Trayvon Martin Shooting: Voice Experts Claim Teen's Cries, Not Zimmerman's, Can Be He

[Russian Crushin]

They are scientist, the scientific method requires reliability. How can you have reliability when you don't test your findings against anything. Its possible their research gave a false negative and they wouldn't know it unless they test it against TM's.

This is distinguished from the fingerprint hypo for one very apparent reason. There are only two possibilities here, there are seven billion and and counting with fingerprints. It's either TM's or GZ's voice.

Even more importantly, in the finger print hypo, if your found a suspects finger print didn't match that at the crime scene, then it relieves the suspect of suspicion. The results here have the opposite effect in that it raises suspicion. For that reason there is more at stake and a heightend demand for reliability is necessary.

Why are you dodging the question of reliability? You're a hypocrit because I do respond to your info, it's you who ignores mine.

You still dont get it

How would testing it against TM change the outcome that its not Zimmerman's? I would love to hear this logic

And you completely ignored my finger print example. Ill make it easier for you

You are a finger print expert called him to test finger prints found at a crime scene to match them against the main suspect

You test the finger prints and and they DONT match. So you would have to test every other person's finger prints as well to show that they dont match? How does that makes sense?

The voice experts in the article were called to test ONLY IF IT WAS ZIMMERMAN's voice. They ARE NOT the DA who are doing the case and need to compare it to the other person's. They are ONLY voice experts asked to see if it was ZIMMERMAN's.

The reliability would fall upon the DA to compare it to TM's voice, NOT the voice experts

[Russian Crushin]

If those voice experts were called to attempt to identify a voice heard in audio voicemail to see if it belongs to person X

So who would they compare the voice to? Because according to you, they cant say whether or not its really person X's voice unless they compare it to someone else

Think about it

[Russian Crushin]

Just think long and hard about my finger print example

You dont have to prove one thing to disprove another

In that example, you dont have to prove that its not 1 of 7 billion people's finger prints to prove that its not suspects X's fingerprints

[Russian Crushin]

The scientists job was simply: Test to see if it was Zimmerman's voice

Not: Test to see who's voice it was, Zimmerman's or TM's

Note how TM has absolutely nothing to do with the actual job the scientists were assigned

Only thing the voice in the video had to be compared to was zimmerman's actual voice

[Sifo]

im going out on a limb and saying it was neither ones voice.

[Jam Jars]

There was 2 people there so it's 50/50 that the voice was Zimmermans and this result says there's almost a 50% chance it was his. LOL nothing new here.

[siablo14]

Assuming this is the same article I just read on the Huffington Post, I will leave this here:

Very interesting. Very flawed. Very typical reporting.

By no means is this a "home run." The first report, simply tells you its unlikely that it is GZ; it tells us nothing about it being TM. The way the article was written is very typical for this case as it rightfully expects its readers to make inferences to reach an unfounded conclusion. Surely if they would run test on GZ's voice they would also run test of TM's. That logically follows from the scientific method, no it's demanded of it. I wonder why that analysis was omitted from the presentation.

Regarding the second report, there is nothing scientific about relying on ones tone in an agitated state to conclude that was the voice of a young man screaming. That's the first level of scientific theory, the hypothesis. A hypothesis is inherently not a scientific finding; rather it is the starting point of trials that must be taken to reach a conclusion.

I actually do believe that it is GZ screaming. I think he TM was hitting him, however my suspicion is that he instigated it and therefore cannot claim self-defense.

/Thread.

So, how did you logically arrive at the green?

[-Spinal-]

Damn they had to get voice experts for this. I heard a boy cry from the start

[Boxingtech718v2]

I still say it was excessive killing that boy.

Guilty or not, Zimmerman or not, just senseless. Nothing he did warrants that AT ALL.

Killed obviously........right? He didn't fall off his damn bicycle?

This right here, GZ is wrong both morally and ethically. I'm just waiting for the law to get it right.

[Boxingtech718v2]

Two voice experts have now said that it could not be GZ screaming out there without a doubt.
If it wasn't GZ then who could it have been?
I guess we better just listen to voice expert Hous instead.