TalkLeft Discussion Forums

State v. George Zimmerman (Pre-Trial) => Court Matters => Topic started by: MJW on May 09, 2013, 12:18:20 PM

Title: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
Post by: MJW on May 09, 2013, 12:18:20 PM
The defense filed a motion (http://www.gzdocs.com/documents/0513/jury_view.pdf) to let the jury make a field trip to the scene.
Title: Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
Post by: Cylinder on May 09, 2013, 04:38:17 PM
Smart move, IMO.

Zimmerman will certainly want to point out (as did out host from the outset) the importance of W11's proximity to the altercation and the fact that the closer to events, the more Zimmerman is corraborated.
Title: Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on May 09, 2013, 05:14:29 PM
Smart move, IMO.

An obvious one.

Quote
the closer to events, the more Zimmerman is corraborated.

Yes, the device recording the NEN call was a long way from the scene.
Title: Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
Post by: RickyJim on May 09, 2013, 05:39:27 PM
The most important thing they could learn from the scene was how dark it was.  It would have been impossible for Zimmerman to keep track or Martin's whereabouts to run him down, and vice versa.  See Dave Knechel's video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n-h0GmjHSkA).  How they could keep things that dark with an army of paparazzi following them is a problem.
Title: Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on May 09, 2013, 05:46:34 PM
It would have been impossible for Zimmerman to keep track or Martin's whereabouts to run him down, and vice versa.  See Dave Knechel's video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n-h0GmjHSkA). 

Your opinion. The video proves nothing, in my opinion.
Title: Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
Post by: Cylinder on May 09, 2013, 05:58:04 PM
Yes, the device recording the NEN call was a long way from the scene.

Am I missing a spelling joke here? I'm not following your point. I wasn't referencing the recording device or the NEN call - I was referencing W11's proximity to the confrontation. I'm asserting that, in my opinion, it is helpful to Zimmerman to point out the relative proximity of the witnesses to the event to help the jury sort out any issues of commensurate detail that may arise.
Title: Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
Post by: AghastInFL on May 09, 2013, 06:23:57 PM
They will come away with an appreciation of just how small the area is... the neighborhood is compact, homes are close to the street, a person can walk the entirety of the scene in a matter of minutes, as evidenced by the NEN call.
Question, Will they mark the precise location of the body? at the request of jurors? or ...? IMO there is a lot of ambiguity in that regard even amongst those with a great deal of knowledge of facts in the case.
Title: Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on May 09, 2013, 08:33:34 PM
I'm not following your point.

The NEN recording is the evidence most inconsistent with Zimmerman's statements.

ETA: Back on topic, I think it is interesting that the motion seems to presuppose that the NEN recording will be admitted into evidence.
Title: Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
Post by: RickyJim on May 10, 2013, 06:07:13 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.  While standing at W#6's patio door, is there a really noticeable echo given by somebody screaming "Help!" when on their knees on the lawn, facing the houses across the dog path, versus somebody in Zimmerman's position, on his back, feet pointing towards the patio door?  One would assume that if the defense proposes this, they had tested it out already.
Title: Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
Post by: RickyJim on May 10, 2013, 02:12:14 PM
Quote
The prelude to the incident is documented in Mr. Zimmerman's non-emergency call, in which very specific locations are noted at specific time markers in the recorded phone call.
  I guess from this that the defense won't try to have the NEN call suppressed as evidence.  The grounds for trying to do that, to paraphrase Dershowitz, is that the self defense claims are all based on what happened after the call ended.  Maybe they assumed the judge would not grant their request.  Actually the quoted statement is incorrect unless O'Mara has the GPS data from Zimmerman's phone.  I don't think there is any place on the NEN call where Zimmerman pinpoints his location verbally.  The only other source, besides the hypothetical GPS, is Zimmerman's later interviews.
Title: Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on May 10, 2013, 02:20:16 PM
I don't think there is any place on the NEN call where Zimmerman pinpoints his location verbally.

The motion says 'specific locations'. It doesn't say Zimmerman's locations.
Title: Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
Post by: RickyJim on May 10, 2013, 02:24:57 PM
Which specific locations do  you mean?  I only remember the clubhouse and back entrance being mentioned.  I find it hard to believe that is what O'Mara had in mind.  Well maybe he does have the GPS.   ;)
Title: Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on May 10, 2013, 02:41:31 PM
Which specific locations do you mean?

I didn't write the motion. 

Quote
I only remember the clubhouse and back entrance being mentioned.

Also the mailboxes.

Quote
I find it hard to believe that is what O'Mara had in mind. 

Why?
Title: Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
Post by: RickyJim on May 10, 2013, 02:47:40 PM
How does it help the defense case for the jury to view the clubhouse, mail boxes and back entrance and link them to various times Zimmerman mentioned them in the NEN call? 
Title: Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on May 11, 2013, 04:22:36 AM
How does it help the defense case for the jury to view the clubhouse, mail boxes and back entrance and link them to various times Zimmerman mentioned them in the NEN call?

The location of the back entrance would corroborate some of Zimmerman's statements. But the motion doesn't say the locations help the defense case. It just says they are 'noted at specific time markers in the recorded phone call'.
Title: Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
Post by: nomatter_nevermind 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.
Title: Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
Post by: turbo6 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.
Title: Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
Post by: RickyJim 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.
Title: Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
Post by: leftwig 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.
Title: Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
Post by: nomatter_nevermind 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.
Title: Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on May 13, 2013, 08:23:14 PM
I think we all hear the reverberation/echo on that recording

Why do you think that?
Title: Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
Post by: leftwig 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. 
Title: Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on May 14, 2013, 09:04:05 AM
W11 was upstairs in her bedroom

She went upstairs after the gunshot.
Title: Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
Post by: nomatter_nevermind 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.
Title: Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
Post by: RickyJim 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.
Title: Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
Post by: DebFrmHell 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.
Title: Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
Post by: nomatter_nevermind 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.
Title: Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
Post by: cboldt 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.
Title: Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
Post by: nomatter_nevermind 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?
Title: Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
Post by: RickyJim 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.
Title: Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on May 14, 2013, 10:01:39 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.

If the suffocation happened, it would have been after W-6 went inside.

What is your point?

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

I don't understand what this refers to.
Title: Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on May 14, 2013, 11:12:37 AM
By the way, he says he heard one scream while he was outside. 

I don't know what you mean by 'one scream'. W-6 said he heard 'help' at least three times after the went outside.

FDLE, 3/20,  (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUvBZicWPDE#t=18m19s) 18:19-52
Quote
W-6: All I saw, was, at first, it looked like just one individual out there. It was dark. I couldn't really tell what was happening. And then, after I said, "Hey, what's going on?" I could see that there was another man, in a lighter shirt, or a lighter colored shirt, on the bottom, who looked like he was trying to get up at that point. And, then I heard "help, help, help," yelled. So that's when I said "I'm calling nine one one." Or I said, "Cut it out," and "I'm calling nine one one."
Title: Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on May 14, 2013, 11:22:34 AM
Now we know why BDLR implied at a hearing that both individuals were yelling.

I don't understand what this refers to.

OK, I think it refers to the Hollien/Harnsberger report. (http://www.gzdocs.com/documents/0513/051013_speaker_identification.pdf)
Title: Re: Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect Scene
Post by: RickyJim on May 14, 2013, 12:12:35 PM
I don't know what you mean by 'one scream'. W-6 said he heard 'help' at least three times after the went outside.

FDLE, 3/20,  (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUvBZicWPDE#t=18m19s) 18:19-52
He describes the wrestlers as going from an east-west orientation on the grass to a north-south orientation on the concrete during the 10 seconds he was outside.  When he describes his reasons for assigning the yelling to the guy on the bottom he speaks of it coming when they were in the east-west orientation and in the singular.
Quote
...Two, it was a clearer help.  It wasn't an echo-y help, bouncing off, you know, another house from the guy facing away from me.  It was more a projected, uh, help at that point.