Author Topic: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene  (Read 6536 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5449
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
« Reply #15 on: May 11, 2013, 04:29:09 AM »
The other important thing, besides the inability of anybody to see much on the dogpath (besides W#6's patio and lawn), that might be noticed by the jury is the testing of my favorite scream evidence. 

I would expect the rain to dampen the sound. Even if a test were done on a rainy day, we don't how hard it was raining at the time. If were a juror, I would give no weight to such a demonstration.

ETA: If the defense wanted to do this, I think they would have mentioned it when they asked for a Frye hearing on audio expert witnesses.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2013, 04:34:36 AM by nomatter_nevermind »

Offline turbo6

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 66
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
« Reply #16 on: May 12, 2013, 12:20:24 PM »
Another aspect of visiting the scene, besides noting how it looked at night, and possible audio analysis if they go that route, would be the location of Trayvon's body....namely if the marker would denote where Martin was first found, or where it ended up once EMT, other officers etc showed up and began processing the scene.

I know its been talked about, I just can't recall if there was anything specific in regards to where his body was first found versus if it may have been moved a significant distance by medical officers and such.

Offline RickyJim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1580
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
« Reply #17 on: May 12, 2013, 04:12:14 PM »
I would expect the rain to dampen the sound. Even if a test were done on a rainy day, we don't how hard it was raining at the time. If were a juror, I would give no weight to such a demonstration.

ETA: If the defense wanted to do this, I think they would have mentioned it when they asked for a Frye hearing on audio expert witnesses.
I agree that water droplets in the air might scatter and distort sound waves more than dry air.  One might guess that the test would show a greater difference between the facing W#6 versus facing houses across the dog path on a rainy day than a dry one.  If the defense has checked out that the echo effect is noticeable on a dry day, they should go ahead with the test, regardless of the weather.  It is possible that they have checked this all out and found that W#6 didn't know what he was talking about.  However even in a room I can often tell with my eyes closed if somebody talking to me is facing at me or away so I believe him.

Offline leftwig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 532
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
« Reply #18 on: May 13, 2013, 07:54:26 PM »
Stealing this from another thread, but in trying to analyze the screams heard on the 911 call, the FBI said

"Critical listening and digital signal analyses further revealad that the screaming voice on the 911 call is of insufficient voice quality and duration to conduct meaningful voice comparison with any otherr voice samples primarily due to the screaming voice being: (1) produced under an extreme emotional state, (2)  limited in the number of words and phrases uttered, (3) superimposed by other voices most of the time, and (4) distant, reverberant and very low signal level."

Looks like they are saying there was an echo to the screams as picked up on the 911 call (I think we all hear the reverberation/echo on that recording).  If W6 says he didn't hear echo in the voice that was calling to him for help and that we know the screams were causing an echo that was picked up at another location, then that seems to lend some credence to his statement about the source of the voice being directed towards him not away from him.

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5449
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
« Reply #19 on: May 13, 2013, 08:10:33 PM »
If W6 says he didn't hear echo in the voice that was calling to him for help and that we know the screams were causing an echo that was picked up at another location, then that seems to lend some credence to his statement about the source of the voice being directed towards him not away from him.

The other location, W-11's unit,  is in the same building as W-6's, hence also opposite the other building. I'm not getting why an echo should be audible at W-11's unit and not at W-6's.

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5449
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
« Reply #20 on: May 13, 2013, 08:23:14 PM »
I think we all hear the reverberation/echo on that recording

Why do you think that?

Offline leftwig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 532
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
« Reply #21 on: May 14, 2013, 06:46:56 AM »
The other location, W-11's unit,  is in the same building as W-6's, hence also opposite the other building. I'm not getting why an echo should be audible at W-11's unit and not at W-6's.

W11 was upstairs in her bedroom and to the north of W6.  IF GZ was facing W6 as W6 stated, his voice wouldn't have been focused in her direction.  Hence, what she captured on the phone was the voice reverberating off the buildings in the dog walk area.   Its what the FBI indicated in their research and what I hear fairly clearly on the call. 

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5449
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
« Reply #22 on: May 14, 2013, 09:04:05 AM »
W11 was upstairs in her bedroom

She went upstairs after the gunshot.

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5449
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
« Reply #23 on: May 14, 2013, 09:18:28 AM »
Hence, what she captured on the phone was the voice reverberating off the buildings in the dog walk area.   

That doesn't explain why W-6 didn't hear the echo.

Offline RickyJim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1580
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
« Reply #24 on: May 14, 2013, 09:28:23 AM »
That doesn't explain why W-6 didn't hear the echo.
W-6's position made the voice signal he heard of much greater amplitude than the echo signals.  For W-11's phone, the amplitudes would have been closer in magnitude.  Of course, this can and should be tested by an acoustic scientist.

Offline DebFrmHell

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 954
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
« Reply #25 on: May 14, 2013, 09:38:47 AM »
The head is not static in a fight.  If someone is trying to cover or has covered your mouth, the tendency would be to move your head from side to side to free your mouth and get air.

Now we know why BDLR implied at a hearing that both individuals were yelling.

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5449
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
« Reply #26 on: May 14, 2013, 09:47:03 AM »
W-6's position made the voice signal he heard of much greater amplitude than the echo signals.

The echo follows the initial sound. If the echo was loud enough for us to hear on the recording, it should have been loud enough for W-6 to hear.

Offline cboldt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1262
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
« Reply #27 on: May 14, 2013, 09:53:38 AM »
Now we know why BDLR implied at a hearing that both individuals were yelling.

I think Zimmerman says that Martin was talking.  "Shut up," etc.  IOW, that both of them were making sounds is not a point of contention.  The issue is which of them is yelling for help.

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5449
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
« Reply #28 on: May 14, 2013, 09:58:52 AM »
IF GZ was facing W6 as W6 stated, his voice wouldn't have been focused in her direction.  Hence, what she captured on the phone was the voice reverberating off the buildings in the dog walk area.   Its what the FBI indicated in their research and what I hear fairly clearly on the call.

For what part of the call, for how long?

The screaming is audible on the recording for about 45 seconds. W-6 was outside observing the struggle for about 10 seconds. During that time, W-6 says that the two men changed position. Before that time, the source of the sound was in motion, according to W-6 and W-11.

Is all of this reflected in the sonic analysis of the recording?

Offline RickyJim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1580
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
« Reply #29 on: May 14, 2013, 09:59:40 AM »
The echo follows the initial sound. If the echo was loud enough for us to hear on the recording, it should have been loud enough for W-6 to hear.
I don't hear any echo on the recording.  The screams are too faint.  When the FBI speaks of reverberation, I assume they know it is there by spectral analysis.  Only an on sight test can check W-6's claim.  By the way, he says he heard one scream while he was outside.  So we have to pick that one out of the 911 call to make a valid comparison.  I think he may well be correct because a person facing the houses across the dog path would give off different amplitudes for echo and direct signals than someone facing him.  Anyway, it would convince me more than those two reports released today.
« Last Edit: May 14, 2013, 10:03:37 AM by RickyJim »

 

Site Meter
click
tracking