Posted on 04/06/2012 3:53:34 PM PDT by dewawi
Voice recognition experts who spoke to The Daily Caller questioned the methodology and conclusions of a voice-identification analysis published by the Orlando Sentinel on March 31.
Using two different forensic methods, the Sentinel’s chosen authorities determined that a scream heard in the background of a widely aired 911 call was not that of George Zimmerman, the man who fatally shot 17-year-old Trayvon Martin on Feb. 26
(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...
Did you?
“Dr. James Wayman, a San Jose State University expert in the field of speech science, told The Daily Caller that he questions the grounds on which Owen based his analysis.
Wayman also said he would be willing to testify against the admissibility of Owen’s findings on the grounds that they don’t meet the criteria required for evidence in federal courts.
“There is no history of, or data on, the comparison of a questioned scream to a known speech sample,” Wayman said.
The problem, he said, is that the two voice samples were recorded in difficult acoustic conditions over different cell phones.
“Even if we were to have Mr. Zimmerman recreate the scream under identical conditions with the same cell phone,” Wayman explained, “it would be difficult to attribute the scream to him without a sample of a similar scream from Mr. Martin under the same conditions. This is clearly not possible.”
Reached for comment, Owen told TheDC that he has conducted his own study — “The Owen Study” — of more than 400 different pitches, screams, and voice disguises. The study is unpublished.
He explained that he has attempted, without success, to obtain a “voice exemplar” from Zimmerman, consisting of recordings of both his speaking voice and a scream.
And Wayman, he said, “assumes that the voice software is not able to make a determination on each voice independently.”
Wayman fired back in a later email exchange. “There is no accepted standard regarding metrics for voice comparisons,” he insisted, “either if done forensically or using automated comparison software.”
This section though down in the article says that the Sentinel’s “expert” could not possibly reach a conclusion based on what he had as a sample.
Please read it again...
You are way, way off base...
“A handful of idiot FReepers said the two Martin camp hired sound experts prove Zimmerman is a racist killer...”
What ever did happen to Free Republic’s miniscule lynch mob? I don’t see them goosestepping about recently.
No idea, but they seem to have a representative blundering about in this thread right now, and he most definitely IS NOT Andrew Breitbart.
I kindly suggest you go back and reread the article.
The only reason this case is being tried in the news media is ratings. Sorry Trayvon got shot, and more sorry for what Zimmerman has to go through.
Thank you, always appreciate pings.
I've long thought it were the Tampax Try Bun.
Didn’t Trayvon’s father even say that wasn’t Trayvon on the tape?
They were obviously on board with the media when it looked like an innocent young black choirboy had been viciously murdered. After the media’s effort went off the cliff, everything that’s subsequently come to light has supported Zimmerman’s claim of self defense.
Why are all these “experts” weighing in on this relatively trivial matter? Why aren’t similar forgery experts fighting to conduct forensic examinations of the impostor’s credentials as an NBC? His election and wanton destruction of the formerly free United States is the real crime of the millennium, not just of the century.
No where in the article do they mention the fact that they have a witness who says Zimmerman was crying out for help.
And, that Martin was on top of him beating his head in. No where do they mention that.
They have a voice analysis that they themselves say is inconclusive (48% match to Zimmerman) which by sleight of hand they then re-interpret as conclusive match to Martin. Dishonest. Bald-faced dishonesty.
Now they have other specialists telling them their conclusions are worthless and again, they reinterpret that as proving that the guy on top was screaming for help, and the guy on bottom getting his head caved in was not... despite witnesses who they fail to mention.
With the DNC media, the more you read the less you know, and the more you know that is flatly untrue. Before you buy a subscription to these people you may as well save yourself the money and just lobotomize yourself.
I hope they don't go bankrupt before Zimmerman collects his judgement.
"The Sentinel’s reporting has landed a blow against Zimmerman’s self-defense claims, suggesting that it was Martin, not Zimmerman, who shouted for help before the fatal shot struck the teenager in the chest.
"Under contract by the Sentinel, Owen Forensic Services founder Tom Owen compared Zimmerman’s voice on his initial 911 call with the scream heard in the background of the later call. Using his own proprietary biometrics software, Owen determined that the two voices were only “a 48 percent match.”
'Owen said a positive identification would involve a number over 90 percent. “[Y]ou can say with reasonable scientific certainty that it’s not Zimmerman,” he told the Sentinel."
"The scream is central to the case. If Zimmerman was the one screaming, his statement to police that he shot Martin in self-defense after being attacked would be more supportable."
This "news"paper/birdcage liner hires their own voice analysis "expert" who clearly gives them the results they wanted. They lead the story with the above, then (of course, in the interest of what is supposed to be fairness) they quote a contrary point of view, ONLY to end the piece with a snotty rebuttal by their own "expert".
The piece is anti-Zimmerman from top to bottom. If y'all don't get that, sorry.
Don't misinterpret this as my own personal stance. I feel Zimmerman was not only justified, but that he should have emptied his mag into the little sumbitch. That's not the point, however.
NO, no, no!
No orders . Just a nod or a wink.
"Never write if you can speak; never speak if you can nod; never nod if you can wink."
This article is not from the Sentinel.
It is quoting the Sentinal and then reporting that an actual expert, Dr. James Wayman, says that Owen, the “expert” the Sentinel hired, is full of BS.
Just wow...
Note that the parts you put in bold are all from the Sentinel and are the parts being contradicted by the actual expert in this article which is not from the Sentinel...
I’m confused regarding your analysis of this article, because it’s a dailycaller.com report on an orlando sentinel report that discredits the so-called science of the expert in the sentinel report via an outside expert that spoke to the daily caller.
Nonetheless, I agree with your stance on the main issue completely, so I can see no point in arguing over this particular piece, other than than to say that it appears to be an expert willing to testify that the other expert’s findings and methods are BS.
I think the media just did this on their own. It is in their DNA. Their worldview is that the white, heterosexual man is evil (and doubly so, if they are Christian) and always ready to prey on minorities. Forget the fact that Mr. Zimmerman wasn't exactly a member of the 'ancestor of the Mayflower WASP club', the media had a conclusion to push - and facts be damned. Same as the Duke Lacrosse case.
The Media has once again proven their utter worthlessness. I can't think of a more loathsome group in American society. Yes, there is a criminal class - but they don't masquerade as folks you can trust, while all the time lying and tearing down the foundations of the Nation.
“Owen said a positive identification would involve a number over 90 percent. “[Y]ou can say with reasonable scientific certainty that it’s not Zimmerman,” he told the Sentinel.”
Ummm...if there’s a 48 percent probability that it *was* Zimmerman, how does that add up to “reasonable scientific certainty” that it was *not* Zimmerman?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.