Trayvon Martin case 911 call: Screams not George Zimmerman's, 2 experts say

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

On show after show on FNC, with the exception of Hannity, they all are convinced he shot the kid, and lied about it.

That settles it then. Just prove it in court and you have a winner. Otherwise, take your ball and go home. He will be indicted (or not) and tried (or not) under our system of laws, not by FOX, not by MSNBC, not by CNN. My comments regarding FOX as a defense were meant to be absurd. It passed well over the heads of people who think nightly news shows are the modern substitute for our system of justice.

Maybe we could just do a VJ poll and be done with it. (joking)

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

It's not going to the grand jury. The special prosecutor says she will make the decision whether or not to indict on her own.

She would be wise to use the grand jury .

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

She would be wise to use the grand jury .

I agree, especially if she intends to clear Zimmerman.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Again, after all I seen and heard in some media especially MSNBC I won't be surprised if this guy is acquitted.

The conclusions of Owen and another audio expert were first reported by the Orlando Sentinel on Saturday.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

It's not going to the grand jury. The special prosecutor says she will make the decision whether or not to indict on her own.

I am OK with that also. In my opinion this means he WILL be indicted since I do not see any ONE person having the b@lls to no bill Zimmerman and risk having her home burned down or a bounty issued on her personally by non-racist, non gun-nut "activists"

I agree with Sousuke though, I would use the grand jury.

An indictement itself means nothing except sparing a few neighborhoods from the torch for the time being. The trial is where the guilt or innocence is decided anyway, IF there is a trial.

[DaveE 178]

Any yet a neighbor who lives there, said it is the voice of Z, but what would he know, he wasn't listening to a poor quality 911 tape and is not a voice analysis expert. Ahh yes, shades of Duke Lacrosse, and Casey Anthony. Nancy Grace will probably have a stroke.

Neighbor defends George Zimmerman

Updated: Friday, 30 Mar 2012, 10:33 PM EDT

Published : Friday, 30 Mar 2012, 10:33 PM EDT

TAMPA - One of George Zimmerman's neighbors is speaking out, saying looks can be deceiving.

Despite booking video from the Sanford Police Department that many say shows George Zimmerman largely unscathed from his encounter with Trayvon Martin, the neighbor said he saw Zimmerman with obvious injuries.

The neighbor is talking for the first time about what he saw on George Zimmerman's face less than 24-hours after Zimmerman shot and killed Trayvon Martin.

"I saw George. He was banged up. His head had two big bandages, that weren't flat, had a bump on them," the neighbor, who did not want to be identified, said.

He described where the injuries were.

"I seen him have a big bandage on his nose and his nose swollen. On the side, where his eyes were at, it was swollen," he said.

He points out exactly where on a picture.

"I seen the bandage right here, and this side of his nose and this side of his nose was swollen.

The surveillance video was released by Sanford police of Zimmerman when he was brought in for questioning after the shooting. Bruises and bandages aren't visible, but you can see an officer looking at the back of his head.

"Once you get into a fight you don't show bruises that day, it shows the next day," he said.

The neighbor says Zimmerman had to have acted in self-defense.

"I think something happened that night where he had to defend himself," the neighbor said.

He says that the voice heard screaming on the 911 call is that of George Zimmerman.

"I hear his voice every single day, I talk to him every single day," he said.

He says the case has haunted him.

"I've been thinking about it morning noon and night ever since I seen the bandages on him," he said.

He believes Zimmerman was defending his life, and that's why he's defending Zimmerman now. He says he doesn't believe race played a role in what happened.

"I don't think race is involved at all, because I've seen black, African-American folks come to George's house," he said.

The neighbor says he's tired of Zimmerman being portrayed as the bad guy.

"Everyone needs to let the justice system take its course before rushing to judgment," he said.

Edited April 2, 2012 by DaveE

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

That settles it then. Just prove it in court and you have a winner. Otherwise, take your ball and go home. He will be indicted (or not) and tried (or not) under our system of laws, not by FOX, not by MSNBC, not by CNN. My comments regarding FOX as a defense were meant to be absurd. It passed well over the heads of people who think nightly news shows are the modern substitute for our system of justice.

Maybe we could just do a VJ poll and be done with it. (joking)

The problem is, it may never get to court, if the special prosecutor decides to clear Zimmerman. Then it will be to AG Holder whether or not to pursue a Federal action against Zimmerman, (on what grounds I have no idea,) but I am sure Justice is making contingency plans just to keep the issue alive well into summer.

[ready4ONE 5,400]

My sole issue with calling this "self defense" is it appears the contact was initiated by Mr. Z. I don't think you can start a fight and still claim that you had to use deadly force when you got a beat down.

I would also agree it is up to the court system, and if the law allows the above, scrap the law.

Edited April 2, 2012 by ready4ONE

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

I hope Zimmerman is found innocent and elected as the next governor of Florida.

[james&olya 1,121]

This does muddy the waters a bit though. Perhaps if the Grand Jury is allowed to hear this, there may be a trial on the charges of manslaughter.

If this really is the voice of the deceased the charges might need to be more than manslaughter!

I doubt these 'experts' conclusions will hold much influence with the court. For one thing, even though I know only a little about voice analysis and identification, I know that it does make a difference whether someone is speaking normally vs screaming in terror for their life! REAL voice experts need to do an analysis for the court. Zimmerman should be only too happy to provide such experts with recordings of himself screaming those same words to be able to prove the voice on the 911 tape was his. If he hesitates to do so that will speak volumes!

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

My sole issue with calling this "self defense" is it appears the contact was initiated by Mr. Z. I don't think you can start a fight and still claim that you had to use deadly force when you got a beat down.

Not just your issue. It's also the 'stand your ground' sponsor and the governor who signed it into law.

The men responsible for Florida's controversial "stand your ground'' law are certain about one thing: Because of his actions before he pulled the trigger and killed 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, George Zimmerman is not protected from criminal prosecution.

Because Zimmerman exited his vehicle, because he followed Martin, because his actions put him in a situation where he felt it necessary to shoot a boy dead, he should be booked, jailed and forced to face a jury of his peers.

Said Durell Peaden, the former Republican senator from Crestview who sponsored the bill: "The guy lost his defense right then. When he said, 'I'm following him,' he lost his defense."

Said Jeb Bush, the governor who signed the bill into law: "Stand your ground means stand your ground. It doesn't mean chase after somebody who's turned their back."

Edited April 2, 2012 by Mr. Big Dog

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I hope Zimmerman is found innocent and elected as the next governor of Florida.

Maybe Alaska should make him an offer. We already have a crook in the governor's mansion. No need to put a killer in there.

[sandinista! 1,816]

Not just your issue. It's also the 'stand your ground' sponsor and the governor who signed it into law.

Yet it continues to play out that way in FL courtrooms...

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Yet it continues to play out that way in FL courtrooms...

Indeed. If this truly wasn't the intent of the law, then perhaps the lawmaker has a responsibility to go back to the drawing board and ensure that the law is amended and passed in a way cannot be interpreted counter to what the lawmakers intended. But they're not going back to drawing board even after several killers have gotten away with the murders they committed leaving me to believe that what they're saying now is merely lip-service in light of public outrage over the injustice they helped create.

[xebec 195]

Indeed. If this truly wasn't the intent of the law, then perhaps the lawmaker has a responsibility to go back to the drawing board and ensure that the law is amended and passed in a way cannot be interpreted counter to what the lawmakers intended. But they're not going back to drawing board even after several killers have gotten away with the murders they committed leaving me to believe that what they're saying now is merely lip-service in light of public outrage over the injustice they helped create.

No need to speculate. The only people that are claiming that this case demonstrates flaws with the "castle doctrine" are those who are ignorant (and too lazy to look at the statute), and political opportunists. The drawing board stage was done long ago, and the law is well-crafted and perfectly sensible. I'll make it easy .....

Title XLVI

CRIMES Chapter 776

JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE View Entire Chapter

776.013 Home protection; use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.(1) A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if:

(a) The person against whom the defensive force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against that persons will from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle; and

(b) The person who uses defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred.

(2) The presumption set forth in subsection (1) does not apply if:

(a) The person against whom the defensive force is used has the right to be in or is a lawful resident of the dwelling, residence, or vehicle, such as an owner, lessee, or titleholder, and there is not an injunction for protection from domestic violence or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person; or

(b) The person or persons sought to be removed is a child or grandchild, or is otherwise in the lawful custody or under the lawful guardianship of, the person against whom the defensive force is used; or

© The person who uses defensive force is engaged in an unlawful activity or is using the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle to further an unlawful activity; or

(d) The person against whom the defensive force is used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who enters or attempts to enter a dwelling, residence, or vehicle in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person entering or attempting to enter was a law enforcement officer.

(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

(4) A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter a persons dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence.

(5) As used in this section, the term:

(a) Dwelling means a building or conveyance of any kind, including any attached porch, whether the building or conveyance is temporary or permanent, mobile or immobile, which has a roof over it, including a tent, and is designed to be occupied by people lodging therein at night.

(b) Residence means a dwelling in which a person resides either temporarily or permanently or is visiting as an invited guest.

© Vehicle means a conveyance of any kind, whether or not motorized, which is designed to transport people or property.

Taken in context with another portion of the statutes:

Title XLVI

CRIMES Chapter 776

JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE View Entire Chapter

776.041 Use of force by aggressor.The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:

(1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or

(2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:

(a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or

(b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.

History.s. 13, ch. 74-383; s. 1190, ch. 97-102.

The statutes have this well-covered. It is perfectly clear that if Zimmerman initiated the contact, as some here are convinced, then he was required to "exhaust every reasonable means to escape" before he could use deadly force. If Martin initiated the contact, and Zimmerman believed his life was in danger, he had no responsibility to retreat.

Edited April 2, 2012 by xebec