• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Day 6 testimony ( Monday 7/1)

Grim17

Battle Ready
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
30,319
Reaction score
14,361
Location
Southwestern U.S.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
This thread is for discussing the days testimony in court, which will begin Monday morning at 9am EST/6am PST.

Once again, please try to keep your comments related to the trial testimony and avoid straying off into debating other aspects not covered in the proceedings...

Thx
 

Grim17

Battle Ready
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
30,319
Reaction score
14,361
Location
Southwestern U.S.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
OK... Is there anyone out there that still doesn't understand why not allowing those so called audio "experts" to testify was the right call?
 

Josie

No Day But Today
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 25, 2010
Messages
38,651
Reaction score
20,659
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
OK... Is there anyone out there that still doesn't understand why not allowing those so called audio "experts" to testify was the right call?
Explain that - I'm behind.
 

Grim17

Battle Ready
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
30,319
Reaction score
14,361
Location
Southwestern U.S.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
When this guy first took the stand for the state, I thought to myself "This could be the witness that drops a bomb on the defense", but the more testimony he gives, the more he appears to be just as ineffective at bolstering the state's case as nearly every other witness has been.
 

sharon

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
11,600
Reaction score
1,344
Location
Georgia
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
When this guy first took the stand for the state, I thought to myself "This could be the witness that drops a bomb on the defense", but the more testimony he gives, the more he appears to be just as ineffective at bolstering the state's case as nearly every other witness has been.
He's clearing up the confusion and controversy... which is valuable.. and appropriate.
 

MaggieD

Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,659
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
When this guy first took the stand for the state, I thought to myself "This could be the witness that drops a bomb on the defense", but the more testimony he gives, the more he appears to be just as ineffective at bolstering the state's case as nearly every other witness has been.
Remember, the defense already knew what he was going to testify to. Not many surprises in courtrooms anymore -- especially with the scope of this particular trial. And, of course, in the very beginning, the defense was more than happy to have him declared an Expert.
 

buck

DP Veteran
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
11,348
Reaction score
4,783
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I can only assume, at this point, that he was brought in to show the jury that someone familiar with the voice can recongize it.

Not sure how this helps the state... Tracy originally said no. Sybrina says yes. The brother says not certain.

On the other side, we have a friend that recognzied George's voice right away. One of the neighbors (forget which) recognized the voice, George's dad recognized the voice.
 

buck

DP Veteran
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
11,348
Reaction score
4,783
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
He's clearing up the confusion and controversy... which is valuable.. and appropriate.
Possibly just to let the jury know why there won't be any voice recognition by experts.
 

Grim17

Battle Ready
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
30,319
Reaction score
14,361
Location
Southwestern U.S.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Explain that - I'm behind.
That man on the stand is an forensic audio expert for the FBI with impeccable credentials in the field of voice analysis... He basically shot down in flames, anyone who claims they can analyze and determine who did or did not scream on that 911 call.
 

buck

DP Veteran
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
11,348
Reaction score
4,783
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Explain that - I'm behind.
A quickie..

The state lined up 3 experts that claimed to be able to recognize the voice (and hear things no one else heard). The defense lined up experts (includig this guy) to show that it is impossible to recognize voice on this recording.

The judge weiged the evidence and decided that the voice experts would not be allwoed to testify on who was screaming for help.
 

Josie

No Day But Today
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 25, 2010
Messages
38,651
Reaction score
20,659
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
So the jury won't be hearing anyone say "I know that's Trayvon's voice yelling for help"?
 

buck

DP Veteran
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
11,348
Reaction score
4,783
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
So the jury won't be hearing anyone say "I know that's Trayvon's voice yelling for help"?

No experts. Just family/friends.
 

buck

DP Veteran
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
11,348
Reaction score
4,783
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
It sure seems like this expert may have just turned on the prosecution.
 

spanky

Banned
Joined
Oct 10, 2012
Messages
5,431
Reaction score
979
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
It sure seems like this expert may have just turned on the prosecution.
To Z supporters, every witness has "turned" on the state...heheh.
 

year2late

IIJAFM
DP Veteran
Joined
May 12, 2013
Messages
22,823
Reaction score
20,204
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive
It sure seems like this expert may have just turned on the prosecution.
Turned on?

I am curious, don't you think that the prosecution pretty much knew what he would testify to?

They probably just put him out there first to minimize any damage later.

Is there anything in his testimony that was not expected?
 

buck

DP Veteran
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
11,348
Reaction score
4,783
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
My comments were split between different threads.. so to clarify why this witness turned on the state:

They almost certainly put him on their in anticipation of calling Sybrina to have her say it was her son screaming for help. The expert indicated that people familiar with the individual and his voice can recognize the screams.

However, under cross, he acknowledged that playing the tape in front of a group (which is what was done with Trayvon's family) will introduce bias.

This will cause the jury to put less weight on Sybrina saying it was her son and will bring out that Tracy originalyl said it was not his son.
 

buck

DP Veteran
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
11,348
Reaction score
4,783
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Turned on?

I am curious, don't you think that the prosecution pretty much knew what he would testify to?

They probably just put him out there first to minimize any damage later.

Is there anything in his testimony that was not expected?
Nope, they did not want him to testify to the introduction of bias. That's why they objected and it turned into a bench conference, where the state's obejection was overruled.
 

sharon

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
11,600
Reaction score
1,344
Location
Georgia
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
A quickie..

The state lined up 3 experts that claimed to be able to recognize the voice (and hear things no one else heard). The defense lined up experts (includig this guy) to show that it is impossible to recognize voice on this recording.

The judge weiged the evidence and decided that the voice experts would not be allwoed to testify on who was screaming for help.
This guy is a witness for the defense.. Do you understand the point of the testimony?
 

buck

DP Veteran
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
11,348
Reaction score
4,783
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
This guy is a witness for the defense.. Do you understand the point of the testimony?
Yes, I do. The beter question is... Do you?
 

justabubba

long standing member
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 22, 2005
Messages
51,138
Reaction score
32,845
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
This guy is a witness for the defense.. Do you understand the point of the testimony?
no
please explain it for us
 
Top Bottom