TexasCHLforum.com

baldeagle wrote:Happy to help guys.

Thanks.

drjoker wrote:That's if the biased for the defense judge would allow this to happen. Crump is not an expert witness used to analyze evidence. Crump is not a character witness. Crump's testimony could be ruled hearsay and disallowed, as with all the other evidence that is advantageous to the defense that has already been disallowed. I certainly hope what you're saying is correct, for justice's sake. I certainly hope that the lawyer for the defense is not an idiot who told a "knock knock" joke during a murder trial.

Hmmm, an 'idiot' like a fox, maybe...

What you saw Don West do with the knock-knock joke (albeit stumbly bumbly) was a cognitive reset. When you ask an engaged listening audience (during debate), in this case a jury: “how many pancakes does it take to fill a canoe”? It’s like taking a massive cognitive eraser to a mental white board.

All prior thoughts are frozen, all ponderings of what you just heard stop; and, most importantly, your focus is unintentionally snapped into position, on the questioner, by the questioner.

It is a classic old school cognitive reset tool to get people to not only stop thinking about what was previous, but it actually wipes out memory. It’s just the way synapses fire – Awesome job by West regardless of how it made him look.

From here: http://theconservativetreehouse.com/201 ... ial-stuff/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Also, the US government records ALL phone conversations. This means that DeDe's conversation with Trayvon and Zimmerman's conversation with 911 are both recorded. Using computer audio analysis of the TWO recordings (you cannot do this with only one recording), you could also compute the EXACT location of both Trayvon and Zimmerman during the recordings. This means that you could definitively prove which party snuck up on the other party. A REALLY GOOD attorney would've been able to get his/her hands on the DeDe recording with Trayvon with some sort of legal motion or search warrant.

On an interview on CNN, a FBI agent admitted that all phone conversations are recorded, http://vigilantcitizen.com/latestnews/f ... -recorded/

The fact is, the government is selectively WITHOLDING evidence.

P.S. all those who say people like me are paranoid are forgetting that America is the greatest country on earth and America has almost UNLIMITED RESOURCES. America has more gold than South Africa http://qz.com/83396/1-billion-of-gold-h ... this-year/ America has more oil than Saudi Arabia http://rense.com/general9/alask.htm During world war II, some German scientists were interviewed about the atom bomb. They said that they felt it would be impossible to build because it would require the mobilization of the resources of an entire country to build it. America has more resources than entire continents. I think (not a fact, but just an opinion) that the government is delaying tapping into these vast resources that our nation possesses because these are limited resources on planet earth. The strategy is for the rest of the world to use up their resources first so that we'd have the rest of the world by the you-know-what and dominate the planet. In March 2013, USA produced more oil than Saudi Arabia: http://www.aei-ideas.org/2013/07/no-1-u ... -combined/

drjoker wrote:Using computer algorithms that the FBI and homeland security uses to analyze voice data, 2 seconds is more than enough screaming to positiviely identify the screamer. All you need is 93 milliseconds, which is only 0.093 seconds. Here is the scientific article to back this up:
http://www.ee.columbia.edu/~dpwe/papers ... -pitch.pdf

... we applied a comb-notch filtering method to sep-
arate two Finnish vowels /a/ and /i/ from a mixed voice signal. The
length of the analyzed segment was 93 ms...

Zimmerman could not afford a world class voice analyst as an expert witness. Zimmerman could not afford a competent attorney (read my post about the "knock knock" joke he told). Zimmerman has a "dream team". His team is sleeping on the job!

I wasn't aware the FBI employed such incompetent analysts. The voice ID witness was from the FBI.

An FBI audio expert, who played a key role helping the defense during pretrial hearings, testified Monday at the George Zimmerman murder trial that there was no way to definitively identify whose voice is heard screaming on a recorded emergency telephone call.

Hirotaka Nakasone took the stand on Monday morning as a prosecution witness to explain the screams heard on a 911 call on the night of Feb. 26, 2012, when Zimmerman and an unarmed teenager, Trayvon Martin, had a deadly confrontation in a gated community in Sanford, Fla.

edit: I suspect the quality of the sample would have great impact on the size of the sample required.

sjfcontrol wrote: I wasn't aware the FBI employed such incompetent analysts. The voice ID witness was from the FBI.

An FBI audio expert, who played a key role helping the defense during pretrial hearings, testified Monday at the George Zimmerman murder trial that there was no way to definitively identify whose voice is heard screaming on a recorded emergency telephone call.

Hirotaka Nakasone took the stand on Monday morning as a prosecution witness to explain the screams heard on a 911 call on the night of Feb. 26, 2012, when Zimmerman and an unarmed teenager, Trayvon Martin, had a deadly confrontation in a gated community in Sanford, Fla.

edit: I suspect the quality of the sample would have great impact on the size of the sample required.

I am willing to bet that the analysis was conclusive and that it showed GZ's voice as the one that was screaming. Then the mitigated answer and or withholding of the conclusion makes perfect sense. Remember who Nakasone's boss is.

drjoker wrote:Zimmerman could not afford a world class voice analyst as an expert witness. Zimmerman could not afford a competent attorney (read my post about the "knock knock" joke he told). Zimmerman has a "dream team". His team is sleeping on the job!

Do you mind sharing your credentials to make such an analysis? No offense, but most of your statements are not in line with what it looks like the rest of us agree have been the tone and developments of the actual proceedings. The tabloid news organizations are probably still hyping this story like they did a year ago, but the serious breakdowns all paint a radically different story.

At this moment, I'm inclined to go with my own analysis, which agrees with almost every legal expert analysis I've seen and read, and which is pretty much the exact opposite of what you said.

The (extremely competent) defense team is destroying the prosecution.

The prosecution was a disaster with no case, no hard evidence, and a slew of witnesses that undermined their case. Even their circumstantial case has been glaringly unraveled.

The knock-knock joke is old news and no longer in play. Some believe it might have helped the defense. Almost all agree - by this point - it hasn't hurt. The defense has basically split the roles so that West is doing the hard, tedious, confrontational and technical impeachment type questioning (although he's calm, calculated, patient, and polite in his approach) and O'Mara is staying very upbeat, polite, cooperative, and positive. I'd bet money that O'Mara will do the closing argument.

A jury can be unpredictable, and anything could happen, but the overwhelming momentum of the evidence they have seen should lead to an acquittal in 99% of scenarios.

I think Zimmerman's going home.

drjoker wrote:Also, the US government records ALL phone conversations.

Sorry dude, you lost all credibility there. Evern if it were true, no one gets to knock on the white house door and say "excuse me, I need all the recordings you have for xyz date and time from so and so to otherso and aso"

ScooterSissy wrote:

drjoker wrote:Also, the US government records ALL phone conversations.

Sorry dude, you lost all credibility there. Evern if it were true, no one gets to knock on the white house door and say "excuse me, I need all the recordings you have for xyz date and time from so and so to otherso and aso"

It is probably true, but from what I understand of recent Snowdon revelations, most calls are written over after a few days due to memory limitations. Only the ones they want to burrow into after analyzing the metadata are kept. All traffic routed through the UK is recorded....everything, voice, and everything over the internet....and again, due to memory limitations, only certain data is kept forever. You can bet the ones kept forever include calls by SC justices, congressmen, high ranking military and government officials, governors, and other powerful people.

cb1000rider wrote:What a waste of taxpayer dollars. Without being there, no one except for Zimmerman is ever going to know what really happened.

Beyond that, where are the grounds for prosecuting this case? The PD declined. The local DA declined... It went viral in the news and we suddenly get a special prosecutor involved?

IMHO, this was a needless avoidable death. However, trying to put Zimmerman in for murder is a big overreach...

One news channel said the lead detective wanted to file manslaughter charges at the time but was over ruled. That was the first time I heard that.

Regarding all the voice analyst threads I don't buy this conspiracy stuff. If they had identified a voice they would have testified to that effect. The expert is not going to lie on the stand over this small time case. This is the real world and not CSI where they can do amazing things.

Did the witness on the stand really just give a "shout out" to the city of San Antonio?

Frankie wrote:Did the witness on the stand really just give a "shout out" to the city of San Antonio?

Boring day so far. I would love to see that animation they were talking about. I personally wonder about this marijuana usage. Sure they should bring it up, but after encountering hundreds if not 1000's of people under the influence of marijuana, I have never encountered a hostile or aggressive one. That could play bad for the defense depending on who the prosecution brings on to counter this. I also wonder if they will bring that awful ME back on the stand who had the new opinion that it could have effected Martin?

texanjoker wrote:

cb1000rider wrote:What a waste of taxpayer dollars. Without being there, no one except for Zimmerman is ever going to know what really happened.

Beyond that, where are the grounds for prosecuting this case? The PD declined. The local DA declined... It went viral in the news and we suddenly get a special prosecutor involved?

IMHO, this was a needless avoidable death. However, trying to put Zimmerman in for murder is a big overreach...

One news channel said the lead detective wanted to file manslaughter charges at the time but was over ruled. That was the first time I heard that.

Regarding all the voice analyst threads I don't buy this conspiracy stuff. If they had identified a voice they would have testified to that effect. The expert is not going to lie on the stand over this small time case. This is the real world and not CSI where they can do amazing things.

He testified under oath that they had no evidence to disprove Zimmerman's account, and that he was being pressured from outside. He agreed to file manslaughter charges but balked on the 2nd degree murder charge and was demoted as a result.

Bwahahahahaha!!!

From the Patriot Post

texanjoker wrote:

Frankie wrote:Did the witness on the stand really just give a "shout out" to the city of San Antonio?

Boring day so far. I would love to see that animation they were talking about. I personally wonder about this marijuana usage. Sure they should bring it up, but after encountering hundreds if not 1000's of people under the influence of marijuana, I have never encountered a hostile or aggressive one. That could play bad for the defense depending on who the prosecution brings on to counter this. I also wonder if they will bring that awful ME back on the stand who had the new opinion that it could have effected Martin?

I wondered about that too.....everything I've ever heard indicates marijuana does not produce aggression, but a dull mellow response. Unless they've got some evidence that ties marijuana use in some individuals to aggressive behavior or shows aggression in combination with some other drug in his system, it would seem to undermine the theory of Martin as aggressor. I'm guessing the intent is to corroborate Z's phone remark that Martin looked like he was on drugs, and maybe just make the inference that drug user = bad person.

sjfcontrol wrote:Bwahahahahaha!!!

From the Patriot Post

That's a good one. Of course, the Obama base is unlikely to even know who Chris Stevens is.