Skip to main content

View Diary: Yet Another Ruling against Trayvon -- Audio Experts excluded from Trial (155 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  You are just wrong. (11+ / 0-)
    Audio Experts DO get used.  Its Evidential Science that is 70 years old.
    The experts here were using methods that were NOT 70 years old.  In fact, and FBI expert testified that the methods they used (trying to determine the speaker from a scream and "looping" a short clip so as to get a longer audio to evaluate) were NOT generally accepted.

    The fact that audio experts are often allowed to testify does not mean that anyone who claims to be an audio expert must be allowed to testify.  The party who wants an expert to testify -- the prosecution in this case -- has the burden of providing evidence to the judge (usually through other experts or through the scientific literature) that the methods this particular expert is using in this case are valid and reliable.  In many cases, where opposing experts are using the same method but just reach different conclusions, that's pretty much a given.  In this case, where there was, for example, an FBI audio expert saying the methods these two used were NOT generally accepted and that he was "disturbed" by these particular methods, the prosecution had to burden of introducing SOME evidence that the methods these two experts were using were valid and reliable.  According to the judge's opinion, the prosecution did not introduce any such evidence.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site