The DCA allowed Crump to respond, and the defense to reply later (May 9th instead of today). I'd link to the orders, but there's nothing beyond granting the requests. I thought Crump's response would probably be allowed, but I'm still disappointed it was.

Thanks MJW

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

"George Zimmerman Team Questions 911 Calls, Wants New Hearing"

http://www.cfnews13.com/content/news/cf ... n_tea.html

'Friday, defense attorney Mark O'Mara filed a motion asking the court for a hearing at the Seminole County Courthouse as soon as possible regarding the analysis of the 911 calls. Considered to be some of the most important pieces of evidence in the upcoming trial, those calls could be used to determine who was yelling for help the night George Zimmerman shot and killed 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in Sanford."

The cries for help sound like GZ to me. The same high pitched "weak" voice I have heard on many hours of recordings with GZ speaking.

I recognise his voice... there is no doubt for me.

But more than that... the circumstantial evidence all point to it being GZ... he was the one being beaten... it is silly to imagine that TM might be crying out for help while on top of him beating him. Also GZ said in interviews that he called for help... long before it was known there was by chance an audio with the cries evident... as discussed previously.. scientifically more powerful evidence since it was predicted and later found.
Those imprinted old dears who have convinced themselves it is Trayvon because it sounds like a "little boy" should look to the evidence now available that he was NOT a little boy... that was a made-up story spread by Julison-Crump. Those evaluating the evidence seriously have moved on from that. It seems very probable that TM had a deep voice.. nothing like the "weak" voice heard on the 911 call.

And.... it's no good them suggesting we "take a poll" (in effect)... they foolishly think that surveying opinion on whose voice it is is the answer

Polls (surveys) measure popularity.. they do not measure reality.

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

Further...

When people are DENYING some of the basic evidence that has now come to light... it is not surprising that they continue to draw WRONG conclusions.

I know they have an "agenda" in their posting to stick with certain notions... but as it turned out those notions have long since been discredited (proved false).... if they want to continue to spin the pro TM line... it has to include basic facts.. such as TM was 17.. with likely a deep voice... it is a bit silly to attribute the cries we hear in 911 call to him. He WAS a troubled teen... already in serious trouble with school discipline.. and only avoiding official LE involvement via a scheme to massage statistics for young black offenders. He was clearly "home alone" ... abandoned by adults who WERE in a position to supervise/mentor him. etc.
There are facts in evidence now that discredit the initial false narrative... to persist with that as a basis for discussion perpetuates a WRONG evaluation of this case.

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

More along the lines of nonsense verse.

Beware the Jabberwock, my son!
The jaws that bite, the claws that catch!
Beware the Jubjub bird, and shun
The frumious Bandersnatch!"

Nelson can't handle simple concepts like confidentiality, work product or discovery violations. I shudder to think how badly she will mangle scientific concepts in a Frye hearing.

George Zimmerman Requests Frye Hearing on 911 Call Screams
By Jeralyn, Section Crime in the News
Posted on Mon May 06, 2013 at 02:47:55 PM EST

George Zimmerman's lawyers have filed a motion seeking a Frye hearing to determine the admissibility of the testimony of any voice experts the state may want to call at his trial on the issue of who was screaming in the background of Witness 11's 911 call to police. The motion is here.

The Martin family thinks it was Trayvon screaming. Zimmerman's family is equally insistent it was George. FBI experts stated no conclusion could be reached due to the quality and nature of the recording.

The Orlando Sentinel retained two experts who used different methods. Tom Owen concluded it was not George but having never heard Trayvon's voice, he couldn't conclude it was Trayvon. He used a new biometric program he developed. The other expert used a different technique and concluded a young male was screaming. (He had never heard Trayvon's voice either.)


...more at link
http://www.talkleft.com/story/2013/5/6/ ... ll-Screams

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

It comes across to me like they're argument is the deposition would be okay second time at bat.

So now, when O'Mara & West file a response, is that it and the DCA makes a decision? Or are the others allowed to respond to that? If it is the last to be filed - we should have a decision before June 10th, right?

Petition for writ of prohibition (to remove Lester) filed August 13, 2012; states response filed August 23, 2012; writ granted by DCA on August 29, 2012.

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

If this is handled as it normally is (and I have no reason to think it won't be), then once the defense files their reply, the DCA will consider the issues and reach a decision. I've looked at the dockets for other, similar petitions for certiorari, and it's been months between the reply and the decision. For example, in Eutsay v. State the reply was filed Nov. 21, 2011, and the decision was issued May 24, 2012. In that case, the trial commenced on Jun. 26, 2012, so the decision was still made prior to the trial. (Eustay's petition was dismissed, but he was found not guilty, so we'll never know how the issue would have fared on appeal.) Perhaps the DCA will work more quickly in GZ's case, given the trial schedule. It's important to note that the petition for certiorari doesn't divest the trial court of jurisdiction, meaning unless the DCA stays the lower-court proceedings, the trial can go on.

I wrote a little more detailed comment on this issue at TalkLeft, but I've changed my opinion to now believe that law in 5th district doesn't support dismissing the petition for a writ of certiorari because the issue should wait for a post-judgement appeal. The reason the court gave for dismissing the petition in the recent case Bill Kasper Const. Co., Inc. v. Morrison, 93 So. 3d 1061 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012) does not apply to the Zimmerman case: "When an order striking testimony is entered, the aggrieved party can proffer the stricken testimony, thereby enabling this court, on final appeal, to determine how the testimony could have affected the result of the trial." The concurring opinion takes the position that no denial of evidence should be reviewable by certiorari, but obviously that view wasn't adopted by a majority of the en banc panel.

I still think the decision could go either way.

Thank you MJW. This is so confusing to me. I don't get why Crump can insert himself into a case and then not be subject to discovery just like the others. I hope the DCA comes back soon after the defense's response so hopefully, the defense will have the chance to depose Crump. If months go by, it will be worthless.

The FBI cited they couldn't determine who was screaming due to the quality and length of the 911 tape, they were following the standards set forth by the American Board of Recorded Evidence (ABRE). I can't wait to see BLDR explain how neither of their voice expert witnesses failed to follow the standards required by the ABRE. Owens is a board member (Chair Emeritus no less) and he didn't follow the standards set forth by the board when he made his determination using his "New and Improved" software.

Voice Comparison Standards
http://expertpages.com/news/american_bo ... arison.htm

Let's just say for discussion sake that defense does not get to depose Crump. Is it not possible that defense can AT LEAST defend on many of the talking points by playing videos with Crump speaking and then asking a Witness closest to the subject on that talking point.

One I am thinking about are the statement Crump made about the SPD. When defense calls Tracy and Fulton to the stand, they could play that video and then ask them if they have any knowledge as to what Crump was saying is true? If so, how do they know it's true.

Age on DD. They already took DD's dep so they know if and when she told anyone about her age. Since I do not know what she answered, let's say she DID tell Crump. Could they then not play the video of Crump stating this was a minor chile and then turn and ask the Witness if Mr. Crump knew she was not a minor chile when he made this statement? Date of video vs. date she told Crump or ANYONE she was 18.

This is just on the Dep of Crump. Regarding the settlement in the Association case, defense can go right to Tracy and Fulton, and that may even be a good thing, to keep Crump silenced throughout the trial.

My point is that I think they can clearly discredit most of the early on false narrative of Crump by calling a witness and playing the videos with Crump speaking. Surely they are allowed to do that. Does anyone know if the early on videos are part of the discovery? to be used at trial? I know I have seen them in filings as exhibits.

Where there's a will ... there's a way.

I don't know that they could use the Crump videos as part of the defense. Now, they could use them when they sue him and I would hope they would be used in a criminal case against Crump.

Talking off the top of my head, and from memory....

Didn't the shonky analysis in effect claim the voice did not match the sample of GZ they used... that is all? They have no sample of TM. They are saying it's not GZ therefore it is TM?

THAT is about as shonky as "scientific" analysis gets.

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

That, and the comparison was made against Zimmerman's normal, non-stressed voice. Using brand-new, un-vetted, just-released-to-market voice-analysis software - developed, marketed, and sold by the "expert" himself.

_________________
"That the attacker sustained a mortal wound is a matter that should have been considered by the deceased before he committed himself to the task he undertook." - 5th DCA, Stinson v. State (Fl)

Don't forget that the software couldn't match 2 known voice samples beyond 65%. I think it was Winston Churchill or something they used as a test.