Those exact words apply to W-6. Is his testimony 'tainted'?
"Taint" may have been an imperfect word choice. I intended to make the rather uncontroversial point that McLendon's original statement which strongly supports Zimmerman's version of event was weakened by his later statements. The same probably applies even more to W6, who originally had Zimmerman on his back screaming while being pummeled by Martin.
I believe there's a difference, though. I think W6's changes were only motivated by a desire to be as accurate as possible about what he saw. I think Cheryl Brown wants to make sure her son's testimony helps Zimmerman as little as possible. I don't know if Austin shares that objective, but it does make me view the changes to his testimny in a different light than W6's changes.
For both witnesses, I think their original statements, made while the events were fresh in their minds, were probably more accurate.
Voices deepen at puberty, so distinguishing adults from teenagers by voice alone seems problematical to me. I was told I had a pretty deep voice when I was fourteen.
I looked into that quite a while ago, and as I recall, most males' voice have reached their adult pitch by age 17.
I didn't dismiss it. I said it was possible the Miami Herald got the quote wrong. Do you disagree? Do you consider the reporting of the Miami Herald to be divinely inspired scripture?
The reason I made a point of what I assumed to be the human fallibility of the Miami Herald staff, was to give Cheryl Brown the benefit of the doubt. The alleged quote was a direct contradiction of what she said on The Nancy Grace Show on March 29.
The statement attributed to Cheryl Brown was not that Austin once said the garment was red, and later retracted that. It was that he never said the garment was red. You debunked that yourself. I'm puzzled that you're touting it now.
The interview summary doesn't say that anyone denied that Austin ever said the garment was red.
"Dismiss" was another poor word choice on my part. A more precise word just didn't come to mind at the time. I don't trust articles to get the facts straight -- that article certainly didn't -- but I do assume that they can usually get direct quotes correct. Sometimes they don't, but I think that's a fairly rare exception. In the case of that particular quote, I have almost no doubt Cheryl Brown said it.
One thing to note is that the article where Brown made that statement follows the quotation with, "Brown said she will hire an attorney to demand a copy of the audio statement her son gave to prove he has never wavered, and never claimed to see Zimmerman on the ground." It must have been made before she retained Adamson. On the Nancy Grace program, she's already represented by Adamson. So the quotation was made earlier, which may explain the difference. I'll mention in passing the exceptionally odd "representation" of Brown by Adamson, which consisted of lobbying for Zimmerman's arrest.