Bill Jacobson dug up a 1997 case where voice expert Tom Owen tried for a voice match as part of a legal dispute.
Today, in the course of promoting his new software ($4,995 and it can be yours!) Mr. Owen claims he can attempt to match a scream in the background of a 911 call to George Zimmerman's spoken voice on an earlier 911 call.
His own website says he can't, as do the sites of other experts - normally for reliable analysis the voices to be compared need to be saying similar words at a similar intensity, so matching screams to speech is out of bounds.
But set that aside and poke through the challenges he faced in 1997. We have come a mighty long way!
This is now fated to be Exhibit A in conservative charges of mainstream media bias for about the next century or so. And who can blame them? What a cockup.
Make that Exhibit B - I see right through Drum's attempt to sweep RatherGate under the rug. Never forget! (As waves of nostalgia wash over us, who can forget that Charles Johnson had yet to switch sides? Andrew was already gone. Hard times were coming for the Four Horsemen of the Ablogalypse.)
More scatter brainwaving on NBC - Reuters noted that a stooge at ESPN was fired for less, namely, the "Chink in his armor" headline about Jeremy Lin. IANAL, but - Jeremy Lin was never going to sue ESPN; A Zimmerman or two might well sue NBC. To preserve team solidarity, NBC doesn't want to name names or throw anyone overboard for fear that said throwees (the throwee of the second part) will be named separately in a lawsuit and rat out NBC as part of their settlement. All for one and one for NBC! Well, it's a guess, yes?
File dump nearly over: An insightful commenter whose name will come to me (Rob C?) suggested that Martin family attorney Ben Crump is desperate to see Federal charges against Zimmerman because Florida's Stand Your Ground law specifically immunizes self-defenders against criminal and civil penalties.
I am still not a lawyer, but those who are might want to help us out with that. Presumably Ben Crump wants a deep-pocketed defendant or two in the eventual wrongful death claim. George Zimmerman won't be writing million dollar checks; would, e.g., the City of Sanford also be shielded with Zimmerman under 'Stand Your Ground'? Would a Federal charge/conviction change that, or does Crump simply have to find a hook for a civil 'wrongful death' suit in a Federal court where the SYG would not apply?
My cursory research tells me that the wackos from Waco eventually sued the Feds in federal court, but the Federal hook there is obvious. This site says it is normally a state level action. And I am still not a lawyer.
Or from a different perspcetive - under what circumstances does the immunity stop applying? For example, if convicted of criminal charges I assume SYG would not still shield Zimmerman from a civil suit. Yet Ben Crum and the familyhave been screaming for an arrest. Why? One might imagine that the city could accomodate them with a orchestrated 'speed arrest' - stage a nice perp walk in the front door, bok Zimmerman, arraign him, bail him, and whisk him out the back door fifteen minutes later. Why bother?
The answer may be in the immunity statute (my emphasis):
776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.—
So one interpretation of (2) is that the immunity is gone once probable cause is demonstrated and an arrest is made; a subsequent conviction is not necessary. Hence the legal importance of an arrest to Mr. Crump's payday strategy.