Hence the rolleyes smilie. We really need a tongue in cheek one.

My understanding was because of the poor quality of the recording.

I saw some of the testimony of the impartial expert in voice recognition. There was an analysis of the recording by that professional expert and his conclusion was that the voice could not be identified. Why is this an issue to anyone? An expert in the field concludes and so what do you want ... someone to overrule that expert in favor of your (not meaning you in particular DM) view?

"Fuc king punks, these as sholes always get away"

Not this time Sheriff Z, not this time.

Sorry, I see eye rolls as hateful, snarky and sarcastic...I have current teenagers, remember? :)

I agree that they need to update the smilies...

There are unconfirmed reports that Zimmerman will be feted at a barbecue given in his honor by the descendants of Roy Bryant and J.W. Milam in Money, Mississippi.

Could they have compelled Zimmerman to provide a comparative voice sample? Obviously, they could not secure one from Martin, unless they somehow could have made previously-recorded voice samples work.

You are obviously quoting this out of context!

This is the first I have heard why they could not identify it.

It would be interesting to hear what the jurors have to say about the verdict.

An option for juries might include ..."we thought he was guilty as heck but the prosecution did such a poor job it was not proven." ...of course that will never happen and I would be surprised if any juror comments on the record.

Is there any consensus in the legal community as to whether there can be a civil suit as there was in the OJ case?

If you're asking if the legal opportunity exists for a wrongful death lawsuit, the answer is yes. If you're asking if the plaintiff will prevail...

I am not asking who will prevail.

I saw a clip of the Z attorney sitting on top of a foam dummy shaking it so its head hit the floor. The dummy Must have weighed three pounds.

I'd like to see a demonstration of an average 5' 11 seventeen year old weighing 158# shaking a mature man weighing (what do you guess?) 230#. If I had been the prosecutor I would have been on that like ugly on ape.

I am still not buying that the kid could have killed Z that way....not even if their physical sizes had been reversed.

Ooopsy, busted. I'm sure he meant something else and this is in no way an indication of his intentions.

re: voice recording - I dont know if there is any legal precedent, but the human ear can hear from 30hz to 20,000hz in its prime. - that 19k of "bandwidth". Make that 7k of bandwidth if you are old and your ears are going bad (IIRC a tube television makes a 19k(?) noise....which is why some children can hear a TV on in an adjoining room....)

Cell phones/normal phones are tuned to only pass 6k or less if the connection is bad - Not sure what the connection was like during the incident in question.
who knows what the sampling rate of the 911 recorder is.

Given that we only have a lousy (my term) recording of whatever screams were made (I havent been that tuned in to the trial). I can see why someone would reason that any kind of scientific voice analysis is simply not up to the task of doing an either/or comparison based on the limited data available.

True audio folk are welcome to disagree with me here - I'd love to hear the science.

-John

I like the "not proven" verdict in Scottish law. It's basically a "not guilty" verdict with the same protections, but it says "this person might be guilty, but the prosecution didn't prove its case."

As far as a civil suit, I heard that it was difficult to impossible to sue for wrongful death in Fla. if the defendant was acquitted of criminal responsibility for the death. Maybe a suit on a Federal level would work, who knows?