Author Topic: Defendant's Second Supplemental Discovery  (Read 8247 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Cylinder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 730
  • Rate Post +0/-0
  • IANAL
Re: Defendant's Second Supplemental Discovery
« Reply #15 on: May 22, 2013, 12:48:55 AM »
The May 6 photo set can be fixed via WinRAR repair. IMG_0681 is corrupt. They are pictures of RATL.

Offline AJ

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 371
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Defendant's Second Supplemental Discovery
« Reply #16 on: May 22, 2013, 07:13:37 AM »
DSC_0227 is interesting. The phone shows a time of 7:04PM. The metadata on the image says it was taken on August 8th, 2012 at 3:06PM. Is this the approximate time the phone shut off? If so, wouldn't that mean that W8 was not on the phone with Mr. Martin while these events took place?

Offline cboldt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1262
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Defendant's Second Supplemental Discovery
« Reply #17 on: May 22, 2013, 07:22:40 AM »
The May 6 photo set can be fixed via WinRAR repair. IMG_0681 is corrupt. They are pictures of RATL.

For anybody using linux or similar, `zip -FF may6_photos.zip --out may6_photos-fixed.zip` also works.  IMG_0681.JPG extracts from the fixed archive, with the bottom half of the image "missing."

Offline cboldt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1262
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Defendant's Second Supplemental Discovery
« Reply #18 on: May 22, 2013, 07:26:20 AM »
DSC_0227 is interesting. The phone shows a time of 7:04PM. The metadata on the image says it was taken on August 8th, 2012 at 3:06PM. Is this the approximate time the phone shut off? If so, wouldn't that mean that W8 was not on the phone with Mr. Martin while these events took place?

We'd have to know how the clock on the phone is set (only locally, of via data on the cell tower signals or wireless network signals), if the phone was powered down hard (battery gone or dead), and when the phone was last resupplied with power, before the photo was taken.  I doubt the clock on the phone is showing/stuck on the time it shut off (if it did) on February 26th.

Offline AJ

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 371
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Defendant's Second Supplemental Discovery
« Reply #19 on: May 22, 2013, 08:03:17 AM »
We'd have to know how the clock on the phone is set (only locally, of via data on the cell tower signals or wireless network signals), if the phone was powered down hard (battery gone or dead), and when the phone was last resupplied with power, before the photo was taken.  I doubt the clock on the phone is showing/stuck on the time it shut off (if it did) on February 26th.

Thinking back on it, I did jump the gun. I was somehow under the (self-imposed) impression that maybe they kept the battery out of the phone when they weren't working on it, but looking at the image again, the battery is full so the clock has been moving for a number of hours.

Offline Evil Chinchilla

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 157
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Defendant's Second Supplemental Discovery
« Reply #20 on: May 22, 2013, 10:06:38 AM »
Thinking back on it, I did jump the gun. I was somehow under the (self-imposed) impression that maybe they kept the battery out of the phone when they weren't working on it, but looking at the image again, the battery is full so the clock has been moving for a number of hours.
Also, didn't the police use the phone to call 911 in order to obtain the number of the phone, back in March 2012?

Still, it's kind of weird that the clock on the phone just happens to randomly show a time corresponding to the time phone calls were being made before the altercation-- as opposed to, say, 11:20 AM.

I've never owned a cell phone, so I have to ask: is it possible to replace the battery to do something with the phone but not reactivate the clock, so it keeps displaying the last time it showed?

Offline unitron

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1060
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Defendant's Second Supplemental Discovery
« Reply #21 on: May 22, 2013, 11:21:23 AM »
Also, didn't the police use the phone to call 911 in order to obtain the number of the phone, back in March 2012?

Still, it's kind of weird that the clock on the phone just happens to randomly show a time corresponding to the time phone calls were being made before the altercation-- as opposed to, say, 11:20 AM.

I've never owned a cell phone, so I have to ask: is it possible to replace the battery to do something with the phone but not reactivate the clock, so it keeps displaying the last time it showed?

If you power it up, I'm pretty sure the clock is going to start ticking again.

If you have it inside a Faraday cage so it can't connect to any cell phone towers or anything, I don't know if it picks up where it left off (or if it even has a record of when that was), or if it resets the time and date to whatever the default is for whatever operating system it runs.

It would make sense for them to do all the work in a totally shielded environment so as to not have the phone start downloading a software update in the middle of things.

I'd like to see proof positive that the camera that took the picture was set to the right time and date, to the sliver of a second, and in what time zone it was set.

Offline AJ

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 371
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Defendant's Second Supplemental Discovery
« Reply #22 on: May 22, 2013, 11:30:42 AM »
Gzdocs.com (where documents are hosted) has had some bandwidth issues in the last couple days, and they put up a bunch of .zip files which doesn't help people who are on handhelds. What I've done is set up a dropbox with all of yesterday's documents. Feel free to share it if you want (I know Annette did on her blog): https://www.dropbox.com/sh/gg072c6k5jii62t/5SE_vMu4f7

Offline MJW

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1304
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Defendant's Second Supplemental Discovery
« Reply #23 on: May 22, 2013, 11:41:53 AM »
If you power it up, I'm pretty sure the clock is going to start ticking again.

If you have it inside a Faraday cage so it can't connect to any cell phone towers or anything, I don't know if it picks up where it left off (or if it even has a record of when that was), or if it resets the time and date to whatever the default is for whatever operating system it runs.

The phone display shows four bars for the signal strength, so I doubt it's in a Faraday cage. Too bad the display doesn't include the date.

Offline leftwig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 532
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Defendant's Second Supplemental Discovery
« Reply #24 on: May 22, 2013, 01:26:23 PM »
So after looking at some of the photos, I am left thinking of a question we've had for some time and that is, was the button really found on TM's sweatshirt or in his pockets by police or ME?  In looking at the photo's from the 7-11 and the photo of the sweatshirt with the gunshot wound, it looks like the button would have been awfully darn close to the bullet hole.  I am not suggesting I can tell its exactly where the bullet hole is or that even if it was, the gun could have been under the button when the shot was fired.  However, if the button were on TM's person, in the location that it can be seen on the 7-11 photos, it most certainly would have had blood on it and likely gunshot residue. 

Was the button tested for any forensics evidence?  I don't recall that it was, but can't think of any reason it wouldn't have been tested if found on the sweatshirt right by the gunshot wound.  IT seems to me that if it wasn't tested, then it wasn't in the same location that it was on while at the 7-11 and most likely was not attached to the sweatshirt.  That, or police just totally screwed that one up.

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5449
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Defendant's Second Supplemental Discovery
« Reply #25 on: May 22, 2013, 01:38:53 PM »
Ayala reportedly said the gunshot wound was under the button (2/284).

I still don't understand why Ayala would have hallucinated this, when he had no way of knowing there was such a button in one of Martin's pockets.

Offline MJW

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1304
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Defendant's Second Supplemental Discovery
« Reply #26 on: May 22, 2013, 02:37:54 PM »
Ayala reportedly said the gunshot wound was under the button (2/284).

I still don't understand why Ayala would have hallucinated this, when he had no way of knowing there was such a button in one of Martin's pockets.

But leftwig's question remains: if the button were pinned on the hoodie so near the bullet entry hole, why wasn't it tested for blood and powder residue?

Offline DiwataMan

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 141
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Defendant's Second Supplemental Discovery
« Reply #27 on: May 22, 2013, 02:59:49 PM »
But leftwig's question remains: if the button were pinned on the hoodie so near the bullet entry hole, why wasn't it tested for blood and powder residue?

We don't know it wasn't tested do we? Even if not it could be they just didn't do it like other things they could have done but didn't. Did they test the watch? Because there looks to be abrasions about George's head and face that could have come from Trayvons watch scrapping against the skin. Perhaps that one cut on the bridge of the nose came from that as well. But of course that's stuff that would help George so why would they bother really, they had their victim.

Offline MJW

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1304
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Defendant's Second Supplemental Discovery
« Reply #28 on: May 22, 2013, 03:01:15 PM »
Ayala reportedly said the gunshot wound was under the button (2/284).

I'm pretty sure the page number is wrong. I know the button is mentioned on page 20 in by Ciesla, but I don't know where Ayala's report is. (I believe there is one, I just can't find it quickly.)
« Last Edit: May 22, 2013, 03:10:51 PM by MJW »

Offline MJW

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1304
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Defendant's Second Supplemental Discovery
« Reply #29 on: May 22, 2013, 03:09:24 PM »
We don't know it wasn't tested do we? Even if not it could be they just didn't do it like other things they could have done but didn't. Did they test the watch?

I don't think the watch was tested, but the watch wasn't a few inches, at most, from the bullet hole. I also don't understand why the button would be removed at the scene, except if it were necessary to aid the attempted resuscitation. And if it we're, I think that that, being something out of the ordinary, would be mentioned in a report.
« Last Edit: May 22, 2013, 03:13:46 PM by MJW »

 

Site Meter
click
tracking