the relevant scientific community.   There is no objective criteria that must be met, there are no photographs, no comparisons of methodology to review, and the final deduction is in the eyes of the beholder, i.e., the identification is a match because the witness says it is a match.

        • I recall some kind of “expert” in Texas who was also phony. He and a prosecutor convicted lots of innocent folks and send some to death row.

    • “It would defy logic that it was Trayvon screaming. If OMara can’t convince a jury of this, he is the worst lawyer in the history of the world.”

      AGREED

    • The traysupporters claim that martin was screaming because George was pointing his weapon at him and that the only reason that george has injuries was because he fell, or ran into a tree, or already had the injuries or had witness 6 give him the injuries and then lie about what he saw. There is zero evidence that he was walking around with his gun drawn but they are quite insistent.

  6. I’m sorry – I just don’t see anything wrong with what O’Mara did here. He makes it quite clear that he thinks that this is George Zimmerman’s voice on the 911 call. He thinks it’s an easy call that is consistent with the evidence in the case.

    • While he did say that he thought that (past tense), when you take the totality of his remarks (which he may have mentally cabined into remarks about the experts), there is a sense he is saying “I used to think it was GZ’s voice, but after consultation with the experts, it could go either way.” I believe the listener/viewer comes away with that message, regardless of the message O’Mara intended to deliver.

      • I disagree. I think he is saying that, while it seems obvious that it is George, based on the circumstances and the evidence and George’s statements that it is indeed him, there is no “expert” consensus, and that’s why he wants an evidentiary hearing before the judge to argue the point that the “experts” should not be allowed to testify to something for which there is no scientific consensus at all.

        • I don’t think our remarks are mutually exclusive. I am giving my opinion of what I think the (low information) viewer will take away, and you are giving your opinion of what O’Mara is saying. My opinion is based on hearing O’Mara say “I thought it was easy to tell whose voice that was, but from an expert’s perspective, it’s not.” And later, “If it’s GZ, it documents his story completely … If it turned out to conclusively be TM …”, which indicates a finding could go either way; and the segment concludes with a thought on the order of O’Mara saying he is “frustrated that there is not good evidence” either way.

            • The point that O’Mara made, but didn’t emphasize, was that there is all sorts of evidence that supports his client being the one screaming. Injuries (O’Mara mentioned), being on his back (John, Witness 6, grass and wet on his back per police), his own remarks to police minutes later (GZ said “screamed for help, nobody helped”). Experts are working only from sound recordings, they weren’t there. If they could form an unequivocal opinion, it would support his client. But they can’t form an unequivocal opinion on the available recordings (see FBI), therefore no expert testimony should be allowed.

              It’s not unusual to have dueling experts at trial. Juries decide what to believe based on the presentation of all of the evidence.

              I don’t think O’Mara’s remarks on this teevee program affect the outcome of the trial, because the non-expert testimony leans so strongly in Zimmerman’s favor.

        • “I thought it was clearly GZ, but now, …”

          I think I know what he’s trying to say, and I think his remarks are made with his “inside the forest” cabin of expert testimony. I believe his intention is to undercut the experts’ ability to deliver an unequivocal conclusion, but the way he phrases his remarks, many viewers are going to come away with the impression that the evidence is highly equivocal, period.

          • But the evidence IS (from the perspective of “expert” witnesses in the field of forensic audio analysis) highly equivocal, at least without voice samples of Trayvon Martin to compare it to. That’s O’Mara’s point – that the evidence should be the evidence – not some phony “expert’s” interpretation of what the evidence “may” be. Instead, the jury should be allowed to listen and draw their own reasonable, common-sense inference as to who is screaming on that tape. O’Mara’s belief is that if the jury is allowed to do that, they will come to the same conclusion that he did – that it is George Zimmerman screaming, because nothing else makes sense.

            • You are much more intelligent, and infinitely better informed (on this case) than the average viewer. I listened to what O’Mara said, and it includes your takeaway, although you phrased it more directly than O’Mara did.

      • No, I don’t see that at all. In fact, I say that kind of thing that MOM said all the time. It’s kind of an incredulous feeling I get when someone argues with me about something I think is crystal clear. I’m like, “Well I thought it was obvious… but whatever.”

    • “He makes it quite clear…”

      lolz, okay, can you cite me the part in the video you’re talking about?

      Here’s the parts I’m talking about:

      “I thought it was easy to tell but…”

      “If it turns out…”

      “I’m just frustrated…”

      “…not good evidence to support…”

      “I thought it was clearly George Zimmerman’s voice but now…”

      And his tone and body language reeks of it.

      • Maybe a distinction needs to be made between what MOM believes and what the experts can prove. He believes it was GZ screaming, but the experts really aren’t going to help prove that. You don’t think the average person can watch that and make the distinction? I could, and I’m average. Or maybe a bit less.

      • After listening to it several more times, I’m going to agree with you to great degree. Like you, I get what O’Mara is trying to say, but he could have said it MUCH better, something like this:

        “We know that this is George’s voice, because (1) George told witnesses and the police immediately after the shooting that he was screaming for help repeatedly, (2) multiple witnesses said they heard the man on the bottom who was wearing the red sweater or vest screaming for help, and (3) it makes no sense that Trayvon Martin would be screaming for help while straddling George Zimmerman and beating him repeatedly in the face while slamming his head into the concrete sidewalk, and (4) based on the lone audio sample of Trayvon Martin’s voice that we have seen thus far, it is clear that he has a voice similar to his father’s, which is much deeper than George Zimmerman’s voice, so it might be easy for someone to assume that the voice was that of a younger person when, in fact, it was George Zimmerman.”

        “Unfortunately, because of the nature of the so-called science of voice analysis, there’s not enough information here to get a SCIENTIFIC determination with any degree of certainty as to whose voice that is, so we are left to rely on the best evidence we have, which I’ve just outlined. That’s why we want the judge to disallow any so-called experts from testifying on this matter, since it will do nothing but confuse the jury.”

      • I guess I’m starting to see what the debate is about here. And so, if the question is, “Could MOM have fleshed out his answer, and been clearer about what he was meaning?”… then yeah, I’d agree. But I imagine he was just thinking This is SO obvious, everyone will “get it”. Of course that’s giving the viewing audience a little too much credit, I’d say. Now if we’re debating about whether or not MOM himself believes the voice is George? No way… there is no doubt he believes that just as strongly as the rest of us do.

  7. Pesonally my view on this is that MOM has said that expert testimony is there biggest expense going forward. If hey don’t need to pay for an audiologist(s) that will help out in other areas of defense. I believe that that is why he is saying what he said here.

  8. If he’s going to move to have any expert testimony disallowed on the matter, then he needs to move to have that call excluded from the trial altogether…

    Because if the experts can’t agree, then it certainly shouldn’t be left up to a jury of laypersons to listen to the cries for help and decide for themselves who it was. It’s also inflammatory and potentially prejudicial and, with no consensus, it has little to no probative value(*).

    And I use the term ‘experts’ loosely here, because I think the real experts (i.e. the honest experts) who aren’t just opinions-for-hire or attention-seekers probably would all inherently have to agree with the FBI’s assessment that no conclusive forensic determination can be made. The recording is of insufficient quality (cries coming from outside in the distance in the background of a recorded call) and quantity (only two words, two syllables) and the conditions under which the cries were made simply can’t be recreated for an authentic comparison to be made (a terrified man being beaten and crying for help while his broken nose is swelling).

    (* though the call itself has little or no probative value, excluding it would inevitably prevent MOM from grilling Tracy on his ‘evolving’ opinion pre- and post- his consulting with a personal injury attorney)

    • “he needs to move to have that call excluded from the trial altogether…”

      Oh no way. NO! The Defense should fight like crazy to get that call INTO evidence. You watch… it’s gonna be the Prosecution who tries to get the whole thing thrown out. They’ll say, “Well, if we can’t have the experts, then the whole tape must be kept out. We know it’s Trayvon, but without the experts it must be excluded.” And WHY would they make that motion?…. Because they know it’s NOT Trayvon! They are looking for any way they can to keep it out. And when the public realizes the Prosecution is trying to keep out the tape with “Travyon’s screams” on it, people are going to be VERY confused as to what’s going on. They’ll be asking, Why would the Prosecution do such a thing?

        • You’re probably right… but if she allows either of these two ‘experts’ to testify, it would be in clear violation of Frye. The one is using proprietary software that he developed himself that hasn’t been subjected to peer review, and the other is using his own ear… it would immediately trigger petition #3 to the DCA.

          Though I must say that I would love to see MOM argue that the one’s hearing needs to be checked to establish his competency… the man is getting a little long in the tooth (so am I) and has worked in the recording industry his whole life. I can’t imagine his hearing is as good as it once was.

      • That’s like going around the block to get back to the same place, then complaining about the distance If the prosecution wants to exclude the call, why is it the prosecution is the me asking for the call to be excluded! Hits makes no sense to anybody.

  9. “I thought it was easy to tell whose voice that was, but from an expert perspective it’s not.”

    So no, I don’t think he’s at all questioning whose voice it is… at least not in his own mind, or on “common sense” grounds. He’s just frustrated that something that’s so easy for the average person to realize, is apparently NOT good enough for the “experts” to give a definitive opinion.

    • Everything I read back when the identity of the screams first came up said that it was pretty much impossible to match screaming to a particular person. Owens used untested programs he invented himself and had recently put on the market. the other guy said that he was sure it was martin, which is supposed to be a big no no since he didn’t have a recording of martins voice. The FBI seemed to make the most sensible call, the other two just wanted the publicity. Martins supporters still insist it was martin and George’s supporters insist it was him. I think the balance goes to george. If the two witnesses are called for the state couldn’t OMara call the FBI as a rebuttal to their testimony? That would be kinda great even if the FBI just says that it impossible to make a match.

      • It is a Frye hearing. So the FBI will be relevant. The dopey experts hired by the dope’s at the Orland Slantinel are about as reliable as Soupy Sales in charge of the White House Global Warming Agency.

      • Common sense is that Zimmerman was screaming. He was the beatee. Martin was the beater. All the objective evidence points to that. It screams it.

  10. Perhaps this is not the time to ask this, but I will anyway. If the prosecution can’t call W8 and they can’t call any voice witnesses, what else do they have? I am serious here. DeeDee has been discredited and O’Mara is on his way to getting the voice witness testimony not allowed due to the inexact science or opinion/speculation, what else was the PCA based upon? Are they gong to argue “stalking”? Not likely, but possible I suppose . They cannot argue “following” since that is in itself not illegal. What other evidence do they have or possibly have? I know there is a dead body and George admitted to the shooting, but what possible evidence could support murder 2? Speculation?

      • You are very, very correct. If he’s off by just one word, even if that word is a synonym, he’s a liar. But there’s more as I’ll show above.

        • I agree completely. The star witness against George zimmerman is george zimmerman. They will hammer him with any inconsistent statement he has ever made. That is why you should not talk to the police without a lawyer even if you are innocent. It would be more suspicious to me if he remembered every detail. Like he had planned the story out in advance

    • I can’t wait for the state to tell the jury that Zimmerman’s nose was not broken enough and his head was not bashed in enough.

    • How about that there no proof that Trayvon touched George? That all the injuries amount to mere scratches that could have happened when he ran into a tree or fell in the bushes while chasing down Trayvon? No Georgie’s blood DNA on Trayvon’s hands. No wounds except for the gunshot wound. I’ve got more, but if you’re interested you would need to read what I wrote on the Daily Daft section of Random Topics.

      • “How about that there no proof that Trayvon touched George? That all the injuries amount to mere scratches that could have happened when he ran into a tree or fell in the bushes while chasing down Trayvon? No Georgie’s blood DNA on Trayvon’s hands. No wounds except for the gunshot wound. I’ve got more, but if you’re interested you would need to read what I wrote on the Daily Daft section of Random Topics.”

        Just another example of how weird this case is. Unless all the witnesses that night were hallucinating, we know that there was some kind of struggle between the two of them, but there seems to have been very little DNA transfer between the two.

        • Here I fault the ME. It appears he never looked for DNA on Trayvon’s hands. Under the fingernails, yes and found no match for George. That just stinks and it’s a rallying cry again for the pro-TM crowd that says he never assailed him. Lazy work on his part I say.

          Another thing that got me, and it’s also used by them, is his inaccurate height measurement of TM. 5′ 11″? No way he was 6′ 3″; even Sybrina thought he was 6′ 2″.

          Last summer I linked pictures of him and Tracy showing them to be the same height and Tracy’s 6′ 3″.

          The reason that it makes a difference is that at 5′ 11″ there would have been only a 3″ difference between the two as opposed to 7″. That’s huge in a fight.

          Sorry for the rant, it’s just when I think about the ME findings and his sloppy laziness, it pisses me off!

          • Since they didn’t bother to take George by the ME’s office a day or three after the shooting to be weighed and measured, so that we’re comparing apples to apples, I’m going to withhold judgement on the comparative sizes of Trayvon and him for now.

            As for comparing the ME’s med school diploma and experience with you analyzing pictures from the internet, I think I’ll wait for more information there as well.

            • TM’s size will be explained by experts if need be. He was over 6 feet tall. Anyone that has seen any pics of him or knows him will know that (as long as they are not biased).
              As for TM’s hands….We cannot forget that TM lay out in the rain with a tarp over most of his body (probably not his hands) for about 2 hours before he was put in a body bag. You can bet the house that there will be pictures of his hands.

          • “The reason that it makes a difference is that at 5′ 11″ there would have been only a 3″ difference between the two as opposed to 7″. That’s huge in a fight.”

            Let’s say they did lop off 4 inches of height.

            (with a bad tape measure, not a chain saw)

            They didn’t manage to subtract any appreciable amount of weight at the same time, did they?

            If you take him at 5′ 11″ and 158 lbs, and then stretch him to 6′ 3″ without any increase in weight or mass, you’ve just made him even scrawnier.

            • It was pretty obvious he had almost 0% body fat. ( Wish I could say that, now). Maybe he lost 5 lbs. of blood, so let’s say he was 163 lbs.

              There are pictures on the web showing that he was not muscularly deficient.

              Speaking of “scrawny”. I would have been, by your standards, scrawny in high school. At 5′ 8″, I weighed 115 lbs. But as a wrestler, I could bench almost 200 lbs. Yeah, looking at me, I did NOT appear to be much of a threat, But, I had not trouble taking down those without wrestling experience double my weight.

              So “scrawny”, is not always indicative of fighting ability nor strength.

  11. D-Man: I agree with you that O’Mara should just STFU in public. Unless he’s willing to view every appearance in front of a camera from here out an opportunity to CAMPAIGN for GZ’s innocence and apply a little reverse spin to the Scheme Team narrative, he should just STFU. He’s missing the entire point of making public appearances in his role as GZ’s defense attorney. He has done George NO favors with his many public appearances. It infuriates me.

    • Thanx for that. I never saw it before. BTW, you can also here TM say, “plastic” when the clerk asks him, “paper or plastic” in the 7-11 video. It’s not quite as clear as “hello”, but it’s there.

      • Excellent point, ejarra. There is no way that a logical person could think it was TM yelling for help. That guy who calls himself an expert is trying to sell software. No way he can pass the Fry test- ( or a smell test) but who knows what that stringy haired judge will do. I think the defense team is doing an excellent job of getting information out to the public. imo, the person (or persons) who put this video together did a great job too.

        • Both are liberals but Jeralyn is convince of George’s innocence while Susan is NOT at all. I no longer visit her blogs but that was the last opinion I saw. I do go to talkleft but do not post .

          • Yep, Jerralyn is as convinced of George’s innocence as we are. And as angry about what the prosecution and the Scheme Team has been dishonestly doing. The only thing about Jerralyn, is that she’s really strict in not allowing “conjecture” or “insults” unless very warranted. It took a long time before anyone could question the reality of Dee Dee. But little by little, as evidence of the fraud has come out, Jerralyn has been more forgiving of questioning the whole Dee Dee narrative. Still… you can’t go TOO far. 😉

            • I, for one, appreciate the way she and others there “moderate and control” the site to keep everyone on the subject in an orderly and mannerly way.

              MANY other sites one boths sides moderate according to the “hierarchy’s” belief system and THEIR idea of what constitutes “respect.” I think you know who some of them are.

  12. How will the prosecution get around the fact that there is a witness who says Martin was on top of Zimmerman? Didn’t BDLR admit that Martin punched Zimmerman?

    I assume the prosecution will argue that Zimmerman was the agressor by starting an altercation and thus lost the right of self defense.

    So far as I can tell it’s only Leatherman and the Crump crowd that thinks Zimmerman hunted Martin down.

  13. I just listened to the interview and I think I get his point. He could have been a little clearer.

    I can’t blame O’Mara for talking. His client was, for a time, the most hated man in America.

  14. Great post. I was checking constantly this blog and I am impressed!

    Extremely useful info particularly the last part 🙂 I care for such info much.

    I was looking for this certain info for a very long time.
    Thank you and best of luck.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s