We have been following the investigation into the death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in Sanford, Florida. The shooter, George Zimmerman, 28, has not been charged and reported a suspicious character to 911. Martin was returning from a 7-11 after buying Skittles. He was carrying the candy, a small amount of cash, and an iced tea. The family and many others have called for the arrest of Zimmerman, though the accounts of the shooting have been murky. Previously, we discussed the need to hear the 911 tapes, which have now been released and are linked below.
Zimmerman is reportedly a habitual caller into the police and is heard on one of the tapes complaining that ““These a**holes always get away.” Zimmerman states on the call that Martin appeared “up to no good . . . It’s raining. He’s just walking around, looking about . . . He’s just staring looking at all the houses.” Zimmerman says on the call that it is Martin who confronts him: “Something’s wrong with him. He’s coming to check me out.” However, he later admits that he is following Martin, which the police dispatcher discourages.
Police Chief Bill Lee said the 911 calls show that the incident was not a case of racial profiling. He said Zimmerman could not say whether the suspect was black or white. However, on the tape you hear Zimmerman say “He looks black” and then a few moments later, “He’s a black male.” While he is at first equivocal, he does identify his race. That does not mean that this is a case of profiling, of course.
However, family member have been critical of the handling of the case by the police and what they view as the police bending over backward to defend Zimmerman. The family had to file a lawsuit to get these tapes. After a hearing, the police finally relented.
The tapes certainly contradict some statements by the police. However, I am not sure that they substantially alter the status in the case. The evidence still is largely based on Zimmerman’s account, though such contemporary records are generally admissible. The tapes both help and hurt Zimmerman.
The statement by Zimmerman that “these a**holes always get away” certainly shows animus and he clearly follows the youth. However, that does not translate into evidence of intent to kill. I am more interested in the level of force used by Zimmerman and the two gunshots heard on the tape. It is possible that audio creates a misleading impression of two shots but that would seem an important forensic question. It is hard to believe that Martin would allegedly continue any confrontation of Zimmerman after a warning shot unless the shot was fired in the midst of a struggle over the gun. Zimmerman can cite the tape for his statement that he believed that Martin had something in his waistband and appeared on drugs. He can also cite his contemporary description of Martin approaching him.
Putting aside the complaints regarding the handling of the case by the police and the conflicting statements given by officials, there remains the question of whether there is sufficient evidence to base a charge against Zimmerman. I would like to see the coroner’s report on the trajectory and distance of the gunshot wound as well as audio analysis of the gun shot or shots. I would also like to see evidence of the abrasions on both men. Zimmerman was reportedly bleeding from the struggle but we have not heard many details on Martin’s other injuries.
Zimmerman would be wise to secure criminal counsel. There is probably enough here for an indictment. The most salient facts against him are (1) the statement on the 911 tape showing animus, (2) the disregarded instructions not to follow Martin, (3) the advantage in weight and possession of a firearm in the struggle, and (4) the lack of any weapon or proof of criminal conduct by Martin.
What do you think about the state of the evidence?
Here is the Zimmerman tape: 911 Tape (Zimmerman)
Here is a witness tape: 911 Tape (1)
Here is a witness tape: 911 Tape (2)
Source: CNN
Oooo. Somebody said something about third hand information and rumor and a cite to the FBI’s website. That’s hearsay, not evidence. You really don’t have a clue what constitutes evidence, Sotb. Hearsay as in information gathered by one person from another person concerning some event, condition, or thing of which the first person had no direct experience that is inadmissible in court to prove the truth of a matter.
In 1943, Einstein started working as a consultant with the Research and Development Division of the U.S. Navy Bureau of Ordnance, section Ammunition and Explosives. As indicated by the correspondence between him and Lieutenant Stephen Brunauer, U.S. Navy Bureau of Ordnance, available in digitized format at the National Archives website, all of Einstein’s work for that office was on projects related to building a better torpedo. Letters from Albert to his CO. Some in his own hand. Almost all about torpedoes.
Now how about you produce some direct records proving that Leo Szilard consulted Einstein on Manhattan Project business? Not just point to an author’s and the FBI’s general website.
Specific evidence. Not hearsay.
SoTB,
Yes to your last post. I knew all that. Not sure how much you know of top tier physicists, but physicists who function at that level of genius form a very small community. I have several friends who are theoretical physicists and just as in my field, I can tell you it is a small and collegial community. That they confer with each other on difficult problems is the worst kept secret in the world. I get at least a couple of phone calls a week asking for help with sticky problems. That is the way the scientific community works.
My point was that Einstein was not a part of the Manhattan Project itself. Nowhere does his name appear on any payroll other than Princeton during those years. He stayed at Princeton until his death in 1955.
@Otteray Scribe – I do not doubt you about AE (Albert Einstein) being banned on working on the MP (Manhattan Project). However, another educational website also says the same thing that I found on the Rice U site earlier. That is the C.A.C. Peace Day’s website. I was wondering why they feel that AE contributed somehow to the war effort and nuclear bomb. Well I checked with this famous book author: “Fred Jerome” who wrote a book about it and how Hoover had a MASSIVE 1,800 page dossier on AE which is now available at http://www.fbi.gov. Jerome says that his sources say that Leo Szilard would visit AE frequently and ask him for help on some problem at MP despite AE’s lack of clearance. Also he said that the USN had approved his clearance and AE willingly worked on USN high explosive projects which had a direct relationship to the bomb. However the Army said no to MP clearance because of FBI’s Hoover. Then MP Head Vannevar Bush asked him to be a MP consultant but AE said no. Bush viewing the USN clearance approval devised a way to still ask AE questions about the bomb in the venue AE was working on with the USN. AE saw through this ploy but still helped anyway. This is NOT from me. It is simply stuff I found on the Internet.
OS and Gene,
Great quotes! so true.
From Flip Wilson:
“Beauty is only skin deep, but ugly goes clear to the bone.”
Malisha,
Some variations for you:
“Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I’m not sure about the universe.” – Albert Einstein.
“The two most common elements in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity.” – Harlan Ellison
yvw, W.
You always are.
W=^..^
You infer improperly. A machine is not alive, but designed and built. Human (and other biological) intelligence evolved naturally. That is not to say that some day there won’t be actual intelligent machines, but then and only then, is there going to be evidence for “Intelligent Design”, but the intelligent designers in question won’t be some spooky unprovable mystery force, but rather humans. We exist. All other examples of intelligence we have are spontaneously generated by the mechanics of evolution. This, however, presents us with a problem. Once machine intelligence is achieved, if we give it some from of reproduction, its intelligence will rapidly outpace our own. We are limited to the speed of the electro-chemical reactions of our brains as to how fast we can think. A machine would face no such constraint if allowed to evolve. Their speedlimit is electron flow – the speed of light minus impedence. They’re generational cycles would not be bound by the human life cycle, but rather as fast as they could maintain build cycles. Welcome to the future of the Matrix. 😀 None of this changes that the universe itself is not conscious and/or intelligent. Only parts of it are.
I remember the Watson game…great fun to watch and I think its still on youtube. Now I’m going to get the heck out of the deep end of the pool cause I’m waaaaay over my head and just barely dogpaddling!
nice swim though, ty 🙂
The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limitations; stupidity is limitless.
(from sign in an acrylics store)
If any of you guys saw the Jeopardy series where “Watson” played against the two best Jeopardy contestants, there were several instances where Watson was stumped when asked questions where raw data crunching did not work. Both Ken Jennings and Brad Rutter lost the overall contest, but on several occasions, Watson either guessed wrong or was stumped, while the human contestants figured out the answer correctly. Those were questions where insight and ability to interpolate abstract information were key.
Had the staff who designed the questions written all the questions in similar fashion, Watson would have had its electronic butt kicked. Also giving Watson an advantage was the time delay on the buzzer as the humans took a fraction of a second longer to get the signal from eyes, brain and thumb. Watson had no such handicap and could react in microseconds.
“The imitation of intelligence is not intelligence. It’s following its program and design function”
————————————-
Implies that design can be separate from intelligence in the application but not the initial creation.
🙂
W=^..^
You may also want to look into weaknesses of the Turing test. It’ll give you insight into the distinction I’m making.
“artificial” being the key word, W=^..^
artificial \ˌär-tə-ˈfi-shəl\. adj.,
1: humanly contrived often on a natural model : man-made
2-3: n/a
4a : lacking in natural or spontaneous quality b : imitation, sham
The imitation of intelligence is not intelligence. It’s following its program and design function. Until a computer demonstrates spontaneous abstract thought, emotions and forethought (including true spontaneous intuition)? It is a limited intelligence at best, but it is as conscious (read “perceiving”) as its data inputs allow for. Your sensory input is only part of your consciousness. When a computer demonstrates spontaneous abstract thought, emotions and forethought? Then the question becomes is it conscious. Intermediate steps to that point don’t change that consciousness and intelligence are interdependent.
“i.e. theory does not mean conjecture in science as it does in colloquial English.”
——————————-
I am humbled…all I’ve ever had was an ‘opinion’…. 🙂
AND Gene,
here is ‘Among the traits that researchers hope machines will exhibit are reasoning, knowledge, planning, learning, communication, perception, and the ability to move and manipulate objects.[56][57] In the field of artificial intelligence there is no consensus on how closely the brain should be simulated.’ from Wiki which directly counters the idea that consciousness and intelligence are always linked….
Descending into the clouds of epistomology doesn’t not invalidate the function of proof as related to findings of fact within the application of the scientifc method, W=^..^. The difference between a law and valid theory in science is that one is a completely known proposition and the other still has details to be worked out, i.e. theory does not mean conjecture in science as it does in colloquial English.
Gene,
My whole statement came after a posit that was of belief…. but as far as that all goes, ANYONE at this time can only come from a theoretical or belief based perspective because that whole theoretical line of discussion is poised on pins and needles waiting to exhale….?
“Only his “smarts” as I would like to debate him as he seems to be a more worthy challenge to me. That’s no aspersions on most of you here! “~SoT+
—————————————————–
Dude….you are so Sheldon…..
W=^..^
You might also want to at least check out what Wiki says about intelligence and its definition.