I agree. The animation is an approximation. The video states that, and specifically notes we do not know where or how exactly the vehicle turned. Not knowing, I just put the solid U-turns in because they're easier to animate. (I'm not an animator, and the work is quite difficult and time consuming). I did put in a two-step turnaround for the vehicle moving from facing the mailboxes to GZ's final position, because it matches the visual evidence, and it seemed important to show that. I put the time into the things that were important, and where I could match the animation to the videos with accuracy. For example, those U-turns are three key-frames each, and there's probably a dozen or more keyframes getting GZ past the mailbox and around the bend.
The second turn on RVC could have been a genuine U-turn if the vehicle used the parking area in front of the clubhouse for extra radius. But without tests that would match the 2/26 footage to known paths of a Ridgeline there's no way to know for sure.
As the video states, we can't say definitively that the first two passes are the same vehicle as the third (which does have to be Zimmerman), but the probablity is pretty good.
The transcript looks a little 'biased' to me. I got a laugh out of 'f-ing puddles'. He said 'coons', not that that means anything different than 'punks' in that context, or is evidence of bigotry (i elaborate on this at http://whonoze.wordpress.com/2012/05/27/why-coons-or-punks-doesnt-really-matter/).
I find it laughable that you would say that anything is a little biased.
The reason I pointed out that transcript is that Lee is an audio specialist. The important thing in that to consider is that only once does he mention what could be a gear shift.
The point is all about the times. You "see" Smith's car arriving on Twin Trees when that is not credible. For some reason, I read what you wrote is that it took well over a minute for Smith to arrive. Going just from memory, I think he was there between 20-40 seconds after the shot. I would have to go back and view the Event Log to be certain. In the meantime, I am using this one until I have time to go get one I can reference for you with a link.
1916:43 911 call placed by (redacted) where Zimmerman is heard screaming for help
1917:20 Shot fired; screams from Zimmerman cease
1917:40 Officer T. Smith arrives on scene
What you think is Zimmerman's truck, and I believe time wise that I can spot it too, neither of us can say without any doubt that it is the Ridgeline because there are no distinguishing factors that confirm it to be true. I don't agree with your timeline. If you were doing the animation correctly and making that three point turn it would chew up valuable seconds and that goes against your narrative. The turning radius for that truck is greater than 21 ft. 21.3ft IIRC. That makes it nothing but speculation.
I applaud that you put in the split screens for the clubhouse and pool. I thought that was very interesting because of the rain patterns. Since that is way out of my paygrade, I appreciate the hard work.
I just am not convinced you have made your case. Call it beyond reasonable doubt.
And it is a funny thing about the word you say he used. When it was first played, I had read about it beforehand. I heard the same as you. I was shocked. When it came out about the punks, I listened again and I could hear that word too. IMO, you are going to hear what you need or want to hear. Since the State has said/agreed it was "Punks," I will stay with that.
In the end, you are right. It won't matter. What I find to be...well...something...is that in both of the words and the phraseology, they were pluralized. That would be a generalization. Yet many think that it is directed solely at Trayvon Martin instead of considering the situation in general.
And since I have noticed that you were complaining about your comments being deleted from here at another site, this has not happened. There has been relatively good discourse about the video. I have thought there were a couple of times both of our posts would be deleted and they weren't. I also believe the statement RE: The Other Offensive "C" Word will has crossed the line here. I suspect it will be gone along with this one. We have already had stern warnings that if we wanted to discuss this in detail, we should go to the site from which it originated.