(04-01-2012 08:43 AM)Max Power Wrote:  

(04-01-2012 08:05 AM)Jugnaut Wrote:  

(04-01-2012 07:57 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Jug. It's it possible an independent witness could be telling a lie?

I trust the police and prosecution to get to the bottom of this. With the information they have, there may be probable cause. I don't know what they have, I'm just not convinced based off what the media is pushing. It seems like a witch hunt to me.

I'm also very suspicious of these expert witnesses' claims. I'm sure they were paid by the media, how many experts did the Sentinel consult (did they consult ten and publish the two that were sensational?), is their science reliable, those sorts of questions. I'm surprised the audio quality would be good enough to properly examine too.

We'll just have to wait and see what happens. Again, I think the State has tremendous pressure to prosecute Zimmerman, the fact that they haven't arrested him, even though I'm sure they want to, speaks volumes to me about what they believe about the strength of the evidence in the case. I mean they prosecuted Casey Anthony and there was virtually no evidence in that case.

WHY do you assume they want to arrest Zimmerman? On what basis?

Don't you agree there is racism in this country?

Do you assume sheriff's offices and prosecutor's offices (in Florida!) are immune from racism?

State Attorney is an elected official, whenever there is a high profile case with a great deal of public outcry, there is tremendous pressure on the State Attorney to prosecute the case. That's the basis for the statement that they want to prosecute, they want to be seen as "tough on crime" and they don't want bad press. They want to get re-elected.

There is racism in this country sure, but I think is nearly impossible to block a prosecution or arrest based upon "racism." There are too many people working on the case, including black officers and prosecutors. I'd be willing to bet that a black detective interviewed Zimmerman at some point or a black officer wrote a police report. Simply put, cases don't get dropped because of "racism." It would be extremely difficult normally and pretty much impossible in a case like this.

As for the independent witness, he said he saw and heard Zimmerman screaming for help while Martin was on top of him beating him. He didn't use names, just descriptions because apparently he didn't know either of them.

I'm not saying Zimmerman is innocent, he could very well be guilty. I just haven't seen enough evidence to prosecute him. I think they have enough to take it to a grand jury, but if they do that with the evidence they have, they may not get an indictment.

Additionally, even if the experts are right and it was Martin that was screaming and not Zimmerman, that still wouldn't prove a crime has been committed. Screaming doesn't establish who attacked first, whether Zimmerman was getting beaten by Martin, or anything else. Hell, Martin could've beaten Zimmerman while screaming. I know that's far fetched, but there is nothing to prove who started the fight or disprove self-defense. Sure, if Martin was screaming that might cast doubt on Zimmerman's story, but it doesn't prove that he murdered Martin or committed manslaughter. The burden of proof is on the State to disprove self-defense remember?

And I want to take a moment to state that I don't necessarily believe Zimmerman, I think its very likely this could be manslaughter, there's just a lack of evidence at this point. There is no evidence of murder. So I think it will come down to whether a grand jury says there's enough to arrest on manslaughter.

The key piece of evidence for me, which the police should know, is where was Martin's body? Was it near the sidewalk next to Zimmerman's vehicle? or was it far away from Zimmerman's vehicle. If the body was by Zimmerman's truck, that backs up his story of retreated then getting attacked by Martin. If it is far away, that shows that Zimmerman confronted Martin away from Zimmerman's vehicle.

Honestly, I don't know what happened. I could see it as a situation where Zimmerman confronted Martin and started a physical altercation or the other way around. Only the police and prosecutors know the evidence at this point. And I don't think there is any chance they let the appearance of racism affect the case. They'll go out of their way to make sure everything is lined up perfect for whatever they decide.

I know you guys are just parroting what you hear on talk radio and Fox News, so that when I feed you truth you come up with these ridiculous attacks and honestly think I'm nuts, but listen to me: FOX LIES TO YOU. IT IS PROPAGANDA. STOP WATCHING. A lot on MSNBC is propaganda too, me personally I watch CNN.

(04-01-2012 10:11 AM)Max Power Wrote:  I know you guys are just parroting what you hear on talk radio and Fox News, so that when I feed you truth you come up with these ridiculous attacks and honestly think I'm nuts, but listen to me: FOX LIES TO YOU. IT IS PROPAGANDA. STOP WATCHING. A lot on MSNBC is propaganda too, me personally I watch CNN.

I don't believe any of the MSM channels. Read from a bunch of sources on the internet, watch some tv news, but be skeptical of everything. Make up your own mind.

(04-01-2012 10:11 AM)Max Power Wrote:  I know you guys are just parroting what you hear on talk radio and Fox News, so that when I feed you truth you come up with these ridiculous attacks and honestly think I'm nuts, but listen to me: FOX LIES TO YOU. IT IS PROPAGANDA. STOP WATCHING. A lot on MSNBC is propaganda too, me personally I watch CNN.

Presumptuous aren’t you. We don't think you are nuts, we think you are a fool.

I'm going paragraph by paragraph here jugnaut because I'm on my smartphone.

I realize that the states attorney is elected and wants to be seen as tough on crime. But when that "crime" is a white-ish concealed carrier neighborhood watchman shooting a black kid in a hoodie claiming self defense, the usual "tough on crime" dynamic is thrown out the window. Because those constituents are racists, and concealed carriers who can say "hey, that could be me", and could be pressuring the SA NOT to prosecute. Don't you agree? Andthe vast majority of "public outcry" comes from people outside his county in town for protests

It's been reported there was disagreement among police and prosecutors on whether to arrest and charge, so there might very well be black detectives or whatever who want to move forward. In the end it's the SA's call, and iv he's a racist he can let Zimmerman walk, and point to any myriad of possible defenses as a cover. He may or may notreveal his racism, and it may or may not reach the black detective, but even if it does the black detective may decide he doesn't want to risk his career for insubordination and not speak up. I doubt the SA is stupid enough to reveal his racist motivation though (or, the racist motivation of his constituency to whom he wants to pander).

The witness who saw them outside though ran inside afterward and didn't actually see the gunshot or who was doing the crying immediately prior to the gunshot. So he's not an eyewitness to the crying that is at issue here.



If the experts are right that proves Zimmerman lied, which casts a credibility cloud on his whole story. And perhaps you missed it but I mentioned earlier that the only explanation that would in that case work for Zimmerman is if Martin was crying for help and beating up Zimmerman at the same time, which is extremely far fetched. The cries lead most reasonable factfinders to believe that Zimmerman was in a position of strength; that he had grabbed his gun and likely had enough space to use it. People don't plead for their lives when beating up the guy with the gun. That just doesn't make any f'king sense. And if Z was in a position of strength it no longer matters if Martin threw the first punch because the balance of strength had reset and Zimmerman no longer reasonably feared great bodily harm. At that point, he became the aggressor and self defense is thrown out the window, regardless of who started the first scuffle that had ended.

I agree with you that the SA doesn't want he appearance of racism effecting this case at all. But he also doesn't want to lose the support of his racist gun toting constituents, whose support he's counting on in the next election (I'd bet a lot of people there identify with Zimmerman). What you get is a kind of quiet racism that has been the GOP's M.O. for 40 years. And a dead black kid whose killer is walking around free.

Scientifically certain, that's a hoot.

I also want to say you make some good arguments but I just think they're implausible and can't buy them. Anyway it's 100x better than arguing with these other dolts on her. FYI to you dolts, I'm not wasting time responding to your posts anymore if they make me roll my eyes.

(04-01-2012 10:03 AM)Max Power Wrote:  

(04-01-2012 09:31 AM)Paul M Wrote:  Headline: It's not George Zimmerman crying for help on 911 recording, 2 experts say

What they actually say.

Quote: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.

Quote: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.

He relies instead on audio enhancement and human analysis based on forensic experience. After listening closely to the 911 tape on which the screams are heard, Primeau also has a strong opinion.

"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."

They are both young men.

More media bias and Max was happy to add his own bias.

Max headline:
Scientifically certain

Actual quote from the expert:
reasonable scientific certainty

Have you written a headline on here? I couldn't fit that word in there if I wanted to. I had to cut out some words to make it fit. And NO I am not encouraging you to post more topics. It should be common sense that it's not 100% certainty anyway, and I pointed you to the article, so I'm not hiding anything.

Trayvon is a minor and Zimmerman is 28, that can be a big difference in voice and I know it's been for me, oh and that expert you bolded specifically said he meant Trayvon.

I've started topics and had to leave out words. But then I put them back in my first sentence. You left it out of the title and chose to leave it out of the text of your reply as well.

My common sense knows it's not 100% but you saying that now doesn't change that you certainly put forth that it is 100% in your topic.

Quote:Zimmerman said it was him crying, but two experts say it can't be. So it was Martin crying (who else?)

Not only did you leave out the one word showing the science isn't 100% in your title or post but you implied it was.

Any poor person who doesn't understand statistics, who thinks they have a chance of winning the lotto at 160,000,000 to 1 odds and who has an attorney leading them would believe it to be 100%.

A "witness" says that he heard Zimmerman crying for help...how convenient that those who are pointing this out as a fact that should exonerate Zimmerman are failing to recognize that there are a couple of witnesses who are saying that they heard a young man (Martin) whining in a desperate tone right before the shot went off and that those cries stopped immediately after the shot went off. Furthermore, when the two witnesses went out to investigate the ruckus they saw Zimmerman straddling Martin with a foot on either side of him and his hands pressed on his back.

At 2:28 of Video titled "Dateline: Trayon Martin, Part 1"

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032600/#46874941

(04-01-2012 10:53 AM)Paul M Wrote:  

(04-01-2012 10:03 AM)Max Power Wrote:  

(04-01-2012 09:31 AM)Paul M Wrote:  Headline: It's not George Zimmerman crying for help on 911 recording, 2 experts say

What they actually say.

Quote: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.

Quote: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.

He relies instead on audio enhancement and human analysis based on forensic experience. After listening closely to the 911 tape on which the screams are heard, Primeau also has a strong opinion.

"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."

They are both young men.

More media bias and Max was happy to add his own bias.

Max headline:
Scientifically certain

Actual quote from the expert:
reasonable scientific certainty

Have you written a headline on here? I couldn't fit that word in there if I wanted to. I had to cut out some words to make it fit. And NO I am not encouraging you to post more topics. It should be common sense that it's not 100% certainty anyway, and I pointed you to the article, so I'm not hiding anything.

Trayvon is a minor and Zimmerman is 28, that can be a big difference in voice and I know it's been for me, oh and that expert you bolded specifically said he meant Trayvon.

I've started topics and had to leave out words. But then I put them back in my first sentence. You left it out of the title and chose to leave it out of the text of your reply as well.

My common sense knows it's not 100% but you saying that now doesn't change that you certainly put forth that it is 100% in your topic.

Quote:Zimmerman said it was him crying, but two experts say it can't be. So it was Martin crying (who else?)

Not only did you leave out the one word showing the science isn't 100% in your title or post but you implied it was.

Any poor person who doesn't understand statistics, who thinks they have a chance of winning the lotto at 160,000,000 to 1 odds and who has an attorney leading them would believe it to be 100%.

It isn't 160,000,000 to 1. It is 175,711,536 to one. :) Well, for Mega Millions anyway. Powerball is 175,223,510 to one.

That's what you want to pick at Robert?

(04-01-2012 11:30 AM)Paul M Wrote:  That's what you want to pick at Robert?

SInce you guys say I never state facts, I just wanted to state facts so you can't say I never state facts. :)

Dude, scientific certainty doesn't imply full "law of gravity"-type certainty. The headline isn't even wrong. If I wanted to mislead you all I wouldn't have pointed you to the article. Stop the pathetic reaching to impugn my credibility and address the substance here.

(04-01-2012 11:33 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(04-01-2012 11:30 AM)Paul M Wrote:  That's what you want to pick at Robert?

SInce you guys say I never state facts, I just wanted to state facts so you can't say I never state facts. :)

Now show where you got that info, Because(you know) your sources are always a source of concern.

(04-01-2012 11:39 AM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(04-01-2012 11:33 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(04-01-2012 11:30 AM)Paul M Wrote:  That's what you want to pick at Robert?

SInce you guys say I never state facts, I just wanted to state facts so you can't say I never state facts. :)


Scroll down

Now show where you got that info, Because(you know) your sources are always a source of concern.

http://www.illinoislottery.com/

Scroll down. Click on "Ways to win" for Mega Millions and Powerball.

(04-01-2012 10:58 AM)Howl-n-Prowl Wrote:  A "witness" says that he heard Zimmerman crying for help...how convenient that those who are pointing this out as a fact that should exonerate Zimmerman are failing to recognize that there are a couple of witnesses who are saying that they heard a young man (Martin) whining in a desperate tone right before the shot went off and that those cries stopped immediately after the shot went off. Furthermore, when the two witnesses went out to investigate the ruckus they saw Zimmerman straddling Martin with a foot on either side of him and his hands pressed on his back.

Eye witness testimony is the least reliable in situations like this.

How's this for a possibility? Zimmerman follows him, Martin doesn't like it, confronts him, starts giving him a beat down. Zimmerman is screaming during his beating but is able to get Martin off him or Martin lets up. Zimmerman grabs his gun and Martin begins to scream upon seeing it. Zimmerman shoots him. And cries normally stop when you're shot dead Howl. No unusual.

Explains both sets of witnesses statements as to what they heard and the 911 call "experts."

Or Zimmerman could be lying about everything, which would be strange given that he had a broken nose and a gash in the back of his head. So it's reasonable to assume the kid got in a few shots on him.

The eye witness testimony is varied and inconclusive. And what is said in some of it doesn't jive with other things we know, for example the Zimmerman was beat up.

There is a ton of uncertainty around this case and what happened, and it is only made worse by jacka$$es screaming racism is involved when there is no evidence at all that is the case. You see it in Max's question to Jug and the implications of it. Is there racism in the world? Yes. Ergo, according to Max, there is racism involved here. Low burden of proof to be sure.

I have no idea what happened. Neither does Max, Al Sharpton, Jessie Jackson or any of the others trying to exploit this tragedy for political and ideological purposes.

Jug is right. Let the investigators investigate. If something is there, they should prosecute to the fullest extent of the law. That is the majority of people who aren't race baiting liberals opinion on the matter.

Howl, FYI I put Ninerfan on ignore months ago because he's dishonest. Even his signature quote from me is a misquote and taken out of context. I don't mind when people disagree with me or call me names so long as they are earnestly being wrongheaded. :-D. Do whatever you want but just a warning if you're going to engage him.

(04-01-2012 10:11 AM)Max Power Wrote:  I know you guys are just parroting what you hear on talk radio and Fox News, so that when I feed you truth you come up with these ridiculous attacks and honestly think I'm nuts, but listen to me: FOX LIES TO YOU. IT IS PROPAGANDA. STOP WATCHING. A lot on MSNBC is propaganda too, me personally I watch CNN.

I don't get fox, and I spend all of 30 minutes a day in the car tuned into local radio..

(04-01-2012 12:11 PM)Max Power Wrote:  Howl, FYI I put Ninerfan on ignore months ago because he's dishonest. Even his signature quote from me is a misquote and taken out of context. I don't mind when people disagree with me or call me names so long as they are earnestly being wrongheaded. :-D. Do whatever you want but just a warning if you're going to engage him.

Yet you read every post I make, as the above continues to prove.

You put me on ignore because you can't defend your positions when I attack them. You have to lie, deflect and throw out straw man after straw man. But you keep acting like you don't while indirectly responding to me if it makes you feel like you're accomplishing something.

(04-01-2012 12:16 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(04-01-2012 10:11 AM)Max Power Wrote:  I know you guys are just parroting what you hear on talk radio and Fox News, so that when I feed you truth you come up with these ridiculous attacks and honestly think I'm nuts, but listen to me: FOX LIES TO YOU. IT IS PROPAGANDA. STOP WATCHING. A lot on MSNBC is propaganda too, me personally I watch CNN.

I don't get fox, and I spend all of 30 minutes a day in the car tuned into local radio..

So you listen to Rush Limburger and Mark Latrine.