A new report shows that the day after killing Trayvon Martin, George Zimmerman passed a police lie detector test. He registered truthful in stating that he was afraid for his life before shooting the teen. The report does not materially affect the trial since such tests are not admissible but may explain the the resistance of local officials to bring the case. It also further supports the view, again, that Angela Corey overcharged the case. She was no doubt aware of the test which, while not admissible as evidence because their reliability is questioned, can be considered by the prosecutors in determining the appropriate charge. UPDATE: A police report shows a critical view of Zimmerman’s account and says that he missed two opportunities to defuse the situation.
Zimmerman willingly submitted to a computer voice stress analyzer (CVSA) “truth verification” on February 27 and the test “was classified as No Deception Indicated (NDI).” This included the question of “Did you confront the guy you shot?’ He answered, “No.” He was rated as telling the truth in both saying that he did not confront Martin and that he was in fear of his life.
Also released recently are further details from Zimmerman to the police. Zimmerman insisted that the teen knocked him down and began to pound his head in the sidewalk while telling him “You’re going to die.” Zimmerman claims Trayvon reached for the gun and that he grabbed it to protect himself.
Both the question of fear and the party responsible for the confrontation could be distorted by Zimmerman’s perspective and not accepted objectively by third parties. Of the two questions, however, the confrontation question is the most interesting. It is rare for targeted suspects to agree to lie detectors, though I have agreed to such tests in past cases.
Once again, this evidence does not rule out the basis for a criminal charge, but in my view strongly militates against a charge greater than manslaughter. In fairness to the local officials, the evidence also offers support for their view that no charge was appropriate. One can disagree with that conclusion, but they may have had solid reasons for opposing a charge. That does not excuse sloppy police work and there was still a basis to detain Zimmerman at the scene. However, the case has become more muddled with such new evidence. As a criminal defense attorney, I have always viewed this case as one with strong defense arguments for trial. While the odds always favor the prosecution, the factual record has a number of elements that could create reasonable doubt. Obviously, the trial itself can present facts in different light and the prosecution has yet to be fully heard in the case.
Source: NY Daily News
Ralph Adamo 1, June 26, 2012 at 5:05 pm
… And make no mistake about it, those who dismiss or discount facts and circumstances ARE prejudiced…
===========================================
That is why Zimmy and his wife are in jail for lying under oath.
It is amazing how those who want to see Zimmerman punished seem to be willing to dismiss or discount ANY and ALL facts and circumstances that go aaginst their prejudice. And make no mistake about it, those who dismiss or discount facts and circumstances ARE prejudiced. On the other hand, those same prejudiced anti-Zimmerman minded people are more than willing to accept and believe any false or unsubstantiated “evidence” that could be taken (if believed) against Zimmerman. However, I enjoy reading the lame arguments of the anti-Zimmerman crowd, who never let facts, evidence, or expert opinions get in the way of a “good” story.
Maybe Zimmerman should run for office…. Sounds like he has all the qualifications to even be president…..
But then again, society as a whole is turning pathological……
I think the “overcharging” statement raises a bunch of questions. Once I saw the state indictment in the Rodney King case, i suspected overcharging. The state had to pretty much prove that the officers intended to kill King. And there were no lesser includeds. The state looks good for taking a hard line and the offending cops walk because the state is never going to make the case.
Unless there are no lesser includeds in the Zimmerman case, the DA may have overreached. Oh, we’re in Florida. maybe not.
I wouldn’t believe a word of it. Lie detectors tests are far less reliable than Computer Aided Automatic Screen Identification(TM). Unless of course he flunked the test. Than I’d believe it.
Professor Turley, passing that voice-stress test would not, in my opinion, be as impressive to a prosecutor considering his credibility and considering whether to charge him based on HIS STORY or some other criteria as another little thing that happened during his interview with the administrator of the voice stress test: During the comfy cozy pre-test chit chat with the very friendly expert administering the test, dear little George Zimmerman, the victim of the violent sugar-crazed hoodie-bearing teen, said that BEFORE HE FELT TRAYVON MARTIN’S HAND REACHING FOR HIS OWN GUN, HE HAD ACTUALLY FORGOTTEN THAT HE WAS CARRYING THE GUN ON HIS LITTLE ADDRESS-SEARCH!!
So criticism of Corey for NOT believing that George is credible is not, in my opinion, very convincing. Corey could have wondered, “DO I really believe that George forgot he was carrying his gun?” And she could have concluded, “No, I do not really believe that.” And she could have used that as part of her reason for not believing George at all.
As would I have — and I bet a jury would — because of the “Hey c’mon principle” of law.
Of course Zimmerman passed a lie detector test; he believed, in his delusional mindset, that he was the “good guy.” He still lay in wait for a target, stalked the kid, and killed him. Sure, there may have been a moment when he was in fear for his life, but he set the whole chain of events in motion when he decided to go hunting for hoodies.
“Lie detectors” do not measure lies or truth. What they measure is stress and tension, both terms borrowed from physics. Most of these devices measure stress and tension very well and very accurately. The problem arises is when a subject is or is not feeling stress or tension.
Dr. David Lykken did a number of studies on the polygraph and discovered something interesting about psychopaths. When he used the device on known psychopaths, he found they did not have anticipatory anxiety, and therefore did not respond as normal non-psychopathic persons would. He would warn them they would get a painful electric shock in a few seconds. The psychopaths did not have a stress response until just fractional seconds before the shock. Normal subjects began having a stress response as soon as they were advised a shock would be coming shortly.
In Zimmerman’s case, there are three possible explanations: 1) he was telling the truth; 2) he felt he was in no danger even if he did lie and therefore did not have a stress response; or 3) he is a psychopath and did not have a normal stress response even when lying.
When I was learning how these devices worked, the instructor cautioned the class to never ask about sex. He observed with a grin that everyone lies about sex, or even if they tell the truth, they often respond with a stress response anyway. The autonomic nervous system is funny that way.
Mike S, if “my being scared lets me kill someone I see in public” works, George Zimmerman can never go out in public again in his life. Somebody’s going to kill him and get away with it.
Besides, I don’t agree he was afraid for his life because I don’t believe the scenario he painted was true; I think he was MAD AS HELL because he wasn’t getting total control of the situation and that was what dominated his motivations and his actions. I don’t believe that part about his fear.
The test was a voice stress test, not a polygraph. First of all, listen to the whole hour and 11 minutes — if you can stand the risk of dying from laughter. The control questions as to how Zimmerman’s voice sounds when he is lying? “Are the walls in this room green?” and “Were you ever pulled over for speeding?” Huh? He was rehearsed that he should lie about those two questions.
Well, there’s no emotional content to either of those lies. I wouldn’t care if the walls were green or not and my lie about that question would not give me a second of stress. Likewise, “pulled over for speeding.” Who cares? Now, if you’re really trying to see how a person’s voice changes when they lie, ask (and this came from a real polygraph administered by a genuine expert in a real case): “Have you ever done something sexual that you were ashamed about later?”
The test was clearly given to GIVE the police an excuse not to charge.
Zimmerman’s credibility will be a big issue, essentially the main issue, if O’Mara wants to use the self-defense or SYG-self-defense ground, and that means, Zimmerman testifies and he can have the best voice in the whole world but when he answers the questions that arise for anyone (especially Sling Trebuchet) about the discrepancies between his statements and the physical evidence, the problems presented won’t be solved by some expert saying, “He’s really an honest guy.”
It will come down to this honest guy who murdered an unarmed teen.
They performed the voice stress test AFTER finding out that Trayvon Martin was not a criminal. They got George’s written statement (wherein he called Martin “the suspect”) BEFORE finding oout Trayvon Martin was not a criminal. In between those two times, Serino said “Murphy’s Law –” whatever can go wrong will go wrong.
They might prove Zimmerman can pass a lie detector test yet, because he already passed a voice-stress test, but they can’t prove what he said on 2/26/2012 was true.
“He registered truthful in stating that he was afraid for his life before shooting the teen.”
Putting the fact aside that lie detector tests are not scientifically valid and that is why they can’t be used as evidence, I have no doubt that Zimmerman believed the statement above. The question should be that given the circumstances was his fear that which would pass the reasonable man standard. I contend that it doesn’t pass that standard. If we were to allow such latitude then I should be able to kill anyone walking in my direction on the street who scares me. Somehow I don’t think I’m allowed to do that, nor would even the most ardent defenders of stand your ground laws say that was their intent in writing those laws.
Nal 1, June 26, 2012 at 3:28 pm
Does VSA actually work?
… the mere presence of a VSA program during an interrogation may deter a respondent from giving a false answer …
========================================
Which may indicate that it is not scientific, in that, if the subjects did not know about a “lie detector” being used they would be more inclined to be themselves … to lie hard or tell the truth hard.
Which should work better than intimidation of any form in the context of data analysis.
Don’t discount the friendly testers at “we love Zimmy” police HQ. That will be interesting to the feds who are looking at very skewed procedures.
They can make all the difference in their world.
Brooklyn REader: Do the people undergoing these stress test have access to pharmaceutical drugs like George?
What is the effect of Adderal or Temazepam on the outcome of these tests?
Shano,
Do the pathological liars you know lie and pass a computer voice stress analysis about those “lies”? Just because someone swears to tell the truth despite the evidence to the contrary doesn’t mean they don’t know they are lying. Anyone who’s been a teenager knows that. “Beating the test” requires much more than just trying to believe something. Keep in mind the analysis will last hours.
Per Zimmerman, more likely than not, is not very experienced with lie detectors; it appears that he did it very soon after the incident which means he had little time to prepare for it.
I put a lot of confidence in the results of Zimmerman’s test.
Wait, are you unaware that lie detectors don’t work at all? Is this not known in the legal profession? It is well known in the science/technology fields. I think it was the National Academy of Sciences that concluded they should not be used “for any purpose”.
Does VSA actually work?
According to a recent study funded by the National Institute of Justice (NIJ), two of the most popular VSA programs in use by police departments across the country are no better than flipping a coin when it comes to detecting deception regarding recent drug use. The study’s findings also noted, however, that the mere presence of a VSA program during an interrogation may deter a respondent from giving a false answer.
Deceptive respondents. Fifteen percent who said they had not used drugs—but who, according to their urine tests, had—were correctly identified by the VSA programs as being deceptive.
Nondeceptive respondents. Eight and a half percent who were telling the truth—that is, their urine tests were consistent with their statements that they had or had not used drugs—were incorrectly classified by the VSA programs as being deceptive.
test
What shano said.
He didn’t pass the lie detector known as “the judge,” who put him and his wife in jail for lying under oath.
I guess that is another loss for “machine intelligence.”
Does a pathological liar easily pass these tests? Because I have known liars who actually believe their lies even when you produce all evidence to the contrary.
Maybe he passed because George is afraid for his life all the time, he cannot help but be very, very afraid of anything he cannot understand or control..