Halloween Movies (1999)
"SPOOKY WORLD" SHOWCASES SOME OF THE PREMIERE COSTUMES AND PROPS FROM HOLLYWOOD MOVIES.
News Clip: Fright night
Video footage from the KXAS-TV/NBC station in Fort Worth, Texas, to accompany a news story.
BH-93 1 inch
LITTLE SHOP OF HORRORS, THE
1960s TV SHOWS
Back in Studio INTERVIEW CONTINUES: David Susskind 9:59 Ladies, I don't intended chauvinistic, defensive American men but I'm very curious, are we really lacking subtlety? Are we apes? Pamela you said it as if you have no doubt of it. Pamela Rothon 10:12 I had a rather unpleasant experience. David Susskind 10:14 Another one. Pamela Rothon 10:14 Yeah. I think you want to be a situation prone people. I don't know why. But I was introduced a very eligible bachelor. He was 35. He was a criminal attorney terribly attractive. And I was introduced him at a cocktail party in some place in Scottsdale, and five times we went out to dinner he was perfect gentleman, who really was charming. And the sixth date he said, I can't meet you at your apartment. As I have a court case somewhere in town. Meet with my apartment at six. I thought well, six date, okay, six o'clock in the evenings pretty safe. I knew him fairly well. So I go along to his apartment, knock on the door, go and we sit down drinking scotch and city and discussing the legal system in England a subject hardly conducive to romance. And he suddenly took hold of my class. I thought Oh, goody, more drink. Oh, no, he just threw me on the floor and tried to rape me. So now I'm on the floor and I said what the hell are you trying to do I sound stupid David Susskind 11:07 was I was he was uh, did you get out all right, Pamela Rothon 11:19 Well, I scrambled up said How dare you and I ran for the door and I couldn't open I was fumbling I got all caught up my long nails and things and he dragged me back and he threw me on the floor again. I said this is stupid like a bad movie. Let me often don't such a fool. And he was very unreasonable. You say threw me on the floor again? Three times. So I was I thought I'm done. This man is going to attack me against my will is not sporting. So I picked up a bottle, and I hit him on the head with a bottle of scotch when he fell on the floor and I thought I broken his neck because he didn't move. And I thought oh my god, I What can I do? I've killed this man. You know, he's a criminal attorney, my father. So I went out and left him and I walked good nights a doorman and went home and thought what can I tell no one knows I've been here I get away with it. You know, my bottle my fingers on the bottle. My fingerprint. So get me and you rang me up in the morning didn't even mention it said coming up the dinner. And I thought he was the mos unsettled man I'd ever met. David Susskind 12:22 Pamela, I don't know what to tell you about America. But it isn't all like that, you know? Oh, yeah. No, we don't get hit by bottles. a man that's been very patient. You have a question? Audience Question 12:34 Well, I was really interested compare notes with these three fellow country women of mine about dating from their standpoint, because it has always struck me that dating in America is fantastically institutionalized far more so than it ever would be in England. I mean, the double date, the blind date. The other day, I was talking to a girl and she said to me that where I'd call her up on a Friday, and say, What are you doing this evening? Well, we're still on a Saturday morning and say what are you doing this evening? Such was the pressure on her to have already made a date for Saturday evening, the evening had she had nothing to do she would refuse to admit it and say she was busy. Now this may be an odd case. Although I have reason to believe that is not all at all. Now, it occurs to me that this isn't quite the pressure isn't quite the same. On girls. Am I right? Patricia Layman 13:24 I would say you are right that it isn't the same in England. I don't feel that pressure here. I think it's very sad. If it's true. Audience Question 13:31 That's probably because you're English not American. David Susskind 13:34 Do you double date? Do you ladies you lethal women of England do double date? A double date is when two silly chaps decided to tackle the proposition together to silly girls. Yes. It cuts down privacy. Yes. You're a bit above that. Patricia Layman 13:52 We might go out with friends Jane Cooper 13:56 Not when I'm dating. Sounds like an organized bridge team or something. Gillian Shenker 14:02 actually everybody is much more blase in England. I mean, if you're if they ask you out, they don't really care either way, whether you come or not half the time. That's why you want to do they would never show it David Susskind 14:13 is that was that attractive to ask You out and not really care? Gillian Shenker 14:17 No, it's just the latest thing in England everybody is very bourgeois and sort of frightfully disinterested really. David Susskind 14:27 But something doesn't square with what you said before. You said that there's no delicacy or subtlety here that you've it's a meal and bed and that's it Pamela Rothon 14:35 With Englishmen they make it think it's your idea. You see and that's different. They play it very cool. David Susskind 14:46 Play it round to your court. Pamela Rothon 14:47 You Play a subtle little game you know, it's it's all games here. There are no games. That's true. David Susskind 14:57 I mean, how's the game played in England you go and keep having dinners and then after dinner, Gillian Shenker 15:02 We never say anything directly, outright, nobody will show any, nobody would say anything like, I think you're great. Or I dig you baby or whatever out, right? I mean, they would never get they would never say it may say something a bit of all right, you know, David Susskind 15:17 That's a thrilling line, I mean, you're a bit of all right said begrudgingly Pamela Rothon 15:22 you're right girl you know that sort of pat you on the behind like a horse now again, that's that's very complimentary David Susskind 15:28 to be patted on the behind like a horse Pamela Rothon 15:30 like it very much Englishmen have a sparing with their complements. And when they said they mean them, they could be about all kinds of things. But David Susskind 15:39 who puts the basic issue to does does the Englishman wait till the lady says, I have a fearful need of You Patricia Layman 15:48 No, I think that nobody says anything Pamela Rothon 15:54 Because they discuss it so much beforehand that it's finished. They kill any sparks that was there. And so I say, is there so analyze every little stage? And then you know, what's going to happen then is boring. There's no point. David Susskind 16:05 Could you describe a typical date with an American man? I mean, Pamela Rothon 16:09 yes, will you you'll go out and go to a nice restaurant, and you'll usually have a usual food, and he'll offer to order it for you. And then a bottle of wine and then maybe nightclub after perhaps David Susskind 16:22 What's the conversation like during dinner? Pamela Rothon 16:24 Usually, what what are you going to do with your life? What are your plans? Why did you come here? And you say, Well, you know, may told them or you may say, Well, I decided to see America? And they say well, what are you gonna do with your life? You know, I suppose you want to get married and have five kids and living in Scarsdale or something? David Susskind 16:42 You have a thing about Scarsdale, don't you? Pamela Rothon 16:44 I know I have I have bad memories David Susskind 16:46 Every since that criminal law. Yes. Pamela Rothon 16:48 And they attack you immediately and think that you're going to trap them. American men are terrified, you're going to trap them David Susskind 16:54 into marriage? Pamela Rothon 16:54 Yes. Or trying to have some relationship. They're always on guard for this. And yet, they get married younger than Englishmen, generally yet they're afraid of you. David Susskind 17:05 Pick it up after dinner. Now you're on the way home Pamela Rothon 17:07 on the way home. And then they sort of some very uncertain libertarian attacks, which I don't like very much. And you say pack it in or something and they'll say, oh, come off it. You know, you've had a nice meal. You say, Well, this is not payment for a meal. And then you get to the business of going home. And you think, Oh God, how do I get rid of this man, subtly and be nice about it? And you say, oh, I'm terribly terribly tired. I got my aunt Maude staying or something. And then they'll say you're just telling lies. You're living with a man. That's it. Admit it. And you have this terrible trouble of getting rid of you don't want to come in? Because if you invite them in, that's it, do what you can. And then they say, Well, you invited me in what do you expect for your age. David Susskind 17:52 What do we try it? How is this different from an Englishman? Pamela Rothon 17:56 Englishman is much more casual. He'll say, Oh, do you feel like going going to the pub tonight for drink or something and say yes. All right. Well may pick you up at 830 or something. So is it okay? And he'll come along at half past nine expected to read at half past nine and you don't see anything and you go out and you have a meal. And later on. He'll probably take you for a drive and park in a cornfield. Just kind of thing. And no words are said and you feel like okay, kissing and cuddle otherwise you say this and cuddle? Yes. Otherwise you'll say take me home and he'll say. Okay? He'll try again. The next day next day. American men give up. First Date? No, go. That's it. David Susskind 18:43 If you don't get a symptom of love early on, Pamela Rothon 18:46 Yeah, but what do you call love? David Susskind 18:47 Or you call it madness. But we have to pause we're coming right back.
ZIMMERMAN TRIAL POOL 070913 P7
INT BROLL GEORGE ZIMMERMAN TRAYVON MARTIN TRIAL / SWITCHED POOL FEED NOTE: Do not use any pictures of the Trayvon Martin gunshot wound shown during this morning's court testimony.It was from his autopsy and was inadvertently broadcast. Under FL law autopsy photos are exempt from public record We cannot show the picture when it was displayed or when it was in the hands of the witness KATIE HUBER LOG **NOTE: JUDGE'S COMMENTS IN CAPS **NAMES OF WITNESSES IN RED **VISUAL DESCRIPTIONS IN (PARENTHESES) **GOOD STATEMENTS/VIDEO BOLD 8:31:06 PLEASE BE SEATED. GOOD MORNING.... (defense team is not present) 8:31:37 ON THE RECORD.... STATE VS. ZIMMERMAN 8:31:56 omara: issue of the animation, deposition last night that focused the inquiry, state still has issues... not so much admissibility but applicability to the facts 8:32:19 mantei: supplemented original issue.... daubert issue and early concerns.... part 3 of the witnesses deposition... now done from states perspective, move from witness creating exhibit that represented physical evidence and police reports and witness statements... changes from animation taken to fit to theory who has yet to testify to it... now a daubert issue, simple representation and physical items to create an essentially animated picture or theory that di maio discussed with witness Saturday after shoemaker was deposed twice but before di maio's deposition 8:34:04 because of what came out in that deposition, expand hearing to include daubert hearing... daubert-Frye-pierce hearing, all issues need to be flushed out... filed supplemental motion accordingly... witness had other still-pictures and a computer diagram, haven't gotten those physical things from the witness..... apologize for telling the court we want what was said we didn't want yesterday, but given yesterday I believe it is 8:36:53 (judge nelson reading the motion) 8:39:10 DEFENSE RESPONSE? 8:39:17 omara: factual response first, concern evidence by the state addressed one fact issue that is undisputed... dr. shiping bao and our medical examiner expert... gunshot entered at 90 degree angle, closet to a straight through shot... no dispute as to that fact... the state's concern, attended to making of the animations.... well aware of deposed and given copies of.... added to that fact, the potential of the distance from gun to body.. only distance he would give was 0.4 to 4 ft. other witness says 2-4 inches 8:41:09 states concern with that, fine with not using that still... not part of the animation, use in closing as demonstrative... withdrawn to make sure that was clear 8:41:34 underlying fact the state suggests concern with the positioning of the bodies when the shot was fired... gun and body at 90 degrees, not know and depicted in animation as probable positioning is what I guess is in issue... body and gun together........ only eye witness testimony when he saw it... left a few seconds before..... state can argue to the jury something different.... it happened, based upon evidence and shiping bao's testimony, animation that has bodies in that position, suggest what they want... don't believe and never seen evidence admissibility having some argument that it may have happened differently 8:43:30 I don't understand why that makes it a Frye or daubert admissibility concern.... it is specifically in line with facts of evidence and how things happened.... if we were to go through a daubert piece Frye standing...... not certain, I know they talked but didn't come up with anything different to john good's testimony 8:44:35 saying now it's just based upon what we talked about... no its based on 90 degree angle.. 8:44:54 what you'll see is it is more than animation, series of stills... response to states concerns in the past... took out animation and placed with a still.... movement of the arms.... SORRY TO INTERRUPT, JUST START WITH HEARING AND GIVE ARGUMENT AFTER THAT... DEFENSE HAS BURDEN, CALL FIRST WITNESS 8:46:37 (sworn in) 8:46:48 name? daniel shoemaker... address? California. name of company? contrast forensic... type of business? crime scene accident reconstruction.... I take reports and photos from the scene.... I take all of that and put into context for the recreation 8:47:40 how you got into this business? information graphics for fortune 500 companies. when that began? 26 years ago. who'd you work for? viewcom systems in Ohio... did corporate presentations for tire companies in Akron 8:48:25 the days before PowerPoint? days before desktop computers.... a lot of art graphic work, poster presentation? we had a sophisticated computer and it did slides. how long with them? 5 years. position? senior artist 8:49:01 you would take on a project, create the tools? work with the client on modifications... any formal education in this area? bachelor in fine arts. 8:49:38 advertising and marketing, corporate identity 8:49:48 graphic presentation to audience? yes, the best way... various ideas and procedures. 8:50:00 for 5 years? yes. and then? to California, same thing for a lot of companies in bay area 8:50:15 contract basis? worked for company, senior artist. which company? dolphin multimedia. same job description? similar job as in Ohio... being in bay area, more access to up to date software, more up to date technology 8:50:55 any difference in first five years to now? main difference is doing a lot of information graphics for governmental proposals.... information graphics for governmental proposals and information graphics of crime scene recreation for attorneys. how long in Cali? 13 years. 8:51:50 name changed? contrast design to contrast forensic. owner/sole proprietor... 8:52:07 type of work you focused on? initially started out by working with attorneys on designing their information, court room presentations were a bit below that..... gone from information graphics to attorneys like that to drawing crime scenes... progressed quite a lot to the point with the equipment I'm using now 8:52:59 what type of software or hardware was available to you when you started? mostly drawing out a scene.... scale and accurate, mostly 2-D.... from there it's gone to 3-D to the point where the reconstruction and the software got more sophisticated.... start with you going out to scene with tape roller and get a measurement? yeah 8:54:06 software I use, I have two kinds for using my total station data.......... aras 360.... 8:54:34 start with foundation point, total station.... bring us back to an idea when you walk onto a scene and what do you create? progressed from tape measure to robotic laser, set up on tripod and measure crime scene... series of points and 3-D space 8:55:25 used now by law enforcement? yes and road crews 8:55:38 set up that laser here, bounce off points in court room and have a data configuration of the entire outline of the court room? two types... type I have is point by point... I lay out 2-500 points in a scene... I walk around with a pocket computer and prism, everywhere I go hit the computer point where I am... laser follows me around... creates a point cloud of the whole scene..... 8:56:50 how does that compare to total station software? how does what compare........ total station gathers data and then export to aras 360....... 8:57:28 once you get that information, what you do to see if information is there? look at the data and examine it, another piece of software that I have... visual statement, between those two... 8:58:10 within context of aras 360, gathering environment digitally... motion capture suit for gathering....wireless, accelerometers... capture movement accurately and bring into the scene.... accuracy of the scene 8:59:16 give court examples for the motion capture suits... in other cases? use a few ways, I use it.... a month ago I had to go to impound lot, death in a vehicle... get into vehicle and it still sees the movement.... typical one has balls on the suit with high speed cameras following it, but the cameras won't follow behind the wall or into the vehicle..... my suit is I can take it, accelerometers to measure my movement 9:00:51 perfect for court because it gives you a running log of all the movements..... somebody hits something and cause damage.... do the same action from the accelerometers see how much force I used 9:01:24 what software exists behind those suits to interpret that and make it relevant to presentation? software that came with suit, engineers that developed it... not only used it for motion capture but also biometrics for physical therapy, monitor movement from day to day 9:02:07 put on those suits if I had range of motion problem and the suits will measure progress? yes, printout of all the movements 9:02:26 software the interprets the movement of the suits, criteria that can be put in to determine force, speed and effect of objects moving through space? yes, could do that in the reconstruction 9:02:56 how this suit gives data for recreation? put on the suit, still considered crime scene... didn't want to disrupt it... t vac suit to protect the scene, somebody opened the door tried to pull the person out.... he reached for a gun and shot him.... shot the person coming into the car? yes 9:03:49 very good use of the suit, had an attorney pull me out and record it in real time 9:04:06 what you were able to recreate? in the truck? yes..... 9:04:27 I had accurate measurements of the truck, recreated the truck, my movements fit well within the truck, exports motion file.... bring into 3D program... map their movements onto figure that matches the person involved... map onto the person's skeleton 9:05:11 how do you get size of person to be accurate? from police reports and coroners reports 9:05:23 does the software recreate body in proper proportion? doesn't do any simulation, I just have a figure that I size to the size that I need.... 9:05:50 can specify what height the person is... weight? weight is more the appearance from photos 9:06:05 helpful and do you have another sample of the car one? I have another sample 9:06:22 happened in a sams club parking lot........... 9:09:33 since it's just the court, approach the bench and you could see off the computer screen? FINE YOU MAY BRING IT UP HERE... COUNCIL APPROACH 9:10:15 this is a sample of a motion filed from the scene... how is the scene recreated for the background of event? in software. where did information come from? security camera, placed vehicles where they were in the video, better representation than the security camera 9:11:04 about to see the animations, how does the movement get placed into environment? import from motion capture software. 9:11:28 how does it get placed in right location? move figures around based on scene. come up with alternatives based on witnesses and evidence? yes, can't change movement, just the location of figures 9:12:28 graphic information from witnesses and evidence? yes 9:12:37 say that the movement of the person, how do you decide the speed? timed from security camera..... nothing further as far as that... OKAY THANK YOU 9:13:06 chance to look at that animation, anything different in the software you used in that representation than one in zimmerman case? zimmerman case was more total station data, data that was provided from DA's office 9:13:43 are there any course work or training programs you go through to enhance your abilities for this work? both in aras 360, classes through that and trained through that. only required to go through 1, but I've gone to 3 total station 9:14:24 software that law enforcement uses? total station is the piece of equipment 9:14:38 total station information available from law enforcement in this case? correct 9:14:52 who does the training for that? software companies train 9:15:03 most recent time you took training? training in those courses, a couple years... on my CV 9:15:22 aras 360 software, continually update my skills... webinar every Friday that I watch. any significant changes in program or still the same? still the same, maybe an update every 6 months 9:16:00 training and certification on using the software and using it with total station. 9:16:20 have current version of software? yes. up to date with that software? yes 9:16:34 creating computer graphic animations? luxology modo... whats that 3D software? creating 3d scenes, used for animation movies. 9:17:17 allow you to present environment or frame work? yes and create the scene 9:17:42 start putting in elements? yes. how are they accurate? measurements from total station data.... 9:17:59 bounce off points and import into program? yes..... also one part is I have a helicopter, didn't use in this case... just a drone, take photo of scene I have the data points from total station and it'll lay it on or drape it onto those points, accurate out door reconstruction of the scene 9:18:46 bird's eye view, more accurate data points? yes 9:19:02 opportunity to create animations and testify as expert? yes. what period of time you did that? ongoing for last 13 years... criminal and civil cases 9:19:30 first time you created animation in court case? 2009 9:19:46 tell the court, have you ever gotten to point where animations were utilized in court? yes. experience you had in civil and criminal settings with your testimony? I used motion capture suits for animation but to verify a person's position, did one a few months ago... in a vehicle, shot through window, show a couple more times... which were done in the car... verify his position when 3 shots were fired 9:20:48 explain how... name for motion suit? initial motion capture suit. IMCS 9:21:20 matched vehicle used and recorded movement getting out... in the figure that matched the victim, put in the rod to match bullet trajectory... looked at positions getting out of car to see which positions the trajectory should be 9:21:55 talk in context....? calibrate at beginning of recording. for accuracy? yes. 9:22:24 doing movement, but computer gathering data on 16 points that are moving? yes. computer may not know it's a body, just 16 points? in real time on computer, there's a mannequin 9:22:59 not the exact video of the driver moving his arms, but rather you decided how the body moves, how do you address that frailty? look at certain things you know from the discovery, bullet trajectory, opening of the door, physical characteristics of the truck... look at scenarios to find which one matches the scene and evidence and discovery you have 9:23:48 do an animation at the point you created is specific? Objection! 9:24:02 consideration based on evidence know to you at the time? yes. modify animation to match witnesses or other things you've heard? yes, whatever's more accurate 9:24:23 put on the suit, software allows you to change configuration of body for height? yes. how do you look at body size to accomplish that on the program? most done through photos from reports 9:25:06 take measurements of those photos, ratio comparisons and put on the mannequin? yes measurements from reports.... any measurements you can take. 9:25:35 also look at photographs? yes 9:25:52 I come in after the fact, have to rely on police photos taken from the scene.... don't have certain measurements, but you may have one measurement of an item in a photograph... 9:26:22 how does that assist you with measurements? one known object with measurement you can figure out other items 9:26:50 I can tell how far from the wall you are.......................... lay down a plane in the software if you know one measurement apply to the grid and extrapolate the evidence 9:27:26 don't know the algorithms or math behind it, has been certified to work? yes 9:27:42 this type software, does that have application in entertainment industry? yes. suit I have was used in avatar, iron man, x-man... used in creating characters... also used in madden football... record suits and apply the figures 9:28:27 iron man is placed on top of him in the movie? in the computer the 3D program 9:28:42 talking about your experience in testifying... how many times in court your animations were presented? need CV? yes. moment? YES 9:29:19 come back to your CV.... experience in testifying for the animations. use of suits and presentation in court? most work since I acquired the suit in 2008.... probably 20. 9:30:00 types of cases you worked on and what courts? also on my CV, list of the counties 9:31:35 type cases and court rooms you presented? 59 criminal trials, 21 civil trials... declaration or testified in 20 of those.... 9:32:15 trying to figure out shooting incidents, worked with department of justice and police officer related shootings, stabbings, it varies quite a bit. 9:32:36 in each of the 59 cases, take on data and graphic presentation? yes 9:32:49 are we now talking about spectrum of murder cases, know the charges or just the information? sometimes told more detail and give creation from the evidence 9:33:17 what percentage for defense and prosecution? 100% on the defense, has to do with defensive police officers and police officer involved shootings 9:33:43 if the department of Justice with a civil case against them or a shooting occurred, work with them on that and presentation of their material 9:34:13 presented testimony in court in any of the criminal cases? presented personally or... after being qualified, you personally? probably all 59 9:34:48 qualified as expert various counties.... 16 counties here... all in California? yes 9:35:20 are these counties in which the courts authorized you as an expert? all the courts where my information was presented, all qualified, never denied 9:36:00 (listing counties) 9:36:47 have you ever testified in Florida before? no. outside of California? no. how long have you had motion suits? since 2008 9:37:04 in those counties, which counties were you... did you testify in those counties or was the information you created presented? both... my information was through either as expert testimony or a declaration... sometimes my material can be testified to by another witness... 9:38:01 I just speak to the accuracy of the creation... 9:38:09 have you testified in court concerning accuracy and methods used to create? yes. 9:38:24 what counties and types of cases you've testified to? I don't have a listing ..... what cases have you testified to in court, what types of cases? all the ones I've testified in court have been criminal trials 9:39:06 what you testified to and the animations? plasa county, shooting reconstruction, position of shooter and victim, the order of shots.... testify? yes. expert in this area? yes. 9:39:58 another case? contracusta county, determine position of the person from the 3 shots... determine there was only 1 through window and the other 2 were outside vehicle. expert? yes. 9:40:34 one more from another case? a couple down in Marino valley, two of them actually... one was inside house, threatening suicide, police officers responded and they were waiting at corner of garage waiting for him to come out and another officer was looking out to the street and the other office was looking at doorway, determine who shot... which officer and the position of person in house.... in my reconstruction, person in house was on floor in kitchen... two counts of murder to police officer... in house the entire time. police said person came out with gun, fired 3 shots, partner turned around and shot the partner in elbow... which shots came first and position of door....... second series, position of the door... no way someone came through door when shots went off, tight space outside the door he would've been hit, had to be in the.... 9:43:08 accepted in the court? yes. give evidence to the jury in that case? yes 9:43:24 other cases where you've been attempted to qualify as expert? no. in all 59 then, by affidavit, declaration, give your testimony to what you created? declaration or testimony was 20 cases, never been disqualified 9:43:59 experience on civil side similar? mostly info designed for attorneys to present to jury 9:44:13 any civil that went to jury? not in civil trials 9:44:35 zimmerman case? first became involved toward end of April... initial conversation in august, but my first meeting with attorneys was end of April 9:44:58 in 2012? yes. went through medical condition that took you out of sorts for several months? yes. all resolved? well se 9:45:14 back to work, talked in April this year? yes. what information did you gather and review, what tasks given on behalf of this case? to do a reconstruction of the scene with the information we had and creation of an animated timeline... 9:45:50 inside your qualifications? yes. not a lot of opportunity to have live audio of the occurrence, different in this case 9:46:23 unique because we had audio evidence, real time available for your recreation? yes, helps with the timeline 9:46:39 similar to security camera makes its more accurate? yes. video surveillance not in this case? no 9:46:59 what information did you gather to assist you in the work? discovery from DA office, photos, reports, audio from 911 calls, questioning at PD of witnesses... depositions? yes. photos from scene and total station data 9:47:48 any information you needed to create animation that you did not have available? use of motion capture suit at the scene, not available to me... made two visits to the scene 9:48:16 came back to utilize motion capture suits? yes. when that was done? second week in may 9:48:40 explain what you do then, who did it, how you assure accuracy? good where I can interact with suits at the scene, 9:49:26 7 points that were labeled windows and they were not in position to be windows.... laser bounced off and was different than what it was? yes... laser pointed up to 2nd story window, went through tree and picked up branches... 6 points on one side and another point that are in the wrong location, not to use it 9:50:20 address that or fix it? I didn't manipulate the data, just didn't use them 9:50:41 any other measuring of the scene now that you're on scene? matter port scanner.... sets up on tripod, has a little computer and cameras.... one that takes photos and another one takes infrared for distance 9:51:19 iPad interface, twirl in 360 and scan around scanner, walk it through the scene... captures intricate parts of the scene as well as textramap of the photos 9:51:49 helpful to get the slope and positioning of buildings and sidewalk. more accurate that total station then? yes it added to the total station data, verified the scanner with the total station data so it all matched 9:52:31 did matter port allow for better graphic representation of the sloping? yes. total station had not done that? didn't measure very many points.... mainly measured the drains and sprinkler fix... didn't do measuring of slope 9:53:08 matter for even more accurate rendition of sloping of ground? yes 9:53:25 SHOEMAKER STANDING FOR AN HOUR NOW.... I THOUGHT IT WAS GOING TO BE SHORT, WOULD YOU LIKE TO TAKE A SEAT SIR? how much longer.... omara: drag him back down here in a moment, so I'll move it along 9:53:58 go to scene to start working on project? correct.... motion capture suit, who did them and frailty of others using it? a couple volunteers from your law office that put the suits on, timing for scenario where they were on the ground, used audio on the 911 call to time it with shot of the gun 9:54:46 also john good's statements and deposition testimony? yes. used for the positioning.... information from Ms. mora, saw zimmerman on top of martin after shot? yes. assist in your creation? yes 9:55:18 also have Lauer 911 audio, has a shot and matter of time before shot? yes. 9:55:36 what other information? Ms. Lauer's police report. she first heard altercation at the T? yes. and Jeremy's? yes 9:55:58 created poster graphics, stills of the scene based upon that testimony as well? yes. recently removed Jeremy's statements since he didn't testify? yes 9:56:24 modifying animation and the posters to come in mind with actual trial testimony? yes. as disclosed to you by me? yes to get most accurate representation of it 9:56:47 able to create animation based on info available to you? yes 9:56:57 sources of that information, seen discovery- witness, depositions, autopsy, reports.... also diagrams made by witnesses and other information in discovery? correct. 9:57:36 a lot of information from defense? yes. extraneous to recreation but to see if it was relevant? yes 9:58:03 conversations with me and others on my behalf for the creation? yes 9:58:13 sources of information? everything you mentioned. anything else? my going to the scene and scanning the scene during motion capture 9:58:41 anything you would have liked to have had in creating the posters that was not available to you? I believe I had everything I needed to create the scene 9:59:06 present the animation.................... 10:00:33 BRING UP TO THE BENCH AND I'LL LOOK AT IT UP HERE.... 10:01:40 (video playing on shoemaker's laptop, audio of 911 call.... no visual of the video) 10:02:47 there are posters that he created.... mantei: new ones? omara: some are new.... 10:03:22 advise the court what this is and how created? from 3d image of how it was created, to explain location of markers...... where'd you get the markings and put at that location? straight from total station data, also have a flat 2D illustration of the scene. incorporated as well? yes 10:04:15 basically the same thing, different view. 10:04:33 to show the slope.... 10:05:28 this is just to show photographs from discovery of what was at those markers 10:05:42 different parts of different items, where located and top left hand corner... imported and picture we gave you? yes. 10:06:12 IN THE MIDDLE? from the point of view from good. to the left is good head? his ear... taken with 50 mm lens in the software, closely resembles what a person will see 10:06:42 line going above the case, distance measurement? edge of porch to marker number a 10:06:58 what it looks like? 49.5 mm., rounded to 50 10:07:10 perspective one would see as humans looking at it? yes that's how they would appear 10:08:06 john goods to the left? yes 10:08:15 states what john good testified in trial regarding what he saw and the peoples descriptions? yes. yes 10:08:34 that is Ms. Mora's testimony in trial to what she saw from her column? yes. 10:08:52 what she would see from her location? yes 10:08:57 in these photos I didn't try to reconstruct the lighting, more important to see detail.....frailty of the posters, lighting was nothing for this evening? jury would have a hard time seeing detail 10:10:07 moment? YES 10:10:34 PROBLEM THEY'RE HAVING IS WITH THE APPLE COMPUTER, CHECK IT OUT OVER LUNCH... get his presentation on a PC. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? just briefly: have been doing this graphic information in court for 13 years? yes. has never been disqualified in court? correct. 10:11:20 awareness of industry and others who did this? only one in US with wireless motion capture suit.... older style ones available? reconstruction are using, but very rare to find one with motion capture suit, whether the balls or the wireless 10:12:21 used in video games and videos? yes 10:12:25 software you utilize, tell the court where that fits in to industry 10:12:56 how long? luxology around probably 4 years.... I believe 4.... started as version 201, now up to 701 10:13:16 ever attend seminars or conventions where others interact? yes.... 10:13:32 users group that gets together, presentations there. how often? just presented once 10:13:44 made up of people who use software on ongoing basis? yes.... 10:13:59 aras 360 gets together every Friday.... keep up on that part of the industry? yes 10:14:11 is this software accepted whether accident recreations or others? yes, highway patrol uses it... 3 basic software... visual statement, aras 360... another software called crime time or something like that.... Sanford police uses on there's 10:14:57 is the software you use the most up to date software for this work? yes,... industry standard for accident and crime scene reconstruction 10:15:18 use this type of software to do the work? mostly used in police departments 10:15:34 80% of aras 360 are police departments, others are accident or crime scene reconstructionist like myself.... user group meetings interaction? yes, get an answer at the end of the week 10:16:07 accident reconstructionist, type of software used in this industry? yes, mines cutting edge 10:16:24 more advanced, only one who uses new style of motion suits for your work? correct. are used in entertainment industry? correct and medical rehabilitation 10:16:50 limited based on expense? yes. nothing further CROSS 10:17:00 mantei: 5 minute break and the witness sit in stand? 10:17:10 COURT IN RECESS FOR 5 MINUTES ============================================ 10:24:29 PLEASE BE SEATED. IS SHOEMAKER HERE? he is. HOW MUCH LONGER IS THIS GOING TO TAKE.... JURY IN BACK SINCE 9, I STAYED LATE TO GET THIS ACCOMPLISHED....mantei: 45 minutes. NO. DO IT LATER... SHOEMAKER REMAIN OUTSIDE, CONTINUE HEARING AFTER COURT.... READY WITH NEXT WITNESS? READY TO BRING JURY IN? omara: approach VERY BRIEF (sidebar) 10:26:55 (zimmerman walking in, tan suit, white shirt, gray tie) 10:27:16 (omara talking to zimmerman) 10:30:53 (sidebar) 10:34:21 MR ZIMMERMAN, PLEASE STAND.... INFORMED BY COUNCIL THAT TESTIMONY OF DR. DI MAIO IS CARVED DOWN... DID YOU HAVE DISCUSSIONS WITH OMARA ABOUT DR DI MAIOS TESTIMONY? yes. AGREE WITH HIS REPRESENTATION NOT TO ASK CERTAIN AREAS, YOU AGREE WITH THAT? yes. HAS ANYBODY THREATENED YOU TO DO THAT? no. READY FOR JURY? west: not yet. HOW CLOSE ARE WE? need the physical evidence in the court. PLEASE OPEN LOCKER DOOR AND GET OUT WHAT YOU NEED...... 10:37:48 NOW READY FOR JURY? LET'S BRING THE JURY IN.... 10:39:59 PLEASE BE SEATED, WELCOME BACK... I APOLOGIZE FOR KEEPING YOU BACK THERE... QUESTIONS: DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE CASE? NO HANDS RAISED. READ OR LISTEN TO REPORTS ABOUT THE HOUSE? NO HANDS RAISED. USE ELECTRONIC DEVICE FOR RESEARCH? NO HANDS RAISED. READ OR CREATE SOCIAL MEDIA? NO HANDS RAISED. 10:40:53 west: call Vincent Di Maio 10:41:27 (sworn in) 10:41:54 west: good morning.... name? Dr. Vincent Di Maio 10:42:13 profession? physician, employed in private practice of forensic pathology.... degree? yes back in 1965 in NY 10:42:39 educational background? graduated med school 1965, 1 yr. internship in pathology, did a 3 year residency, 1 year fellowship in forensic pathology, specialty board exams 10:43:39 board certification? yes... it means you've successfully completed training in specialty... taken written and practical exam and certified and recognized as specialist 10:44:07 mentioned anatomical, pathology...? pathology is branch of medicine with death from disease..... examine tissue removed from someone.... mole, breast tissue... tells your physician the disease, and tells you the diagnosis... wont contact them, physician has contact 10:45:10 clinical pathologist is concerned with tests done... blood test, urine test... 10:45:23 forensic pathologist is concerned with application to medical science and the law... function as medical examiner, determine cause of death and manner of death... individuals thought to have died of violence, accidents suicides or homicides..... exact course of death is not known... autopsy..... based on circumstances, the findings and tests done make determination on cause and manner 10:46:25 professional positions following training? having trouble hearing you..... 10:47:09 following training you've outlined, idea of the professional position you held? after training, went into army for 2 years... armed forces institute in pathology.... chief of medical legal section, then wound ballistic section... moved to Dallas, TX medical examiner there summer 1972- Feb. 1981.... became chief medical examiner for Bexar county Texas.... san Antonio...... from march 1981-until I retired Dec. 2006. 10:48:40 for 16 of the years I was there, I was in charge of crime lab... retired and went into complete private practice, doing since then... also the editor of the American journal of forensic pathology.... chairmen of Texas crime labs....... 10:49:30 director of crime lab for 16 years, role? police had crime lab, county took over when I came..... basic documentation, established DNA Lab.... usually things, drug ID, DNA, trace evidence 10:50:11 work include knowing how to package evidence that may have biological or DNA evidence? yes. but you teach the forensic pathologists, they know that even if not in the lab.... technique to packaging... 10:50:50 certain requirements when packing biological samples, wet fluids? yes, dry out material... package each in paper... if you don't let it dry and put in plastic, the bacteria love that... multiply... mold... stinks and everything deteriorates 10:51:35 well known for a while? yeah I'd say... 30 years that I know of 10:51:45 back you've done with group that monitors labs? Texas forensic science commission... yeah what does that involve? government agency.... problem with labs reported and investigated and issued a report... want tests to be done proper.... labs reporting themselves 10:52:50 in addition to professional positions, also had academic appointments? University of Texas system.. assistant professor, associate professor and full professors before I retired. what subject? pathology 10:53:21 have you in addition to your day to day work as medical examiner and work at the University as professor, published any books or articles? 88 articles and 13 book chapters and then I've published 4 books.... first was gunshot wounds, wrote myself... published in English, French and Spanish... forensic pathology with my father, he's deceased now... third book was handbook of forensic pathology wrote with a colleague, 4th book is excited delirium syndrome... I'm the junior author of that book, wife is senior author.... 10:54:51 your work in gun shots.... first book you wrote, updated over time? 2 editions published and the 3rd edition is going to the publishers in another week or two.... 10:55:17 describe for jury the purpose of focus of that book? book starts out instructing about fire arms, wounds, riffles, hand guns, how to do an autopsy, collect evidence and what you can do with analysis 10:55:51 gunshot wounds, how a pathologist could learn things like the distance from the shot? right, contact, near, loose, distant... range, nature of wound 10:56:20 work you've been doing your entire career? yes, very strong interest in gunshot wounds 10:56:35 written 13 chapters, in others books? correct. how does that work? solicit me to write the chapter 10:56:55 are some of those books more comprehensive look than what you wrote? I don't think so... depends, chapters aren't always about gunshot wounds 10:57:23 how many of those chapters that you recall involve gunshot wounds? I think about 7 10:57:36 authored or participated in 88 peer review article? it's a scientific article submitted to journal... when the journal receives it, sends to others to see if it should be published and editor decides to publish. peers mean other pathologists? yes. published becomes available to other researches to use or educate themselves? it is.... central on computer with articles listed, review articles on the computer... essentially a library. 10:59:14 how many articles involved gunshot wounds? 35 or 37 10:59:28 over entire span of your career? these events, these writings were developed over time you worked? yes, over 40 years 10:59:52 worked in baxer county as medical examiner, perform autopsies? yes, about 9,000 and then I reviewed autopsies that were done under my jurisdiction another 28,000..... 11:00:43 called by prosecutor, typically? yes 11:00:50 as medical examiner testified in court to the autopsies I did 11:01:08 staff that helped? 4 full time, 1 part time physicians... approved for program to train fellows.... 38 or 39 approved to train 11:01:42 how many autopsies would be done in the year? 1500 autopsies and another 1500 we would just do external exams 11:02:04 last autopsy I did was in October and retired in December 11:02:14 takes week or a month to complete an autopsy 11:02:23 since 1981 when you began work in baxer county, private consultant? yes. mostly civil, a few criminal cases.... outside baxer I could testify for the defense 11:02:58 don't do many private criminal cases such as now 11:03:09 working as consultant since 2007? right 11:03:26 private practice as consultant since then? yes 11:03:33 majority of work in connection with civil cases? yes. include gunshot injuries? yes.... alleged suicides, accidental discharge 11:04:05 mentioned you were in the military? yes that's when I started my firearm research... study mechanism of firearms and review gunshot wounds 11:04:43 when I was in charge of the wound section I had another study in Vietnam, photos of those injured or killed by different weapons, attempt to study those.... 50,000 slides of this 11:05:16 mentioned microphotography... what a picture of bullet leaving gun looks like? micro flash... only this flash is very quick, take photos of things moving through air, freeze them when the flash goes off 11:05:56 take moment the mechanics of what happens when bullet fired from gun? firepit hits the cartridge case...................... gun powder burns, converted to gas... gradual pressure to build up... bullet at front, fixed in.... push out of bullet into barrel, gripped by riffling, takes a while.... during this time some gas will get around the bullet... gas in front, the bullet, and then bulk of case... barrel filled with air, as bullet goes down, pushes the gas in front and behind... first thing you get is a little cloud of gas, not big, pretty soon after that get the bulk of the gas... in that, the bullet and unburned or burning grains of powder 11:08:13 can the gas that comes out first, combined with air in barrel? will to certain degree, mostly the larger cloud of gas... column of gas and air pushed straight ahead.... hold gun against clothing, this column of gas and air tears hole and then the bullet gets to clothing and the soot gets to the clothing.... that material after hole is made comes back to the other side.. 11:09:21 hole made by gas first, followed by bullet and then followed by soot? right...... blank cartridges are not dangerous, you can kill yourself with it.... the gas form will tear through skin and muscle in your lung... you don't need bullet to kill you with contact wounds 11:10:17 written articles about head trauma? yes... one peer reviewed article, one chapter 11:10:35 blunt force trauma to the head? right 11:10:42 served as editor of peer reviewed scientific journals? yes 11:10:55 does that work include whether or not to accept submission for publication? yes I have final say 11:11:20 work you've done specifically..... expertise in firearms and injuries, have you done work for united states government? yes about 2 years ago.... US attorney's office during hurricane Katrina, police officers shot and wounded a number and killed 1.... done 1 or two other cases 11:12:10 for the marines? war crimes... testified for marine corp 11:12:20 British government? the bloody Sunday massacre.... and another case going in 2 months in Britain with a concussion head injury 11:12:52 united nations? yes. 11:13:07 jurisdictions you've testified as expert? in most states of the union, state courts, federal courts... Canada, Columbia.... by video.... south Africa, Israel 11:13:44 I don't believe we've touched upon.... state and federal? yes 11:13:56 professional awards? yes, from my medical school master teacher award, outstanding service awards...... 11:14:32 professional background and all detailed in CV? yes they are 11:15:04 defendants MM? yes. your CV? yes it is 11:15:24 offer as exhibit... ANY OBJECTIONS? rionda: we object! May we approach? YES YOU MAY (sidebar) 11:18:11 COME IN AS DEFENSE EXHIBIT 23.... 11:18:42 turn to work in this case, describe the materials that you have received for review and if you have notes reflecting that, happy to do so..... 11:19:14 material I reviewed were scene photos, zimmerman photos, autopsy report, medical records, witness statement and transcribed conversation by good, 911 calls, reenactment tape, firearm, examiner reports, and deposition of dr. rao 11:20:14 talk with you about...... opportunity to review the video recording of zimmerman reenacting the events surrounding the shooting? yes., access to witness statements? yes. reviewed all witness statements? I haven't 11:20:54 more about determining whether evidence is consistent with his accounts of what he said happened.... witness statements are all around, vary greatly... easiest way to hear is examine physical evidence and compare to defendants statements and see if consistent.... say bullet came in front, and it came from the back inconsistent 11:21:46 look at what zimmerman said and the forensic evidence which includes the pictures from autopsy, include looking at report from firearm expert who analyzed clothing? correct. two most important are the autopsy report and the reports by the firearms examiner.... secondary, scene photos... looking at autopsy and detailed report by firearms examiner.. 11:22:49 reach opinion as to the distance? yes 11:22:57 opinion from end of barrel to clothing? yes 11:23:03 what affect if any the clothing had on appearance on the skin? yes 11:23:16 well talk about those details in a moment, also talk with you about is your opinion of how long martin may have been alive, how long martin may have been conscious.....? they are different opinions because you can be alive and unconscious.... 11:23:57 the injury zimmerman sustained, reflected in photos from Sanford PD, review them? yes 11:24:12 talk with you a little about the injuries that you observed through photos sustained by martin from gunshot wound 11:24:34 general frame work for today.... talk about gunshot itself and the mechanics involved in that...... 11:25:08 evidence in this case, describe for jury what you saw when you looked at photos from the clothing and the wound to his skin, the gun shot or tattooing referenced in autopsy report, put it all together? photos show contact discharge of weapon against clothing, agree 100% with firearms examiner, at time of discharge, against clothing, tore clothing, soot all around, know the muzzle was in contact with clothing.... firearms examiner said it 11:26:29 look at the wound in the chest, different picture.... circular punched out wound, lay in area of powder tattooing 2x2.... marks on skin due to powder that comes out of the muzzle of gun... not powder burns, means whole bunch of things 11:27:14 when bullet comes out, mark and reaction, reddish..... marks are called powder tattoo marks... stippling. indicates that grain of powder hit skin and person was alive at the time, don't get that in dead people... distribution 2x2... certain density in the tattoo marks, not against the skin.... more than an inch away. based on concentration and the size of pattern, muzzle of gun was 2-4 inches away from the skin.... the barrel of gun was against the clothing but clothing had to be 2-4 inches away from body. 11:28:52 states 96... photo taken at medical examiner's office, showing entrance wound.... ? if you look, you'll see the hole from the bullet, punched out entrance, all around the entrance you see these little marks like ant bites..... powder tattoo marks.... redding brown the person was alive.... this indicates he was alive at time he was shot... muzzle was not in contact but had to be back... first time you see powder tattoo marks is when muzzle of 1/2 inch away, less.. you won't see.... area of tattoo gets bigger and bigger... increases in range, density will decrease.... this is very heavy density.... decreases until tattoo marks disappear..... 11:31:17 opinion to distance based on training and research? yeah, a lot of research....firearm examiners use heavy white paper and fire the gun, hole, and marks around it.... based on size and pattern give opinion from the range..... problem was it doesn't really reflect what happens on the skin..... did experiments, living animals... yes its valid.... to determine size of pattern by shooting against white paper is valid to at least 18 inches..... hand guns to rifles and shot guns and how it extends, how different types....... denser pattern, actually go out further bull powder because its stated in the report 11:33:11 exhibit is now on the screen, this is the 2 inch by inch tattooing pattern? yes sir 11:33:33 helps you to be precise with distance from 1/2 inch to 18 inches? less than 1/2 inch a hole with dense soot, no powder tattoo marks..... 11:34:11 how does pattern get broader? like a hose, the cone shape, farther you get away the bigger the spray pattern 11:34:34 water droplets just fall off, same with powder.. loses velocity and falls away 11:34:50 would the clothing, not disputed in this case.... clothing in between muzzle and skin, what affect if any would clothing have on the appearance of wounded skin? in this case none, clothing wasn't between powder and skin at time of discharge 11:35:38 hole there produced by gas and bullet.... if you had gun 6 inches away from clothing, clothing will filter out powder to a degree... in this case, clothing didn't filter that, you had a hole there and muzzle against the body.... everything coming out of muzzle was going into the hole 11:36:35 if pressed in his chest, what would you see differently? hole like that, surrounded by a halo of black soot and maybe on the skin, a grain or two of powder, but not powder tattooing... disperses the shoot, not the powder.... powder would be inside the body 11:37:11 medical examiner standpoint, hard call for you? no... this is basic 101 11:37:52 trajectory, photos of examine? no... x ray 11:38:06 reference the x ray if you wish, you know the path of the bullet through the right ventricle into lower right lung? right.... bullet hole in left chest, goes through the fifth intercostal space, space between 5th and 6th rib, went through there, hit sac surrounding heart, went through right ventricle and into the right lung.... you can see the led core of the bullet, see the jacket fragments.... bullet went front to back, left to his right because it went into the right lung, but it started on the left side 11:39:34 based on your review, must've been a slight left to right trajectory? yes. there's some, I can't quantitate it. not radical... bullet was go from his left to his right.... martins left to martins right? correct 11:40:09 standard way of describing wounds, talk left to right, deceased's view point 11:40:36 not precisely straight on? does not appear so 11:40:49 mechanics of that shot, putting together the defect on the clothing... result of contact on the muzzle, distance between clothing was 2-4 inches, not a contact.... you're understanding of Zimmerman's statement because of video, work essentially was to determine whether medical evidence was consistent with what he said happened? that's correct 11:41:39 aware zimmerman said martin was straddling him and leaning over him? yes. and zimmerman had gun in right hand? yes... describe what you know of that sequence of events? the medical evidence is consistent with his opinion/statement. reason it is, simplest thing is his gun was in his right hand.... shoot someone with right hand, natural to twist your hand, go from deceased left to right.... nature of defect in clothing and the tattoo.... lean over someone, clothing falls away from the chest... if lying on your back and someone shoots you, clothing against your chest... so the fact we know clothing was 2-4 inches away is consistent with someone leaning over the person doing the shooting and clothing is 2-4 inches away from person firing 11:43:38 clothing was wet, described as being damped.... the responding officers found an unopened can of a beverage in the front pouch of this sweatshirt.... find those facts consistent with what you saw? tend to reinforce.... clothing falls away from the body is gravity, have wet clothing, its heavier... pulling the shirt down, tends to pull away from body 11:45:03 wound itself by gap, tattooing and the face of the contact of the clothing, consistent with Zimmerman's account that martin was over him leaning 11:45:41 talk about martin's mechanics.... effect of him receiving that shot, how long he survived and how long he may have been conscious... what if anything he could do voluntarily at time of consciousness? #1 is the ability to move.... that is determined by amount of oxygen in your brain, you have a reserve of 10-15 seconds.... if right now I grabbed your heart and ripped it out, you could stand there and talk to me or walk over to me 10-15 seconds, brain controlling you.... that's minimum, assumes no blood is going to brain.... if more blood going to brain could be longer.... depends on blood pressure and how severe your wound 11:47:32 answer getting complicated, some get shot and immediately collapse and some get shot and don't know they got shot... 11:48:02 cardiac, in this case you have a through and through hole of right ventricle and at least one if not two into right lung.... losing blood, every time the heart contracts it pumps blood out the two holes in ventricle and at least one hole in the blood...... engage in struggle, heart rate increases... martin was healthy young man, if he's in struggle heart going/ beating more than 100 times a minute.... 11:49:08 every time heart beats, out comes the blood... say he's only beating 100, slow... loses a tablespoon of blood every time heart beats.... that's not much, 15 CCs, heart beating 100... losing 1500 CCs in a minute... quarter of blood supply.... second minute, lose another 1500.... lost more than 50% of blood supply.... 11:50:16 he's not pumping sufficient blood to anywhere, reached point where he's going to die.... assuming these conditions and all probability, nothings 100%... he's going to be dead within 1-3 minutes after being shot in this case.... heart effectively pumping blood, still get electrical activity, but not pumping.... how long as he conscious, significantly shorter than time necessary to die wouldn't have sufficient blood to brain 11:51:23 best you can give in estimates 11:51:33 in training and experience, familiar with incidents where individuals received similar or more serious and could still talk, move, voluntary actions for 10-15 seconds? yes, 12 gauge shot gun at point black range... heart was shredded, rain 65 ft. before he collapse 11:52:33 being shot in heart itself, quickly losing blood? nothing else than that..... not same as being shot in head? right. swat team immediately immobilize someone is to shoot in head 11:53:18 15 seconds capable of movement? potential for 10-15 seconds. moving arms from outstretch to underneath? Objection! SUSTAINED 11:53:49 could that include moving arms from outstretch to underneath in those 10-15 seconds? yes 11:54:10 lose consciousness, lose ability for voluntary movement? oh yeah... not feeling pain? correct 11:54:38 talk about the injury to martin's knuckle, remember in the photos an abrasion on left hand 4th finger? 1/4 by 1/8 scrap. agree its abrasion type? it appears to be 11:55:08 consistent with coming in contact with hard surface or impacting another surface? impacting another surface. concrete qualify? yes 11:55:35 would you expect to see bruising on knuckles if punching were going on? depends on what part of body you punch, softer portion you may not see it... may have been bruising that we didn't know about, doesn't make a difference.... too variable 11:56:29 take blood pressure to get bruising? yes. once blood pressure goes, then you don't have bruising.... can't bruise a dead body 11:56:52 in this instance, martin lost blood pressure very quickly? yes 11:57:02 dr. bao looking for bruising, better course would be to take a look internally? right 11:57:17 that was not done in this case? correct 11:57:31 move to the injuries that zimmerman sustained........ provided photos from the scene of his bloody nose? yes.... and photo taken of the back of his head showing streaming blood? yes 11:58:00 also provided photos taken later that night by Sanford PD? yes 11:58:15 talk about head trauma, mechanism of blood force injury to head? yes. what happens when hit in head by fist or concrete? well, ok.... what happened is the head wound...... say the heads fixed, made to move or is moving and stops suddenly, brain will shift... brain like gelatin, move back and forth inside cranium... as it moves, 3 possibilities, bruising by impacting the inside or you get bleeding, intracranial hemorrhage sufficient it could kill you, other type is brain cell injury..... connected through fibers which activates.... when brain moves back and forth from impact the axons will be stretched, within limited motion the way we are walking around and such.... no big deal.... if movement is violent, stretches the axons, causes injury to the wall if the movement is mild, the injury is prepared by axon... gradual increase in force like running into something and head goes forward and hits panel, so great it will injure axons and they won't be able to prepare and they die..... lot of brain cells and a lot of connections, can lose a good number and still be alright... at some point you'll have impairment and die 12:02:11 impacts like concrete, worry about intracranial bleeding and the axonal injury.... more bleeding than axon injury... always dangerous... if you hit your head here on the floor, carpet it absorbs.... if your head hits concrete, dangerous... but to kill somebody sure if you banged them hard enough.... didn't impact brain significant, still have stunning effect..... football players with concussions is just axon injury... could get mild concussion.... fall and hit your head, don't lose consciousness, appear stunned..... 12:03:45 stunning goes to concussion to injury..... stunned from the impact... better than concussion 12:04:07 progression depending on how hard the impact? yes and how many times, how much force is used.... if you get head hit against concrete with sufficient force to tear the scalp, you're going to be stunned..... not that common... hair cropped or bald removes the cushion... lacerations there's some trauma 12:05:08 talking about lacerations to the scalp, zimmerman had 2 lacerations to the back of his head, states 76..... identified as the photo taken of zimmerman that night, Jonathan manalo... evidence bleeding to head? yes two sites on the head 12:06:24 later saw pictures where blood was wiped away? right 12:06:42 take a look at 74.... what do you see in this picture? bruise on left side, not a good photograph 12:07:56 do you see in this photo what looks like 2 separate areas of swelling? yes... injury here and here, represent lacerations since it looks like clouded blood.... valley, impact site is swollen and then this is swollen here... this is not swollen, two separate impacts two different lacerations with area in between not swollen.... bleeding under the scalp 12:09:19 lump they get after hitting head is blood as opposed to another fluid? yes its blood.... 12:09:36 talk about curvature of the head, why its two separate impacts? real simple, unyielding surface, circular area hits it.... flatten on contact, you can see if it was one impact it would be swollen between the two 12:10:22 commented earlier, not easy to get laceration from flat object? yeah because it takes a force... everyone bangs their head, you don't get laceration 12:10:47 mechanism where laceration occurred? one is if direct impact, crush the skin and as you crush it and push inside the impact, get a tail... if you hit it at an angle so you slide, the surface holds it, and the rest of it pulls against that... so you tear, laceration is nothing but a tear.... 12:11:45 exhibit 57.... anything here that shows what you're talking about? see the swelling here and a little valley here, swollen here and swollen here... laceration here and a blood clot over the lacerations..... one of them is almost an inch and the other is 1/5 of an inch 12:12:33 laceration significant? in this case.... marker of force, real bad laceration rarely rarely.... people bled to death.... not this type of laceration.... indicates you had severe force, not just a bump 12:13:11 possible to have head struck on something hard enough to ring the bell, stun you and not leave mark? oh sure, see that in abused children.... not a mark on their head, but skull fracture 12:13:50 the presence of the injury on the outside, doesn't mean there wasn't additional impact or the impact was minor? you can get severe head trauma without any marks, or you can get marks and have head trauma.... more commonly you have trauma, but can get it without mark 12:14:30 amount of force necessary to cause those injuries, enough to cause stunning effect? oh yes. don't need to have a laceration or big bruise to..... get stunned.... medically referred to ultra-mild concussion... experience that when you hit your head 12:15:19 if you sustained a stunning blow like this and continued to receive additional blows to the head, would the additional blows continue to cause stunning effect? yeah. 12:15:46 short period of time, get multiple other concussions, people have died..... recognized syndrome 12:16:06 could be accumulative just that night into multiple stunning effects leading to concussion? oh yeah..... I'm using stunning because it's just a mild concussion.... not incapacitated, not knocked out.... hit head hard is stunning 12:16:55 there has been some discussion in testimony about punctate abrasions.... punctate in this photo? right here.... reddish markings, indicates impact with a flat surface that was not smooth 12:17:46 would concrete from every day sidewalk have that surface? yes 12:17:58 consistent with his head impacting a sidewalk? yes 12:18:17 punctate abrasion is around the temple? right, it's not smooth.... area here and here and here and here 12:18:36 noticeable lump higher up? right over here.... consequence of impact? yes.... a knot... hematoma 12:18:58 associated with the impact that caused punctate abrasions? yes sir 12:19:08 could that then be caused by 1 or more impacts with the sidewalk? yes sir. 12:19:22 let me show you states 70, a view of the right side of Zimmerman's head, see anything here that would suggest impact with a fist or sidewalk? start to see punctate and adhesion over here 12:19:55 another photo of same side, 71.... ? injury here, reddish areas 12:20:15 other side of the head, 73.... approach the witness? oh I can see its not problem 12:20:38 in this photo with blunt force trauma? marks here too, assume a print photo would show better, some punctate marks here. approach witness briefly? YES YOU MAY. 12:21:20 right here, you see an arch of punctate of abrasion, pile here and another arch.... hematoma anywhere? suggested, but not as distinct as other side 12:21:58 this area above the ear? swollen in that area, hard to say definitely 12:22:14 consistent with swelling as blunt force trauma? yes 12:22:25 this general area here? right 12:22:53 have seen exhibit 79... first photo taken at scene? yes. what signs of trauma do you see? have to look at original, this appears bruised... look at outline... swelling and abrasion there.... 12:23:39 if you look at this, see the congestion in nose and the abrasion, outline here is smooth and here it bulges out and comes back... compare to another photo, this is consistent with possible fracture.... next photo a few hours later, this swelling is not as prominent... that's what ENS thought he had a fractured nose 12:24:42 injury consistent with being punched in nose? yes sir. 12:24:53 exhibit 48.... take several hours later..... point out what you were referring too? swelling appears to be gone, it can't be gone if just blood... suggestive of fact he had displaced fracture here, when examined by ENS they just pushed it back in either consciously or not... held there by muscle 12:25:47 if displaced or not or even fractured, does trauma consistently show being struck in the face? right and of course another blow here 12:26:15 states 72.... part of forehead you were talking about? right.... vaguely see this line here, and another... when you look at the prints they're redding markings..... those are redding areas, not consistent with concrete, more like a punch than concrete 12:27:16 skin is intact, injury underneath skin.... something that doesn't wash out? oh no it doesn't wash out... underneath the skin 12:27:36 would it likely be a different impact than the one that caused injury? yes too far down, not the same thing 12:27:52 more to the right, see evidence there of some sort? right. mark like this and then mark here.... photograph myself.... 12:28:29 separate red mark on forehead? this and this are same impact.... I think you have 6 ID injuries, 2 lacerations on back, impacts on temple, that's 4, nose is 5 and the forehead is 6..... 12:29:12 may there also have been impacts that for one reason or another, land but didn't manifest in injury? Objection! Speculation! SUSTAINED 12:29:34 in a fight situation where someone may be resisting attack, expect them as being pushed to concrete to resist by trying to sit up? I would assume so 12:29:59 possible there may be other impacts, not as pronounced, some ability to resist? Objection! Speculation! OVERRULED 12:30:19 the head wasn't clean in some photos, definite evidence of 6... doesn't mean only 6, but the 6 I can say. moment? YES YOU MAY 12:30:53 (sidebar) 12:31:51 LADIES AND GENTLEMAN, RECESS FOR LUNCH. NO DISCUSSIONS. NO REPORTS. NO ELECTRONIC DEVICE. NO SOCIAL MEDIA. NOTEPADS FACE DOWN... RECESS UNTIL 1:30 12:32:53 FREE TO TAKE LUNCH BREAK, BE BACK AT 1:30, DONT DISCUSS TESTIMONY 12:33:08 COURT IN RECESS UNTIL 1:30 ======================================== 13:30:00 PLEASE BE SEATED, BACK ON RECORD. DR. DI MAIO OUTSIDE? 13:30:58 HAVE THE JURY COME IN..... 13:31:48 omara: approach for a moment? YES (sidebar) 13:32:31 WELCOME BACK... QUESTIONS: DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE CASE? NO HANDS RAISED. READ OR LISTEN TO ANY REPORTS ABOUT THE CASE? NO HANDS RAISED. USE ELECTRONIC DEVICE FOR RESEARCH? NO HANDS RAISED. READ OR CREATE SOCIAL MEDIA? NO HANDS RAISED CROSS 13:33:24 rionda: afternoon.... 13:33:38 not saying or testifying as to who started? correct. whether who attacked who, can't say? correct 13:33:59 in fact you can't testify as to who threw first punch? correct. whether there was a first punch? correct 13:34:18 you can't say whether it was martin defending or Zimmerman defending himself? when it first started, correct 13:34:34 only focusing on time of actual shot? that's correct 13:34:42 not stating that everything Zimmerman said in the reenactment is the gospel truth? correct. just the nature of gunshot wound is consistent with his accounts 13:35:10 gave 5 statements prior to that one? mentioned that to me before. in your depo? yes 13:35:22 why only the reenactment and not the other statements? I know what the reenactment says, holding to that account being presented here 13:36:05 correct in stating the 1st statement is most accurate? 1st is usually more accurate when giving weeks or months later... get that in depositions 13:36:27 mentioned prior experience in san Antonio, go to Alamo and go down to water? about 2 levels down 13:36:48 mentioned when you worked there for 15-20 years? 25 years 13:36:58 important for you to make sure you understood all facts? depends on the case, sometimes you want all the information, personal 13:37:20 bring you a case, want to know what all witnesses said, not just one... make sure consistent? in most cases yes sir 13:37:37 in this case, focused on defendant's statement and good's statement? focused on defendants... all that I'm concentrating on.... went to see if his statement was consistent with what I found... the rest I can't say. weren't provided statements from other witnesses? have to disregard them in regards to gunshot wound; only Zimmerman was there 13:38:31 another person was there? a couple witnesses.... well the other person there is not here? right 13:38:50 aware the deceased/ victim was on phone with lady? yes. didn't review her statement? no 13:39:09 worked with medical examiner, find all info before opinion? depends on the case... often info from witnesses goes toward manner of death and not cause of death 13:39:35 suggesting all witness testimony should be disregarded? not for the jury, in my purposes not important in my opinion 13:40:08 not saying that should be disregarded? not what I'm doing, for the jury 13:40:26 west asked you hypotheticals; in order to give opinion.... has to be based on accurate and truth? no, just supposed this and this happened. speculating? just giving presentation and asking what it is 13:41:06 agree that at least 1 statement you relied on, the reenactment, Zimmerman has self-interest? yes 13:41:27 argue he has bias in not telling the truth? one could argue that but I think that's your argument 13:41:41 if his statement doesn't match evidence, it's not the truth? that's correct sir 13:41:53 I guess in your review, aware that only person armed was Zimmerman? yes 13:42:04 aware that he wasn't armed with firearm, but also armed with a flashlight? yes, photo of flashlight in scene photos 13:42:23 this right here? yes. could this do damage to someone? I thought it was one of those old steel heavy things, not a really dangerous weapon... hit hard like that? may cause bruising, not of significance 13:43:11 not provided with statement of surdyka who described Zimmerman on top of martin before the shooting? not provided that statement 13:43:29 not provided statement of bahador were you? no sir 13:43:38 provided john good statement? yes. aware he gave additional sworn statement, didn't hear this at all? no sir, I don't think so (smacked hands) 13:44:00 aware that he also stated he didn't hear anything hitting concrete at all? no sir (smacked the desk) 13:44:31 mention that... shooting animals, animals were alive? yes.... animals kept in federally approved area; vet present at time and the animals have to be anesthetized. how many times were they shot? I'd have to read the paper, determine if testing firearm was valid. found it was? yes. 13:45:27 testified all over the world? a couple places. criminal matters for government and state? yes 13:45:43 testified....... in your years? 6 going on 7 now 13:46:06 said over 50 times or so? no I don't think I said a number of times I testified... most are civil cases 13:46:26 drew Peterson case? criminal... testified for defense? yes. how much are you paid today? same thing I charge everybody $400 an hour. how much charged so far? up to yesterday $2400, not a complicated case forensically.... 13:47:11 mention that..... notes, to refresh your memory? if you get a whole bunch of papers, easier to put the facts down 13:47:41 prepared a 5 or 6 page notes you provided to me and west? uh yeah 5 pages, double spaced/double sided... closer to 10 or 8 13:48:09 weren't there, viewed autopsy report? yes. opinion comes from Dr. Bao's medical report? yes 13:48:25 shot to the heart? yes. no dispute about that? correct 13:48:35 did I understand you correctly that if you pulled my heart out I could sit and walk and talk for how long? 10-15 seconds 13:48:56 I could just keep talking and talking and talking without a heart? that's right.... it's between 10-15 seconds, dependent on oxygen supply to the head... that's why SWAT will shoot in the head 13:49:25 even though my heart is gone id still feel pain or not? oh you'd still feel pain 13:49:38 believe it was 10-15 seconds....? I said I can't said, minimum amount of time was between 10-15 seconds. maximum was 3 minutes? in all medical probability no cardiac function after 1-3 minutes 13:50:16 not here to testify as to while this was going on who was yelling for help? no sir... not testifying to that 13:50:29 can't testify as to the statements George said he pulled gun from holster and shot? right I can just say the injuries are consistent with how he shot him, but not how he got the gun 13:50:56 how he claims he got the gun while someone was straddling him, can't say that happened that way? can't tell that by scientific method.... but Zimmerman said it happened that way, means its true right? can't testify to that 13:51:27 physically impossible to do what he said happened? I would say it 13:51:37 not here to say that and how he took the holster? right, outside my ability to make conclusion on that 13:51:49 just to say how close it was to skin and clothes? right 13:51:59 is it not true that one possibility is martin was over Zimmerman and he was like this.....? he'd be someway over him, not sure of the angle 13:52:24 this angle? I can't tell you... if you put your hand out, since it rotates.... still get the path, consistent with him being over 13:52:44 also consistent he was standing up? problem with that is the shirt would be pulled down.... if you shot through the shirt in that area, when the shirt is let go and put back in position, defect in shirt would be over here if pulled this way.... moved it to where it over lined the gun shot to get away from the chest 13:53:38 saying martin had to physically be on top like this? saying that physical evidence is consistent with martin being over Zimmerman 13:53:56 not also consistent with martin pulling away from Zimmerman on the ground, same angle, and Zimmerman shooting at that time? yes 13:54:40 the other question I had.... possibilities, blunt trauma to Zimmerman's head, concrete as possibility or maybe a tree branch for any of those bruises? if you hit someone with a tree branch 13:55:10 if you bump in it? where in face or back of head... either one? well you would expect abrasions.... he had contusion up there... abrasion is scrap. did he have any? yes. small on right side of nose and impact abrasions on temples and in the back 13:55:55 struggling with you, I push you and you hit the tree, caused that way? well you'd have to have a tree branch there and I didn't see any 13:56:20 if you just bumped a head.... wood gives, police used to carry wooden batons, less dangerous than metal... hit someone hard enough on back of head you get a laceration 13:56:50 any gardening at all? no my wife does 13:56:56 I do gardening and I get a bald head, bruise from tree branch? yeah an abrasion, abrasions back here 13:57:15 not aware that there were trees out there.... defendant says struggle near trees? I thought you meant trees on ground 13:57:40 possibility then correct for some of the abrasions? you could have one from the tree 13:57:54 could be from rolling on concrete as they both struggle or fight? yeah... impact with concrete 13:58:15 curious what you mentioned about martin, described injury to left hand..... what did Dr. Bao call it...? he called it so I have to go to with it. you saw the photo though? not sure if I did or not 13:58:51 assuming that's an abrasion, may be additional injuries under knuckles? no. can't disagree with it as an abrasion, but if you punch someone will you get bruises on knuckles, yes or no... if they suspected something they should've cut into hand and saw underneath 13:59:36 if persons alive, just wait a day or so and see if you have hemorrhaging.... but you said sometimes you won't see it? yes....... if it's not there it's not important 14:00:05 can hit someone and not leave bruising on knuckles? correct. Zimmerman could've hit him and not had bruising on knuckles? correct 14:00:26 shown photos of Zimmerman's head, opinions to what they were? yes.... someone familiar with his head, doctor from the past would know what's existing and what's not? may or may not.... you don't really remember a patients shape of head, especially if seeing multiple patients 14:01:04 that would be the best person to see George alive the next day, what he had and didn't have? in theory, if done correctly, yes..... emergency room records and doctor records are lousy in describing injuries 14:01:36 fire rescue do an honorable job? yes, not incompetent, treat them.... not document injuries 14:02:03 fire rescue are interested in injuries? in treating a person.... mention two lacerations, don't say where they are 14:02:22 folgate measured for you? yeah, but didn't say which one was on which side.... 14:02:52 talking about same photograph? the one with blood... clouded 14:03:07 agree with treatment it didn't need stitches? I agree, but outside my area of expertise... its treatment 14:03:47 you did review fire rescue report? yes 14:03:56 patient has GCS 15? glascoe index thing. what does it mean? that he's perfectly fine 14:04:19 people that dealt with him right after his interaction? correct 14:04:28 did I understand correctly you're saying difference between photo at scene..... 14:04:57 blood on front taken by police, something wrong with nose? yes... if you look at the photo take 4 hours later that deviation is not there 14:05:29 your opinion is you believe fire rescue did it without noticing they did it? its consistent with a fracture, since no one.... ENS thought there was a fraction, if it's now replaced that would account for differences... agree his nose is perfect? not swollen to right side as deviated in first photo 14:06:18 possible not fractured at all? the swelling would still be there and it's not 14:06:57 one is smaller than this and ones about like that? correct. that he'd die from those? no, indicative of hard impact 14:07:15 or just tree limb or rolling around? indicative of hard impact. 14:07:26 don't know if someone hitting him or rolling around? hard impact, that's all 14:07:45 aware that he was offered medical care and he declined? yes sir 14:07:57 also I believe folgate and fire rescue didn't notice other injuries to top of head, missed it? no.... the bleeding continued after ENS, or didn't notice it because they didn't consider it significant 14:08:31 went the next day to facility and folgate treated him and she didn't note all the injuries? medical personnel don't describe injuries properly 14:09:06 other thing I want to ask is... the photo taken at the scene, got blood there.... put my hand over that, expect my hand to have what? blood 14:09:54 agree that photograph I just showed you, bleeding like that... blood will go down if standing? depends how profusely... laying on my back, blood will go inward? partial, some will go in and out 14:10:32 more difficult to swallow or say anything? depends on how profusely 14:10:43 blood will go into my mouth eventually? yes. harder to swallow or talk? yeah unless you start swallowing it 14:10:59 you did not view the video taken of Zimmerman when brought to police and could walk fine? I've seen it.... kept playing it on TV all the time... seemed to be walking fine? correct 14:11:28 recording you saw of his interview was after that? yes. but that evening, he was walking and talking fine? yes 14:11:52 agree there's no witness to the actual shooting except defendant and deceased? correct 14:12:09 regarding gunshot wound, it was up to 4 inches as max and 2 as minimum? right... 2 inches accounting for sweatshirt and hoody? no. the hole creates barrier? right.... between the skin and muzzle 14:12:45 ever worn one of those hoodies? not that type 14:12:52 seen others wear them? yes sir.... wear them big? yes. hang down? yes. something in it, wouldn't it hang down? Objection! OVERRULED. yes sir 14:13:22 make it a little tighter? yes 14:13:49 asked about DNA, head of lab in Texas? yes. asked about DNA and possible packaging or improper packaging? yes 14:14:07 surprised that same object or evidence..... plastic would cause mold and degrade DNA? no I said you're supposed to dry the blood, package separately so that one piece doesn't contaminate the other... don't put in plastic bag, plastic is air tight... wrap in paper, the paper breathes 14:15:03 put the clothing in a bag....? always get mold into it, but if it dries... that's why you dry to get mold. assuming you don't? you'll get mold.... DNA gone? yeah you can lose some.... surprised if DNA was found in area that was mispackaged? no 14:15:49 said you reviewed firearms report? yes. 14:15:56 agreed with that in the sense that the findings and range, stippling, soot, gun powder? right 14:16:31 safe to assume that your opinion is that somehow after George was punched, injury to his nose... you believe it may have fractured and displaced and someone put it back? sure he could've. would've been painful? yes. 14:17:09 anybody could've done it? yes. and nobody could've done it and it wasn't as bad as it thinks? well if just swelling wouldn't go down in 4 hours... deviated because it was fractured 14:17:44 when we bleed, its profuse? scalp bleeding is always profuse... more than other areas? yes. why? no idea, that's how its designed 14:18:14 so the bottom line, possibilities about how the gunshot wound occurred? to a degree, consistent with his account 14:18:33 not saying his account, just when he already had gun out and pointing it at martin? yes. at that point, don't know if martin was backing away or going toward? consistent with Zimmerman's account 14:19:10 also consistent with martin pulling back? I told you that too, yes sir 14:19:31 not here to testify about holster or how it works? no. nor about firearm either 14:20:08 sweatshirt with hoody.... still going to grab if big? yes sir.... 14:20:38 testified about your expertise is once body is dead, just trauma? trauma is pathology, will testify to that... don't testify to treatment at all 14:21:06 aware that out there at the complex, also sprinkler boxes? I didn't see any of those 14:21:43 moment? YES.... 14:21:52 know whether Zimmerman is right or left handed? right handed 14:22:10 thank you very much REDIRECT 14:22:38 notes you prepared, a summary of measurements that martin was 5'11 and weigh 158 lb.? right. BMI was 22 which would be normal range for a person his size? correct 14:23:07 indicated that the location of gun shot? Objection Leading! SUSTAINED 14:23:18 where the gunshot wound was on martin? yes 14:23:25 do you need your notes to form your opinions once you have facts before you? no 14:23:35 do notes include several pages of photos that were most pertinent in assessing trauma? yes, 4 pages are just photos... shown those here? yes sir 14:23:56 the scope of your work was to consider the statement made to police about how the shooting took place at moment shot was fired and for you to consider forensic evidence to determine whether or not Zimmerman's statement is consistent with physical evidence? Objection! Leading and Compound. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION? yes. yes 14:24:54 I have to interpret objective evidence, not basing opinions on witnesses... they're wrong all the time... 14:25:08 review witness statements that contradicted physical evidence? all the time... someone stood over man and shot him and two architects and a secretary saw that, bullet from gun didn't match... half a dozen of those cases 14:25:51 bahador and didn't claim to see the individuals at time shot fired? no. surdyka said she was looking at individuals some distance away and believes she was looking at the fired shot, described Zimmerman on top of martin? Objection! Mischaracterization! REPHRASE 14:26:52 surdyka said she was looking out window and believes she was looking at individuals when shot was fired... at that time, Zimmerman was on top and martin was faced down... is that possible given forensic evidence you know? no sir, not possible.. he was shot in the front 14:27:35 would her statement do you good? no sir... example of how an eye witness gets it wrong? yes sir 14:27:53 did consider john goods statement.... ? Objection! Leading SUSTAINED 14:28:07 john good testified he saw Zimmerman on his back on the ground and saw martin straddling him on his knees, striking Zimmerman in an MMA style and then went back inside, some seconds later shots were fired.... position he saw consistent with forensic evidence? yes sir 14:28:54 that statement is separate and apart from Zimmerman? right, but wouldn't use that to give my opinion, use the evidence in conjunction with Zimmerman's statement 14:29:27 you pointed out in your direct evidence, there were two lacerations on the back of Zimmerman's head.... testified you believed those two to be from separate impact? yes sir. could see valley in between? yes 14:29:52 two blows that created lacerations? yes, so separate you couldn't get the two from one impact 14:30:22 are the two lacerations on the back of his head, consistent with two separate impacts? yes 14:30:38 is it... trying to figure out how to ask about tree branches, any big branches on ground to use as club? only trunks on ground and I didn't see anything 14:31:14 to receive lacerations from tree trunk, what would have had to happen? upright sitting and go back violently against the trunk on two occasions... still blunt trauma to back of head, twice 14:31:42 or it could have been on the sidewalk? right Objection! OVERRULED 14:31:58 is that scenario more plausible? cement is more plausible especially from the side of the head 14:32:18 commented of course, different role professionals play in dealing with people injured? right. 14:32:35 their objective is to treat someone, mine is to document injuries and interpret the injuries... their job is different than my job 14:33:07 opportunity to review the physician assistant notes that folgate took next day? yes. notice that she documented what would be black eyes? yes. 14:33:27 consistent with showing up later from blow to nose? secondary blackened of the eye, shows up later... punch eyes directly it would be more immediate 14:33:56 not surprising to you that the blow to the nose from the photos... might be associated black eyes the next day? wouldn't be surprising at all 14:34:17 issue whether his nose was actually deviated or just swelling, is that significant whether or not he was punched in the face? still punched in the face.... swelling is gone 4 hours later, nose displaced and put into position 14:34:55 possible his nose wasn't deviated.... does that matter if he was punched? obviously hit in the face and forehead 14:35:22 the GCS 15 scale, reference to paramedic note? area on the form where a 15 means they're walking, talking, breathing, heart rate, not really bad.... most people come into ER are 15... to go down you to get into trouble 14:36:00 not claiming that Zimmerman wasn't able to walk or talk that evening not withstanding his injuries? correct... more a stunning injury, not significant concussion 14:36:37 something that happens after the actual impact? Objection! Leading. REPHRASE 14:36:47 consequences of blow, those that develop over time? concussions show up immediately, problem is they can be subtle... that's why sporting events like having doctors there.... lay people won't pick up on concussions 14:37:24 feeling it when getting hit like that? oh yes. if you get punched in the nose, you know it. continue to hurt for a while? yes. what about getting head hit on concrete? could... especially if lacerations 14:37:59 able to know what was happening to them was life threatening? no because they're stunned... cant interpret 14:38:17 even looking at them outside, could say they're alright and then die a few hours later... that's why police should've taken Zimmerman to hospital, if he died in station family would've sued 14:38:54 even if no evidence of not walking or? you don't play around... jails always lose the lawsuits 14:39:14 if someone is in the process of being hit and having head struck on cement, stunning affect and the pain associate with it... in the moment, not knowing when it'll stop... say I can take 3 more of these? Objection! Leading! SUSTAINED 14:40:07 these circumstances.... overwhelming person on receiving end? Objection! Leading Argumentative! OVERRULED TO BOTH.... yes 14:40:31 some questions about the packaging of evidence, if wet and bio material... testimony that the wet outer shirt was sealed in bag while wet and placed in paper bag outside of that... good evidence handling? no sir.... when bag was open it smelled of mold? its decomposing... air dry and put in paper bags, not plastic 14:41:22 accepted forensic practice subjecting evidence to that type of packaging... in that condition for a month.... that would promote degradation or the integrity of DNA? oh yes 14:41:55 rionda mentioned if martin put hand over Zimmerman's nose at this point in time there may have been transfer of blood? yes. Objection! SUSTAINED 14:42:25 if martin put hand over Zimmerman in this condition, testimony there may have been transfer of blood? yes 14:42:40 I take it you would have no additional information if his nose was bleeding at some point during the incident? correct... impact to nose, eventually bleed can't tell if you'll bleed immediately... depends on position your head is in? yes 14:43:24 if you find something important but if you don't, absence doesn't make it important? right... general fact that's understood... especially if you don't know the statistical probability... how often do you find something, how often it occurs 14:44:09 do you agree environmental conditions affect physical evidence? oh yeah 14:44:24 about 3 hours from the event until martins body was transported, during that time... covered by blanket...body and hands were exposed to elements? right, do you wrap it tightly or wrap it loosely... plastic tends to rub and be stiff 14:45:07 also consider that there's been testimony, the weather varied from light drizzle to heavy rain... could affect DNA evidence collected? true. or how the hands were handled... or how they were washed prior to photo? that's why pathologist is supposed to be with the body, should never leave the body even if you have assistants helping you 14:46:06 why you may trust your assistants to follow protocol, you would verify? right... examine clothing on body before you take it off and then stand there to make sure they're doing it appropriately.... 14:46:53 marked as states 28..... Object! Beyond Scope of Cross! I DONT KNOW WHAT IT IS 14:47:14 states 28 offered in evidence, picture of martins chest on scene.... states 95 in evidence, photo at time of autopsy, before cleaning or washing? Same Objection! PLEASE APPROACH (sidebar) 14:49:50 states 28 was taken at the scene, any blood present in photo? yes blood around nipple. 14:50:06 look at states 95, taken at time of autopsy before body was clean, any blood? no... in the original photo, stream of blood and its missing in this photo. been cleaned? Objection! Speculation SUSTAINED, OVERRULED TO ARGUMENTATIVE RE-CROSS 14:51:08 photos shown to you....? gunshot wound, one at the scene 14:51:22 show the sweatshirt is up? yeah been pulled up 14:51:30 at the scene and transporting the body, sweatshirt down absorb the blood? sure 14:51:49 expect the blood in the sweatshirt? right 14:52:00 asked questions by west, agree he is not evidence? right. use his words to form opinion? no the reports and my report 14:52:37 agree there was absence of x rays or proof of broken nose? correct 14:52:48 agree there was absence or documentation of brain injury? oh yes 14:53:00 absence of anything being washed off the body? can't say it was washed or not... if that shirt was lying and they pulled it off, could wipe off blood... not supposed to do that.... take photo of wound intact before cleaned it 14:53:39 at the scene, remove clothing or stay on? the clothing should remain on body so the photo at scene is proper, but at medical examiner's office.... shouldn't have undressed body would be wiping it, techniques weren't correct. but you did rely on his findings? I had no other choice. document what occurred? right 14:54:44 absence of evidence anything was washed by rain? it would have to be, have to know how much was raining.. needed observation. pure speculation? yeah unless you were there 14:55:16 there was a baseness of vomiting, no vomit out there? no 14:55:26 agree that a jury who heard john good should rely on what he said on the witness stand? interesting, if he has a good statement at first and then not as good on the stand... depends 14:56:00 rely on his statement? disregarded witness........ supported or validated statements. witnesses are all over the place... but isn't what George said, in effect a witness? yes, but that's why you don't believe him.... check the tests and the autopsies 14:56:58 relied on one of his statements, gun was out and was 2-4 inches? right RE-RE-DIRECT 14:57:14 absence of evidence notion..... if good didn't testify that he heard George's head hitting cement like this, mean that Zimmerman's head didn't get hit? no 14:57:42 if good didn't hear martin hit Zimmerman in head, mean he wasn't hit in head? no 14:57:58 MAY HE BE EXCUSED? yes. yes. CALL NEXT WITNESS.... 14:58:24 omara: one moment...... 14:59:26 (sworn in) 14:59:43 rionda: approach? YES (sidebar) 15:00:23 name? norton bonaparte jr. occupation? city manager. employed? 1 yr. and a half. when this happened? yes 15:00:51 event of playing the 911 call to martin family.... decisions made for that point, not important now.. just event 15:01:23 decision was made to play tape for martin family? to play a number of tapes 15:01:34 police evidence tape? 911 and non-emergency number 15:01:47 focus attention on one even though several were played.. 15:01:54 who took care of process of playing the tapes? mayor's office, myself and mayor 15:02:09 was there any conversation with law enforcement as to how to accomplish? not witnesses, they were parents 15:02:24 conversation with law enforcement as to how to play the tapes to these people? no 15:02:43 you just... decide on your own? make them public, wanted to play to family first as courtesy 15:03:07 when decision to play the tapes for family, your decision or mayors decision on how to occur? decision to just play them 15:03:27 to play them separately? no there was not 15:03:42 it occurred then from other testimony, tape was played with entire family present? yes. you the one playing? I don't recall who was playing we used a computer 15:04:03 who was doing what with the tapes? disk, laptops so they could hear. who was doing what? I don't recall either myself or mayor. who was present? me, mayor, family, attorneys 15:04:32 law enforcement present? no. decision you and mayor made? I asked family and they said they would rather not have law enforcement present. discuss with chief lee? just informed him and other officers to not be in the same room 15:05:05 how many times the tape was played? which tape... the 911 tape? no I do not. always there? in the vicinity, not always in the room 15:05:23 either you or mayor in room at all times? I do not recall 15:05:32 how many times was the tape played while you were in the room? I don't recall. more than one? the tape with screams, yes... anyone in particular? I don't recall.. just wanted to hear it again 15:06:00 did you record or take notes to any responses they had from that one tape? no. record the even in any form or fashion? no we did not. recorded by audio or video? no. court reporter there to document? no it was not 15:06:27 was any consideration given to you or mayor to record it for law enforcement? releasing to media that evening, wanted family to have courtesy to hear it first 15:06:50 any consideration to concept to record it in case law enforcement needed it when half a dozen family members listened for the first time? that's a no 15:07:32 attorneys present, were martin family attorneys? correct. CROSS 15:07:55 rionda: bottom line was that it was the decent thing to play for family before release? our intent. that's why it occurred the way it did? that is correct 15:08:17 MAY HE BE EXCUSED? CALL NEXT WITNESS omara: approach? unique way to appear witness (sidebar) 15:10:31 TAKE A 15 MINUTE RECESS, NOTEPADS FACE DOWN ON CHAIR, FOLLOW DEPUTY OUT OF COURTROOM 15:11:03 PLEASE BE SEATED. COURT IN RECESS FOR 15 MINUTES =============================================================== 15:25:20 (Zimmerman talking with attorney assistant) 15:30:42 PLEASE BE SEATED... BACK ON RECORD... omara: have the witness ready on ipad, waiting for that to get ready.... my client is ok with representing this witness in this fashion. IS THAT CORRECT MR. ZIMMERMAN? yes your honor 15:37:25 (setting up the witness) omara: this will probably be my last witness and then begin proffer.... should be done tomorrow 15:39:17 PLEASE BE SEATED... defense calls eloise dillegard 15:39:29 (sworn in via FaceTime) 15:39:53 home sick, appreciate you spending time with us today. name? eloise dilligard. live at retreat at twin lakes? yes. how long? 2.5 years. moved out since then? yes 15:40:45 time you lived at retreat, knew George Zimmerman? I did. how long? ever since we moved in October 2009 15:41:06 friends? he was my neighbor, spoke on friendly basis... no problem with one another 15:41:15 knew of his involvement with watch program? yes 15:41:28 see him patrolling as part of the watch? no. knew him as friend or neighbor? friendly neighbor 15:41:41 focus attention on February 26th, the night martin was shot, remember? I do 15:41:55 tell the jury what first brought your attention to the event you came to find out was the shooting? I was coming from Wal-Mart, down Rinehart to go to Oregon and make left, police approached me from rear, he wanted to go around me.... coming up Oregon I noticed police were pulling into neighborhood... I looked down from mail station to left and saw crime scene tape.... I didn't want to go directly down, came around right hand side to go around back way, asked a couple guys.. they didn't know but another police was coming.... 15:43:10 weather like at that time? it was very rainy that night 15:43:19 at some point as you got closer to the crime scene, notice any familiar vehicle? yes. which? George's truck. describe? gray Honda ridgeline 15:43:49 where you noticed the truck? because of the way our street is, it was nearing the curb down by the crime scene which I believe was on retreat view circle 15:44:14 know the area as the T intersection? yes. 15:44:21 may not have known names then, a woman who lives on end section jenna lauer, know her? no 15:44:40 she was living in that first townhome just past at the intersection of the T, know what I'm talking about? yes 15:45:10 presume jennas was first in that row of houses, where was the truck parked in reference to that? truck would've been looking toward the east... slightly south of where her condo would be 15:45:36 walk out her front door, looking right at the truck? look to the right from her condo 15:45:52 that would put the truck on the curb to the right of that street from her condo? correct 15:46:07 retreat view circle, the one that circles around as perimeter? it does 15:46:16 is lauer on street that comes off of retreat view circle? her condo would be facing retreat view circle, yes 15:46:36 straight out her front door, into the clubhouse? no down the street to the west 15:46:52 saw it in the area of the crime scene? yes 15:47:00 may come back to map.... came up to the area describe what you saw? a few people standing on the sidewalk, people who were down by the yellow tape, I looked around to see if I saw George because I saw his truck, after I didn't see him I recognized a lady from HOA and asked her... she said Objection! Hearsay! SUSTAINED 15:48:12 omara: your honor.... did you know the person's name who you spoke to? I don't, she's from Pembroke pines 15:48:30 conversation with her about the events? I asked what was going on 15:48:39 at some point then, did you speak to any law enforcement officers? after I could not find George, I attempted to talk to some of other witnesses that were there and after I felt like well I'm not in harm's way, I was walking away and police came up and said you don't want to talk to me.... and I said I wasn't here when anything happened. 15:49:26 he said? we're trying to find someone who knows the people involved in shooting. further conversation? he was going to take a picture and bring to us. 15:49:55 did that officer identify to you by name? he did not... I'm usually pretty perceptive to look at name badge, but I don't remember 15:50:13 did he show you a picture or two of people involved? came back with an iPhone with two pictures.... 15:50:35 identify either by name or description the others who were present? young Caucasian man, either Jeremy or Jonathan.... and a couple there, married but I didn't get their names 15:51:01 present when the pictures were shown? they were. able to identify anyone in the two pictures? George Zimmerman my neighbor 15:51:20 seen those pictures here quite a bit in the court room, was that a picture where Zimmerman had a bloody nose? he did have a bloody nose, yes 15:51:41 describe the difference you saw between the picture that night and Zimmerman you knew before? nose was bloody and to me it looked disfigured, it was somewhat to the left or right, not the way I knew him.... 15:52:16 did it take you a minute or two to figure out that was the same person? his face still looked the same, only difference was disfigurement and the blood... advise police his name? yes. did anyone else identify the person as well? Objection! Hearsay! SUSTAINED 15:52:59 after identified George, shown a second picture? I was. identified that person? I didn't know his name, seen him in passing probably earlier that day, didn't know who he was. know now that was trayvon martin? yes 15:53:32 after you identified Zimmerman, who did you talk to about that event? that night..... if I can remember correctly, where his wife was.... I knew he was married and I didn't see her... looked to be heart, where's his wife 15:54:19 after that? nothing else I could do at that point, I was no longer in harm's way... went to my house, parked in my driveway, went up to George's house to see if Shellie was there, nobody came... shortly after Shellie pulled up.... perpendicular to the driveway and she asked me... Objection! Hearsay! SUSTAINED. omara: offered to be heard. NO SPEAKING RESPONSES. PLEASE APPROACH (Sidebar) 15:59:27 talking about conversation with Shellie Zimmerman? yes. brief. what did she do after that? once I completed my conversation she sped off to the crime scene 15:59:53 there with police... did you go back to the area that night at all? yes I did go back down there to make sure she was ok.... 16:00:13 present during, questioned by law enforcement, present during any other witnesses discussions? yes, the young man there alone and the other couple spoke to policeman about what they knew 16:00:46 were you there when those people gave statements to law enforcement? there for verbal, not written 16:01:00 be more precise... one might have been Jeremy and another Jonathan? that's what I think I remember, not sure 16:01:18 do you recall were there more than 3 that gave statements in your presence? in my presence, a couple and a gentleman by himself 16:01:43 did you give any verbal or written statements to police that night? no... he asked me my name and I gave it to him and my phone number 16:02:07 back to the time where you left the area and ran into Zimmerman and went back to look for her didn't find her and left? correct 16:02:28 give statements to law enforcement regarding what you heard? yes.... request that I called him, so I called.... he and another agent came to my house and interviewed me 16:02:53 gave statement about whatever information they gave you? correct 16:03:04 opportunity to listen to the lauer 911 tape? yes 16:03:25 tell me circumstances of the setting? first time I heard was when it was played on local news channel. by yourself or with others? I don't remember... how many times? besides that time, maybe 2 or 3 times 16:04:02 did you hear a voice screaming for help that you were able to recognize? heard the voice screaming in background and of the two I only heard George talk 16:04:26 who was screaming for help? based on fact I've only heard George's voice I would say that it was his... his who? George Zimmerman 16:04:44 when you say you heard him talk, how long you've known him? by that time 2.5 years. speak to you and speak to others in your presence? yes. ever hear him yell for his dog or laugh at a joke? never heard him yell at the dog, commands were like a regular voice... has a white male voice.... 16:05:36 states exhibit 1... can you identify the picture and walk us through a location you may have seen his truck...... 16:06:29 I'm going to move it a little bit to an area, can you describe what is barely on the screen on this point...? a blue line, a little bit of grass... 16:07:01 see the pool in the center of the photo? I can 16:07:26 (west and omara discussing the photo) 16:07:43 mirror images so ill move on.... 16:07:49 try and do it verbally.... familiar with complex? I am 16:07:58 gave us a drive through of how you entered into complex, which one? I came in the entrance that is in front of the elementary school 16:08:18 have the clubhouse in front of you and to the right? that is correct 16:08:30 from that point, coming in Oregon... took a back route to your complex, right on retreat view....? if you say back route, you're talking about Oregon that goes to.... 16:09:20 ok.. sorry about that, I think I confused my question a moment ago... first came in to subdivision and saw crime scene tape? correct. which way was crime scene from where you were driving in? to the left or east 16:10:00 normal way you would go to the left? no I would go to the right 16:10:10 start at the Oregon main entrance with clubhouse on the right, walk or drive us to the area where you did drive up to get better view of crime scene? if I were to drive in to the entrance, I would've made a left to the crime scene 16:10:52 where on that scene would you have scene George's truck? not even 3/10 of a mile down 16:11:08 have a present memory today as to where the truck was? parked on retreat view circle.... the T 16:11:31 could the truck have been parked not on retreat view but the second street in? yes.... not your first left, but second left on twin trees lane? right 16:11:55 that the street you turned down and saw his truck? it could've been, all I know is it was on one of those cubs 16:12:10 directly in front of, touch to right of lauer's townhome? yes 16:12:23 lauer's townhome... look out front door and to the right for his truck? correct. moment? YES YOU MAY 16:13:10 no further questions.... CROSS 16:13:40 I remember you 16:13:53 rionda: bottom line is that day you came into contact with police, suspect and victim, recognized one photo as George... now know the other was trayvon? correct 16:14:13 seen him earlier that day, just walking around? right 16:14:22 asked about the voice, saw on TV? right. no point of reference knew Zimmerman's voice but not martins? that's right 16:14:58 MAY SHE BE EXCUSED? yes. yes. 16:15:18 WHEN FINISHED WITH THAT, APPROACH FOR MOMENT? (sidebar) 16:21:04 MORE MATTERS WE NEED TO TAKE CARE OF TONIGHT, YOU CAN GO HOME AT THIS TIME.... ADMONITIONS: NO DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE CASE. NOT TO READ OR LISTEN TO THE CASE. NO ELECTRONIC DEVICE FOR RESEARCH. NO SOCIAL MEDIA. ASSURANCES? yes... NOTEPADS FACE DOWN, FOLLOW JARVIS INTO JURY ROOM... JURY BACK TOMORROW AT 9 AM 16:22:25 PLEASE BE SEATED. 10 MINUTE RECESS AND THEN CONTINUE WITH ANIMATION ISSUE AND PROFFERING FOR CONNOR'S TESTIMONY... WE WILL BE HERE TOMORROW AT 8 AM FOR DONNELLEY'S...... 10 MINUTE RECESS ====================== 16:44:54 PLEASE BE SEATED.... BACK ON RECORD, SEE SHOEMAKER SITTING ON STAND, MANTEI READY... GO AHEAD 16:45:10 mantei: going through your CV, graphic design degree in 1985? yes. additional degrees? always ongoing education. nothing in terms of post grad work with degree? no 16:45:44 not held as engineer or physicist? correct 16:45:56 take computer software and draw things or create things? that's one version. what's another? a lot of different types 16:46:16 as far as your prior experience testifying, other appearances? declarations and testified. how many times you were present in front of a jury? 17 16:46:43 how many of those were your testimonies objected to? you mean challenged.... 16:47:04 how many times did they object to you? whenever I testify in court, pretrial hearing 16:47:22 17 times, how many of those were animations created with motion suits? probably a dozen. title of the last one? people vs. green in Placerville 16:47:58 create these animations based on surveillance footage, how many of these involved situation like this one where you had nothing... just inserting figures? very rare that I had film to match animation, so pretty much the only one where I matched onto security camera 16:48:40 how many were figures in mid-lay or fight, in front of the jury? twice... that includes this one 16:49:01 most of them are... they're not person on person fights, most are shootings.... mostly just shootings 16:49:16 most of what you did, take bullet trajectories and place them? essentially, yes 16:49:35 taking raw data and drawing lines or putting figures in places they could've been but not like this case where it was an ongoing fluid situation like this one? some were multiple gunshots, sequence of events 16:50:07 but not physical between the two, just measuring trajectories? correct 16:50:19 what was the only time you testified in court, using the suit, involving physical fight to capture fluid situation? Greensburg 16:50:43 tell me about that one? an ex-police officer came up to vehicle and shot the person in vehicle, had to determine position of each of them... positioning when shot and their movements 16:51:11 involved distance between the two and a shooting? close approximation to each other.,... within open door of truck 16:51:30 not as in this case where you're trying to describe ongoing struggle like this one? one I'm currently working on now that is the same as that 16:51:50 for the moment, things where your testimony has been accepted for court purposes in front of jury in criminal case, sounds like this is the first time? ummm.... the suit I've used has been accepted in court in other cases 16:52:20 all the variables we just mentioned, using suit, inserting figures in court in criminal case in front of jury? with this close contact, yes 16:52:39 I think you said, only company in country using wireless motion capture for reconstruction? correct. 16:52:59 no issue if your peers are doing the same thing? correct. limited number that the company makes the suit 16:53:21 use the software, don't know the interworking, algorithms? correct 16:53:34 if the program were not working properly, unless shut down completely or giving you crazy results, wouldn't know that? I can verify if its working correctly... calibrate it 16:54:02 got raw data from station, did mapping on scene and put two people in suits? correct. out there at the scene, you told them what do to do? according to, yes 16:54:25 who were those people? two males. how big? relative size to martin and Zimmerman 16:54:38 how tall? Zimmerman was 5'8.... martin was 5'11 or 6 ft... not really that important for the person wearing the suit to be the exact size for the person doing the movement 16:55:15 did you measure these people? 5'11. how do you know... I'm 6 ft., approximately the same size... eyeball estimate? that's all that was necessary. how much did they weigh? not relevant. do you know or not? similar stature to the people I was representing. 16:55:55 how long were arms and legs? average size. did not measure them? I didn't measure their arms 16:56:09 got into poses.... suits give off pulses of energy that are documented by cameras? no that's not the way mine works... tell me how? 16 accelerometers, move your iPhone and it recognizes it.... those signals transfer to my laptop, apply to figure represented on laptop 16:56:58 they meaning what? the antennas that come in... applied to characters 16:57:11 pulses given off by accelerometers? go to two transmitters, send signal to laptop 16:57:29 each accelerometer has its own code? yes. antennas differentiate among each? yes 16:57:46 have green light to see if functioning properly.... 16:58:01 the version of this animation, final version now? yes 16:58:10 how many prior versions have there been? 2 prior versions, adjusted for more accuracy according to the witnesses 16:58:30 you adjusted based on witnesses, haven't actually read or listened to the actual testimony from witnesses? police reports... court room testimony? no 16:58:51 you changed them based upon what Zimmerman's attorneys told you people said in court? yes 16:59:03 that actually apparently was different enough from original you changed it twice? just to be more accurate, yes 16:59:20 the... understand that most of what you do to reconstruct crime scene, things mapped and known and static in their positioning.... and that is reconstructing crime scene, but adding figures and animation what are you doing? also reconstructing crime scene..... my gathering of data and put into context, sometimes when a jury receives coronary report, bullet trajectory angle, don't know how its relevant or how it applies to the scene... I take all different aspects and put into context 17:00:46 which pieces of evidence... which testimony did you incorporate into this animation? Jeremy wineberg. did he testify in court?..... 17:01:18 what actual court room testimony was incorporated? Jennifer lauer, john good, and Sonja mora.... 17:01:38 you show in this animation an initial contact by two figures, whose testimony did you use to depict that encounter? part of it is from the discovery that you gave us 17:02:05 whose testimony did you use? omara: trial or pretrial? TESTIMONY PRESENTED AT TRIAL....omara: all of Zimmerman's statements are in trial. 17:02:33 IT HAS TO BE TRIAL TESTIMONY OR EVIDENCE.... WHICH DID YOU USE IN YOUR ANIMATION? for initial contact it was Jennifer lauer's statement 17:02:59 she saw that occur? she didn't see it occur, she heard it occur 17:03:08 you are depicting it visually? correct. she didn't testify she could depict visually? just pin pointed the initial contact, in the T to the left of her condo 17:03:34 ever say it must have started there? PLEASE SHUT OFF YOUR PHONE..... IT WAS ON VIBRATE AND ITS NOT NOW 17:04:02 your indication is that she testified it must've started there? I have a question.... so for evidence which the judge was asking, police reports too? no, evidence or testimony I mean something in this court room during trial, outside of court is not evidence for now 17:04:50 omara: have to identify what's in trial.... DONT WANT YOU TO INFER.... IT WOULD BE ANYTHING HEARD BY THE JURY IN THIS COURTROOM BY WAY OF TESTIMONY OR EVIDENCE INTRODUCED... I was not allowed to watch the trial 17:05:31 if I were to ask you if this animation accurately show what's been testified, I don't know? I'm not sure what the proceedings, what went on in court... according to evidence I've received 17:06:00 not the discovery matters, not what a lawyer told you... ask you does this animation accurately show what has been testified to in this court room, you don't know? yes.... if it's not in my consultations with attorneys it would've changed, it's been adjusted to testimony in court 17:06:38 none of which you have heard or observed yourself? correct. none of which evidence you have seen yourself? none of the evidence in court, yes 17:06:55 part of this animation shows the initial encounter where the figures walk up... victim was left handed? I believe so 17:07:13 don't show anyone jumping out of bush? no evidence for that. nothing? ok 17:07:24 nobody emerging out of darkness, people just walk up to each other and stand face to face? for seconds, yes 17:07:41 animation also, do show and plot various items? correct. that's sort of in a 40 ft. area of that slope ground? correct 17:08:07 animation I saw, takes white arrow from encounter and zooms to a place 40 ft. away where we see the two figures bound up together? correct. reason for that is, teleported? direction of martin and Zimmerman consisted with witness police reports and trail of evidence going there 17:08:54 trail of evidence is just a trail, doesn't have a direction.... place where things are found doesn't have a direction until you bring it what others said? correct... reason for arrow is the one witnessed event to the next one... didn't add anything 17:09:33 the animation can't show it because you have no idea how it happened right? correct 17:09:43 get to where figures re-emerge, john good? correct. how tall is he? 6 ft. know this how? given that info from attorneys. not from anything in court but from attorneys? yes who got it from good 17:10:15 where was he standing? sliding door and the right side slides over, about a ft. out from the door... where did you get that from? good. his in court testimony? consultation with attorneys 17:10:41 where on patio he's standing, pick a spot? straight out from door, one foot. don't know which side? I didn't pick it that's where he was sitting or standing 17:11:04 in court? through consultation. before court? I'm not sure... during the trial, not sure when 17:11:19 he told you exactly where on patio? yes. how big by how big? two pillars on corner, 7.5 ft. from one side to another... tell you one ft. from one side to the other? 1 ft. from the door 17:11:54 start with something else with animation, true or not...... the animation contains artificial light? correct. properties to show things even though dark outside? correct 17:12:24 intentionally no effort to document lighting? yes 17:12:39 most important thing is seeing detail even though that's not detail that night? correct, plenty of people can testify to the lighting... accurate of that night? no 17:13:08 in your decision about where to place the people.... where to instruct those wearing the suits... done before court testimony? probably within the month before.... prior to trial proceedings? correct 17:13:38 told them based on your best estimates? based on police reports and interviews. how many interviews did you read? lauers, goods, a couple hand written reports (3) 17:14:06 like witness statements? yes. that's it? yes 17:14:14 based on those you told these people where to go and what to do? based on that and the 911 call 17:14:33 911 call by lauer? yes. she saw none of this? correct 17:14:42 and john good from whose perspective this is shown was not on phone? correct. show lauers phone call and figures doing points to that? right... pin point gun shot, but to any of the rest of it... where the figures were at during any point of the 911 call? only figure other than Zimmerman and martin is good.... WERE YOU FINISHED WITH ANSWER? no... FINISH... good specified when he came in during the 911 call on the video, when he came in how long out there and when he went back in 17:16:06 what video did good say he came in through the 911 call? based on consultation and the placement of the video 17:16:20 telling this court that john good stated exactly where he was during portions of jenna lauer's call? how long he was outside 17:16:37 matched specific audio to the actions of good and figures on ground? correct. what in court testimony or evidence you were provided that tells you john good saw two figures doing x when jenna lauer was saying y? no in court testimony. no out of court testimony either? consultation with attorneys on how long he was out there and when he came out 17:17:21 integrating visual perspective of one witness who has no idea what jenna lauer is doing? not just based on her call, but he can base it on when the gun shot went off 17:17:49 I understand when the gun shot went off, telling court prior to the gun shot that john good visual witness and lauer audio witness, match up with good is seeing? if you take 911 call from gunshot and good says he was in condo at particular time before gun shot, point when he went in... particular time of how long he was out there, back track from the gun shot and determine from those when he came out and went back in.... 17:18:57 those were not exact, they were estimations? it's an estimation on his part.... nothing more than estimation on your part? based on witness that was there who said how long he was out there and how long after the gun shot went off 17:19:36 that animation is specific, play a portion of that recording in conjunction with video or simulated video.. all based on nothing more than estimations? by the person witnessing it 17:20:09 none of that could be said to be exact or accurate to point to say for certain that's what he was seeing at the time jenna was saying a word? not specific to exact word... your animation makes it very specific, does it? yes 17:20:40 nothing in that animation that tells me the call is generally going on, that animation looks like they're going on at the same time? correct, scenario according to witness and evidence 17:21:08 which witness and evidence that came out in court? consultation with attorneys 17:21:22 no way good can say at time lauer said this I was doing this? I don't think that's what he based that..... he can't say exactly according to what she was saying 17:21:47 he was gone from visual view while lauer is still on phone... no one has clocked however many seconds? correct 17:22:06 nonetheless, animation purports to showing? yes. animation reported to be more accurate than we know the evidence can be? the purpose of him involved in animation isn't so much whether he was outside for 10 seconds vs. 7 seconds, its putting him into location and showing what he saw at that time.... but you don't know at that time because you don't know what was going on with that call? his is based on when the gun shot went off... estimation upon estimation upon estimation...... agree? only to the point that the witness.... 17:23:31 this was created but you're not pretending its accurate depiction of what went on, just estimation? according to witness that was involved 17:23:54 whom you've never heard testify? correct 17:24:37 were still treated to a view of two figures on ground? correct 17:24:46 what witness testimony are you relying on for those figures since good is no longer there? based on di maio's positioning 17:25:05 didn't hear him testify? consultation with dr... phone call last saturday? yes. after you had been deposed? correct 17:25:28 had conversation because you were asked to call him? I wasn't asked to call him... I asked about the doctor who was standing by.... not your idea after you had made another animation until you were set up with speaking with this doctor? 17:26:00 my idea from start we needed physical evidence of when shot went off 17:26:15 based on physical evidence? based on testimony, consultation from di maio's phone call. not testimony, phone call? correct 17:26:34 also told me yesterday that the one think you know for sure is the entry of the bullet wound was directly 90 degrees straight on? correct 17:26:53 position 3, tell me they're parallel to one another? horizontal to each other.... not just horizontal but parallel? yes. stacked on top like Lego logs? no there's space. space based on what? based on talking to, my conversation with di maio and inquiry into the scene to fit the characters together 17:27:49 how big is the space? between clothing or bodies... start with clothing? it varies, in my 3rd position I'm not quite sure, haven't measured... from the ground is 13-15 inches. approximately? not the purpose of final position is to know who's on top of bottom 17:28:42 purpose is to resemble the defense theory? not to resemble defense theory. some other theory? di maio's. based on 20 minute phone call? doesn't take long. 17:29:09 told you they were x inches away and so far apart? bent over Zimmerman. told you exact distances? the distance varies according to our conversation 2 inches in one spot and 4 inches from another 17:29:43 that's the distance between clothing and the shot? correct. have I asked about that space? that would depend on positioning 17:30:03 varies on estimations? yes but in this particular positioning.... purpose of positioning wasn't to get specific to measure with camera the distance between them, otherwise I would've put a camera there... just to show whose on top and bottom 17:30:42 not to be accurate as it happened but to show positions? correct 17:30:51 do you know whether that animation accurately depicts how they were that night? according to di maio that's the position and the findings 17:31:12 parallel and unknown? not completely parallel 17:31:24 so if I were to ask you, are you basing this on phone conversation or in court testimony you would say phone call? yes 17:31:56 said earlier, sometimes bullet trajectories you use metal rod? create a rod in the computer. in this case? showing bullet trajectory 17:32:17 doesn't show bullet, trajectory, the firearm or anything? not the purpose 17:32:26 but it doesn't show any of that? no 17:32:30 you were asked to leave the gun out, weren't you? no. ever told me you were? I don't believe I was told..... 17:34:36 last Wednesday 2nd deposition in the case? yes. show you here pg. 27 line 4....... 17:34:56 see that question answer? correct... it wasn't, not state I was told to leave it out it says in consultation with the attorney 17:35:16 your answer was I didn't make it on my own, just consultation with the attorneys... my input and their input 17:35:33 not the purpose of this video.... I did not put it in 17:35:43 video omits that? correct because that's not the purpose of the video..... 17:36:06 conditions in which you filmed those in the suit? recorded 17:36:14 in the day time rolling around? recorded yes 17:36:22 when you recorded them, obviously.... were these folks moving in rapid pace like fighting or getting up assuming pose? Object! while previous animations we had movement, in response to concerns we eliminated that, they're individual shots.. not relevant any more 17:37:20 first part of animation contains movement....omara: absolutely, but the part where they're moving from that point down. CLARIFY 17:37:40 reproducing and filming motion capture suits in action.... first interaction, position of bodies... 17:38:36 measured the areas from the drain boxes and sprinkler boxes to get correct position... who told you the distance? placement of them, position based on shell casing... position of his cell phone and where it was in relation to goods house 17:39:20 plug into animation? best to record on the scene to plug in elements... once created in computer adjust so its most accurate 17:40:09 didn't measure the shell casing? lay out little markers 17:40:21 took figures and put them in exact locations with shell casings, 6 ft. from porch... specific place? correct. did that based on what evidence? from goods testimony and consultation with attorneys 17:41:11 placed figures where they were in 3rd position based on your belief and knowledge and belief as to projection of shell casing not in the video? correct, relative to the position where Zimmerman was found 17:41:43 you mean martin? yes. that's position 4? correct, but 3 is relative 17:41:56 put the figures in certain position relative to shell case, no one testified about being close to shell casing, estimation on your part? correct it's just in proximity to shell casing, on the right of Zimmerman 17:42:32 on the right but 2 or 3 or 4 ft. from right, no idea how far? can't be that far from where martin ended up... proximity of evidence marker 6 has to be pretty close proximity to third position 17:43:06 I understand, getting at how high gun is off ground affects how far that casing goes? a lot of variables, not unremarkable 17:43:28 none of which you have direct evidence? just that a shell casing was found... no idea where it came from? we know approximately where it came from 17:43:51 animation shows figures in specific spot, based on animation of shell casing? based on last position and previous position and shell casing location 17:44:13 last position 4th is what happened after the defendant claimed he shot martin and martin fell off him and jumped on his back and moved his body? correct 17:44:33 no idea exactly how far that happened, just know where the body was found? close proximity to the final position 17:44:50 I understand, all happened in 40 ft. area? not giving me specifics 17:45:02 what does your animation give me those specifics? it's to one side of the shell casing, the cell phone, their previous position 17:45:26 based on series of estimations... INTERRUPT YOU, I SAW ANIMATION ONE BRIEF MOMENT, REMEMBER GENERALLY WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, BUT POSITIONS AND STUFF, HELPFUL IF YOU HAD ANIMATION UP AND HAD HIM EXPLAIN POSITIONS.... CAN WE DO THAT, IM REALLY TRYING TO FOLLOW TESTIMONY, WITHOUT LOOKING AT EACH FIGURE OR POSITION, HELPFUL IN CONJUNCTION WITH TESTIMONY 17:48:54 third position illustration? yes. yellow circles are items of evidence? correct 17:49:11 place you have these items in yellow circles is estimation? their positioned in between items of evidence 17:49:38 telling me they should be in that location as opposed to a few inches over... couldn't tell me because you're not trying to? correct.... positioning relative to each other is purpose 17:50:08 couldn't tell me what angle the persons head should be? right it wasn't still 17:50:26 still estimation? what part.... the actual positions of figures? placement according to dr. di maio. he said they looked exactly like that? their positioning. he described that degree of tilt to you? within 2 inches 17:51:01 how many inches did he say martins head was off the ground? that wasn't relevant. again an approximation? approximation of his head, yes 17:51:48 as far as these white things depicted, the sprinkler boxes? and drain boxes 17:52:07 hard metal plastic covers whatever their made of? correct 17:52:31 you also reviewed at least one statement from Zimmerman? supplied to me, not sure which one... use any to create this animation? any of animation or what part.. any part? some of the initial portion at the T intersection. that's it? yes all the rest are based on other witnesses.... 17:53:22 which statement from defendant? video walk through. only one you used? yes. 17:53:31 some reason you didn't use the others? because I had other witnesses that placed or positioned them throughout the animation 17:53:52 only used it as it relates to the beginning of this video? yes. in conjunction with lauer's testimony about that is where initial conflict took place 17:54:15 reason why you only used video as opposed to other statements? I had other witnesses that laid out scene from then on 17:54:38 talk to me about.....any types of validation done with this method for animation? 17:55:13 either the several types of software or programs used, other than buying and assuming they're working right, validation studies on them? validation on the motion capture suit. only the suit? and the 3d software I use... if some inaccuracy in any of the measurements I haven't found any 17:56:04 accurate to one measurement? accurate as you want, thousands of an inch... separate them to here? what was relevant to what I needed... measuring porch to shell casing, nothing in here required thousands of inch of accuracy 17:56:49 directed those wearing the suits, telling them to go at it with simulated fight or simply pose this way? just move according to what the witnesses wrote in police reports... what position there in, ground and pounding that type of movement and how they would naturally interact with ground and slope 17:57:40 directing a movie, go here and do this... they weren't just doing it on their own? correct based on location of evidence on scene, the type of surface they were on, what was written in police report in terms of what they were doing at that location 17:58:13 first part of that tape.... have them attempt to simulate speed of that or make that motion and you adjusted speed? swaying and reaction isn't sped up, that's actual movement 17:58:40 whether that's accurate as opposed to another estimation? it was just a movement portraying that occurrence and how somebody doing that motion 17:59:05 tell this court for certain it's an accurate depiction of motion, you'd tell me no, right? someone swinging and striking in the face.... there's other ways of doing it... other ways reconstructionist animate on computer, move arm and advance... estimating how it moves... advantage is you put the suit on and that's how the person will move 18:00:06 that's how that person that day moved with the suit on them? correct... can't tell me that's how they did it that night? just portraying one person coming up and striking another person in that matter with respect to their heights 18:00:37 understand the conclusion or depiction, this is not necessarily your opinion, but what you have attempted to create based on what you've been told my lawyers? no... it's my reconstruction based on discovery, putting the scene together, being out there with motion suits, and fine tuning it with consultation with attorneys... wasn't.... something created based on evidence and testimony and written reports not solely based on what an attorney told me to do 18:01:44 all the actual in court testimony would've been funneled through lawyers? correct 18:01:57 all action out there is estimated based upon your interpretation of what you were given in discovery? a reconstruction, yes based on evidence from discovery 18:02:20 example is the shell casing, know where it landed but not how it got there? and also their previous positioning and the shell casing REDIRECT 18:03:09 motion capture suits, next generation than those that exist before? correct. more accurate? more accurate, less clean up time, data is cleaner than other motion suits... you can also take into more environments 18:03:47 wireless? correct. 18:03:50 do you have to be in direct line of sight with computer antenna? not direct.. I could record someone from the other wall 18:04:11 new generation, the motion capture suits are accepted in your industry? yes... it's the most accurate way to capture movements 18:04:30 not much different than older motion capture suits? yes, restricted by fact they have to be recorded with camera, disadvantage is you can't see data on the arm... can see data on all accelerometers 18:05:04 hooked in to software to recreate movement in context of body? yes it captures it all 18:05:16 put 4 on a Frisbee and fly Frisbee and they would kick back information? yes. also been used, recordings of jumping out of plane and sky diving 18:05:45 in the concept of the beginning parts and modifications, ever waited until after trial is over to create your animation? it sounds senseless in the question.... animations normally done in anticipation of trial? yes. with the discovery? yes. 18:06:22 when you have that information available, go back and modify based on new information if given to you... go back and fit that in? yes 18:06:58 have you done that in the generation 3 of video you created based upon consultation with me and saying such things as? Objection! Leading! SUSTAINED. modified as we discussed? yes, whole purpose is to get as accurate as possible 18:07:32 testimonies in trial that led to modifications? yes 18:07:40 still with judge, changes in those stills based upon actual trial testimony as opposed to deposition or statement testimony? yes. take out one text and place with another? correct 18:08:11 were they're changes made to the stills based on testimony? more of a defining it better. from who? consultation with you and west. what was discussed in that? what came out in court and testimony 18:08:44 make those modifications to the stills? yes. 18:08:52 as to the... ever waited until middle of trial to begin creation of animation? no, begin as soon as I can... 18:09:10 in the information you were forwarded in this case, info from Zimmerman's various statements forwarded? yes. incorporate into your animation? yes, what his video testimony was and verify there's no conflicting or nothing that conflicts with what I used in creating the scene 18:09:57 other statements available, interview with law enforcement available? correct 18:10:09 what significance did you tend to Zimmerman's statements in assisting you creating any portion? initial conflict 18:10:28 was that specific to Zimmerman saying he was struck? yes 18:10:36 in a location approximate to location he was struck? backed up by lauer's positioning 18:10:53 in addition to lauers to place initial location? Jeremy wineberg's police report 18:11:12 other witnesses like jane surdyka who was in apartment behind the t? yes. utilized all of that? yes 18:11:29 any specific evidence found at scene to assist you in determining that was the initial altercation? yes... his flashlight key chain. 18:11:50 how did that assist you? it gives you direction... initial conflict that took place at t intersection, flashlight which goes down to the direction 18:12:20 mantei suggested this is just an estimation, look at that animation it's an estimation to initial location? correct. in conflict with any evidence in the discovery? no its not 18:12:49 have you recreate animation of a shell casing discharge and the way it spins, would you be able to create animation that accomplishes that? yes. how many spins the casing made to the ground? yes... in the computer... but do that with any gun it'll vary 18:13:39 inherent estimation variable? correct, certain scenarios you can create but not infinite... those in conflict with evidence and witness testimony those obviously can't be done that way... consistent with testimony witnesses and the scene 18:14:28 example in modifications, change... decision made not to show movement of bodies from initial to body of rest? yes. why? basically because from witness testimony we know which direction they moved in, not defined how they got from one position to the position by goods house... rather than create something, use arrow to show direction they moved in 18:15:28 decision by you as creator to avoid animation that wasn't documented by witness? yes 18:15:44 why did you use the stills.... where the information comes from to place them there? initial position came from john good.... second position came from john good 18:16:27 initial was at the T intersection? define as something else.... T intersection event, what's first event? first visual that john good had, labeled initial position 18:17:12 the first position you are speaking of..... 18:17:43 this is the t intersection event? yes 18:17:50 (animation playing) frailties in the animation, no witness to this? correct. estimation based on Zimmerman's testimony? right, no evidence or witnesses to dispute 18:18:27 that information right there, where does that come from... from Zimmerman's video walk through and Jeremy's police report., and surdyka? yes. 18:19:06 arrow instead of having figures move without witnesses? yes 18:19:17 this is what we know to be john goods sliding door? yes. based upon additional communication, his position modified? correct. how it was and why it was modified? initially had him come out from middle of sliding door, but after his refinement of his position I placed him on the left sliding door one foot out from middle... based on consultation from his specific recall? Objection! Leading! SUSTAINED 18:20:16 it was based on consultation with you and west on the feedback of good and placement from the scene.... did good look at animation and ask for modifications? yes... modifications changed here? yes 18:20:56 this is where the tape comes in? correct. 18:21:02 why the timing of the call began... was there a point that existed in lauers call and goods testimony as presented to you that was intersection that allowed you to relate the two? yes, the gun shot 18:21:39 do we have a timeline of lauers call... 45 seconds, also have a timeline of goods testimony with the lining up the gunshot in his testimony yes.... line up and give timeline for his goods actions.....? matching up that one event 18:22:35 what information did you have from good where he was when he heard the gunshot and how many seconds before that? he was on his way up to make 911 call, time we had if you go to gun shot and back up on goods timeline... gave estimate on from when he went into condo to the time the gunshot went off 18:23:18 calibrate your animation to jenna lauers phone call.... use goods estimation on how long it took him to leave the area.... Objection! SUSTAINED... IN REVIEWING MY NOTES, GOOD ALSO CALLED 911 AND WAS ON PHONE AND CONNECTED AT OR ABOUT TIME OF GUN SHOT... WAS THAT USED? WAS THAT USED IN YOUR COMPARISON WITH LAUER? no gun shot on his call. NOT BUT HIS TESTIMONY WAS HE HEARD THE GUN SHOT WHILE DIALING 911 AND I THOUGHT HE SAID HE WAS WAITING FOR THAT CALL TO CONNECT, WOULD KNOW WHEN THAT CALL CONNECTED... USE THAT AS BASIS FOR TIMELINE AND TESTIMONY OF GOOD? still waiting for it to connect. DID YOU USE THAT, CONSIDER AT ALL HIS KNOWN TIME... HEARD THE GUN SHOT WHILE DIALING, WAITING FOR CALL TO CONNECT, USE HIS 911 CONNECTION IN DOING COMPARISON? I used his estimation from how long it took him to how long it took him to make his call 18:25:42 if you were to have the time of the phone call and estimate from there the time it might take to connect would that help calibrate animation even more refined? yes. able to accomplish tonight? I wouldn't be able to re-render and re-do the animation but I can do some markings 18:26:25 if there was a few second difference, require moving audio track and animation would stay the same? yes. that's the only relation? 18:27:00 it would affect goods time that he went into the apartment 18:27:14 use of his estimation after leaving the view of the scene to 911 call is close to accurate? I DONT WANT TO INTERJECT, BUT ILL DO THAT WHEN YOU'RE DOING YOUR ARGUMENT.... ANY OBJECTION FROM THE STATE? objection for state asking questions, none whatsoever 18:28:05 ONLY TIMES HE GAVE WAS 7:15 PM WATCHING TV WITH WIFE, HEARD NOISE... OTHER TIMES HE GIVES ON CROSS WAS ENTIRE TIME HE WAS WATCHING WAS 8-10 SECONDS, DOESN'T SAY WHERE IN THAT TIME... BUT DO KNOW HE WAS DIALING AND WAITING FOR IT TO CONNECT WHEN HE HEARD THE GUN SHOT, DONT KNOW HOW LONG IN THE HOUSE BEFORE GUN SHOT, DONT KNOW WHAT 8-10 SECONDS WERE... PROBLEM IM HAVING IS THE USE OF THE LAUER 911 CALL IN CONJUNCTION WITH GOODS TESTIMONY, I DONT UNDERSTAND THAT TIMELINE 18:29:18 my understanding of testimony was that he left the area of the view of the scene, turned around grabbed his phone... WHAT TIME DID HE GO OUT THERE? RECORD IS CORRECT, THESE ARE JUST MY NOTES... BETWEEN 7:05-7:15... FIRST FAINT NOISE, COULDN'T HEAR WORDS, THEN HEARD IT AGAIN LOUDER, COULDN'T HEAR WORDS DIDN'T KNOW IF MORE THAN 1 PERSON, LOOK OUT SLIDING DOOR, CRACKED BLINDS, LIGHT ON PORCH, ONLY SEE SOMETHING OUT THERE, OPENED BLINDS AND DOOR, STEPPED OUT, VERTICAL ON GROUND, WHATS GOING ON.... NO OTHER TIME OTHER THAN WHEN HE HEARD GUN SHOT WAS WHEN HE WAS TRYING TO CONNECT, ENTIRE TIME WAS 8-10 SECONDS... BEGIN AT THE CRACK OF THE BLINDS OR STEPPING ONTO THE PORCH... LIKE TO KNOW IN THIS ANIMATION WHERE LAUERS CALL FITS INTO HIS TESTIMONY 18:31:16 call connect at 19:17:15..... we know lauer's call started at 19:16:11 and its 45 seconds into the call or at 7:16:56 that the gunshot goes off... DIFFERENT WITH TIMELINE YOU HAVE HERE IN CONNECTION WITH WHAT YOU HAVE HERE. 18:32:11 took good 15-20 seconds to get call, place it and connect it... don't have that testimony but lauers testimony that it took about 20 seconds... HE WAS WAITING FOR IT TO CONNECT.... AS I RECALL, DIALED AND WAS WAITING.... WHERES THE 8-10 HE VIEWED THIS... mantei: and the 30 second gap between the connection 18:33:15 DOESN'T HAVE TO BE EXACT, BUT WHEN TRYING TO OVERLAY CALL WITH ANIMATION HAS TO BE CLOSER TO EXACT THAN NOT CLOSER.... may be able to fix that by calling good.... HAVING THE HEARING NOW, NOT GOING TO HAVE THIS HEARING GO ON FOR DAYS AND DAYS.... I SHOULD NOT HAVE COMMENTED AND I COULD JUST RULE ON IT AFTER YOU FINISH.... NOT MAKING COMMENTS TO CALL GOOD INTO HEARING.... TRANSCRIPT AS TO IT... 18:34:24 omara: if court is accurate that goods phone call was connected at 7:17:15 and evidence from lauer the decision to make call and connection is 20-25 seconds... back it out, you are within seconds of hearing the gun shot on lauer's call... STOP YOU THERE, NOT AN ARGUMENT... FINISH WITH SHOEMAKER 18:35:17 did you utilize lauer's call and good's testimony as to when in relation he heard the gun shot? yes. that how you backed out the time that gunshot and went in reverse? correct 18:35:55 recall a time lag to calibrate back to lauer phone call? time lag between.................. 18:36:14 I'm not sure the exact number of seconds... let the judge know then what you used in determining when to start lauer tape to video? in backing it out.... going back inside is based on consultation with you and from his feedback on the video. 18:36:55 does the necessity of being absolutely accurately.... IM SORRY WHOSE FEEDBACK ON THE VIDEO? mr goods. WHEN DID THAT HAPPEN? in consultation with omara. WHAT DATE? no. AFTER TRIAL STARTED? yes... HE WAS UNDER SEQUESTRATION.... GOOD IS NOT AN EXPERT, WITNESS UNDER SEQUESTRATION... used to authenticate as it was his view... I fixed his problems with it... mantei: none of which was disclosed to the state until this point. 18:38:28 what information did you use to identify this as initial position of the two? his comment about..... this position looking at now? consultation with you from testimony 18:38:56 did you change this from true animation to still? yes just to eliminate or mitigate any random movements... just to show position according to good 18:39:29 done to make more accurate? yes. to avoid any other inaccuracies? yes 18:39:42 what was this change from first position to second? also based on consultation with you from his testimony 18:39:56 no animation at this point to avoid concerns? correct 18:40:16 how the determination was made to use third position? consultation with di maio and proximity to the prior position just seconds before... and the items of evidence around.... also include final resting place of martin? eventually 18:40:48 is the one were about to see related to third position? correct, marker 6.... one of the things that comes into play on the position... slope there, so its interaction on the slope 18:41:14 better identified by the posters? yes 18:41:24 does your program have laws in it like gravity? it does, but in this case those physical properties were provided by the suit 18:41:54 decision not to have animation? correct... just to show position 18:42:05 this is the position..... 18:42:15 this is the position that was modified based on conversation with di maio? yes. to what extent? leaning over Zimmerman to verify position.... leaning over you got from di maio based on his viewing of clothing? yes. and what he discussed was anticipated testimony? yes 18:42:59 and what is the after shot position what info for that? from mora's report of what she saw after the shot... any other information used as well? consistent with Zimmerman's video testimony 18:43:51 green circle, number 6 what is that? the location of martin. based on what? based on the marker from the total station data 18:44:14 all of these data points are from their total station? correct. you added the slope? yes 18:44:31 why does it stop at this location? mora's view... from that view point, the video uses 50 mm lens which is what a person perceives when they're looking at something 18:44:58 goes black until call is completed? yes 18:45:09 concern raised about lightning conditions... in other experience, times when you have to accomplish lighting or weather to make animation worthwhile? yes 18:45:32 tell us about it? focus on whether eye witness could really see what they saw, or weather on something... if your main focus for video, but problem with that is.... here in court room there's ambient light, hard to get accurate depiction of lighting conditions... vary on projector or printer you use... focus not on reconstructing the lighting but the detail of what was going on 18:46:29 animation created with artificiality to be viewed? correct 18:46:40 lighter than animation than it would be that night? correct 18:46:49 proper weather available to you that night? added rain. based on what? historic weather I received 18:47:07 any wind added? no wind.. it was 7 mph going NE.... would wind add or subtract to animation in this nature? no in this case 18:47:32 asked whether the software calibrates itself... how would you know it's working accurately, further insight what happens when it's not working properly? verify easily by measuring object you know size of.. 18:48:05 done that in your animations generally? yes. done in this one? yes. how? measure size of object, grab that object and chose tool and it'll give you the height and width 18:48:31 how you created the avatars are martin and Zimmerman? figures already created, didn't waste time, but adjusted certain things to match the figures and the clothing they were wearing 18:49:01 in your motion capture suit at 6'2 make it smaller to be martin at 5'11? correct. done for this? correct... even though they may not be the right size in recording you specify exact size it'll come in to the software.. make Martin 5'11? yes. and his shoes? and his hood 18:49:51 height after those additions? approximately around 6'2 18:50:05 in the still you used concerning moment of shot, would that view you had of it... gun in his right hand been visible? no. flash of gun visible from that angle? no. create another animation from ground level to show gun? correct if that was the purpose of what I was to create.... in this that wasn't the purpose... others can testify to that... just to show who was on top and who was on bottom 18:51:15 purpose limited to that? that's the main thing.... with di maio's input the person that was shot had to be the person on top... person doing shooting was on bottom 18:51:54 moment? YES 18:52:08 nothing further RECROSS 18:52:19 as far as representation.... second and third position... positions of hips change? correct 18:52:33 as far as I know that wasn't based on at least you didn't tell me it was based on witness statement or testimony? based on common sense...... 18:52:55 back up... common sense is if you kept martins figure... no way firearm would be accessible? in second position, correct 18:53:21 had to move to third position for him to access firearm? correct. didn't do that based on testimony, did that to be able to put those figures in position? in position relative to each other when di maio mentioned martin was shot..... and also accessibility 18:54:00 did di maio testify to gun? that's common sense. did he testify that? I didn't hear his testimony... asking me about something I had no knowledge about... 18:54:32 if the gun had to be accessible if we assume the figures were positioned as you placed them? correct so the gun is accessible 18:54:55 if evidence was martin figure was up at arm pits, no way accessible? not only the gun, but also the position of martin when shot. impossible... couldn't create animation to fit that scenario? with him straddling shoulders in position 3, no. wouldn't occur 18:55:35 position 3... in order to depict their angles at 90 degrees, straight in..? yes also in coroner's report.... he mentioned 90 degrees front to back but conversation with di maio he mentioned slightly from left to right 18:56:19 notes with conversation to di maio? just one. only note you took? yes. just that about the 90 degree angle? I already knew about 90 degree angle.. 18:56:43 just opened up folder and looked at something, what was that? just left to right. any other notes? just that 18:56:57 position in position 3, bodies had to be distanced apart from each other? correct. account for not just clothing differential? correct. account for length of arms involved? but you don't know what position. exactly 18:57:29 and the length of gun involved? a lot of variables I didn't portray 18:57:41 main thing accounted for are Zimmerman and martins position.... on top of each other 18:57:52 none of those variables are accounted for in that 3rd position? variables for bullet trajectory.. length of arms, distance, no accounted for, just show position of bodies? consistent with di maio's consultation 18:58:28 not accounted for in this animation? the variables you mentioned are not impossible 18:58:44 way of telling me they are not depicted in this animation? in this animation, but not expounded to point you are talking about 18:59:10 I can tell from this animation the length of distance between the gun, ground, body of martin? if you use photogrammetry, know the measurements 18:59:36 not what else I have to do... can I tell from this? figures in this are to scale... looking at scene, wonder about size of individuals involved... to scale... nothing's changed in relation to video 19:00:03 in their height? correct. and that's it? and their appearance to photos I received 19:00:16 no measurements of other parts of body? I had photos... can I tell that spacing from this animation or do I have to go into the data you have? can tell from the video..... assume we can't? not the purpose... you're looking for something that's not in the video, not the purpose. it's not there? the purpose isn't to examine bullet trajectory... to show relative position from one person to another where he had to be consistent with di maio's testimony.... 19:01:27 may have been another position? variable about 2 inches.... 19:01:39 MAY HE BE EXCUSED? yes. ANY OTHER WITNESS FROM DEFENSE? no. FROM THE STATE? no. LETS HAVE ARGUMENT 19:02:17 omara: daubert initial or applicability to the case... seems we've gone back and forth. YES WE HAVE... STATE SAID NO AND THEN YES, I DONT KNOW WHERE STATE STANDS... 19:02:49 mantei: daubert analysis and a pierce factor analysis... both apply to testimony and animation, asking for both 19:03:07 omara: under frye and daubert... generally accepted in community, not countered from the state.... admitted in courts a lot, by this very witness... never disqualified as expert upon attempt to have it in... I didn't present enormous amount of industry wide..... in his industry he stays up to date... involved since 95, past 14 years focused on this area and presented many times... never been excluded.... generally accepted, suggest it has been and is 19:04:35 this inquiry and say where it assist here today... will it help jury in consideration.... as to that I think the court needs to convinced its accurate, not perfect... based on when it was created.... most recent based on trial testimony.... up to date information available like trial testimony.... can't have trial testimony available to him... taken away frailties of the animation, no longer an animation but initial strike by martin... came solely from Zimmerman's testimony 19:06:05 WHERES THE TESTIMONY THAT MARTIN IS LEFT HANDED? injuries on the right side.....that's where it's from... never said he was right handed... hit him with left hand. WHO TESTIFIED TO THAT? Zimmerman. TESTIFIED HE WAS PUNCHED, DIDN'T SAY WHAT HAND... NOBODY TESTIFIED IT CAME FROM LEFT HANDED PUNCH AND SYBRINA SAID MARTIN WAS RIGHT HANDED...NO TESTIMONY TO SHOW IT WAS LEFT HANDED 19:07:09 rao testified and used her graphic identification and the injury came across the nose.... rao testified the punch came in this way... she said it went up..... punch came in from left to right because it hit him right here, inner right side of Zimmerman's face caused by knuckle.. no evidence to support anything else... fulton said he was right handed but that means it might be the hand you want to use first, but I don't know... hit Zimmerman on right side, that's the basis for the left strike.. 19:08:32 NOBODY COULD EVER HIT SOMEONE WITH RIGHT HAND AND CAUSE INJURY ON LEFT SIDE? 19:08:52 if he came at me with his right hand.... could be... only his testimony they were basically standing in front of each other... Zimmerman turned to him, reached down and got hit.... could Zimmerman turn all the way down this way.... yeah possibility.... more likely event was left handed throw.................. 19:10:01 that part of animation and then we took out some of the concerning parts of animation... after that it's just still photos based upon testimony... modified based upon john good saying in his testimony that it happened in certain relation to 911 call... main reason is we know we have reverse timing. 19:10:47 TALK ABOUT LAUER FOR A SECOND... SHE DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING.. SHOEMAKER TESTIFYING THAT THE TESTIMONY AT THAT T IS BASED UPON HER TESTIMONY... SHE NEVER SAID SHE SAW ANYTHING... HEARING AND SEEING.... BASED UPON HER TESTIMONY... IF WE ONLY KNOW WHAT SHE HEARD AND NOT WHAT SHE SAW, HOW DO YOU GET THAT IN? 19:11:35 lauer testified that she believed the altercation she heard, back forth and back conversation occurred outside to the left near the T.... SHE TESTIFIED THE BLINDS WERE DOWN, HUSBAND AND HER WERE HOME... WATCHING TV, ON LOVE SEAT FACING GLASS DOOR... OPEN... OBSTRUCTED BY BLINDS, HEARD VOICES, COULDN'T TELL WORDS... COMING FROM LEFT, LOUD TALKING SAME VOLUME TONE, MORE FLUSTERED THAN CONFRONTATIONAL... HEARD SCUFFLING LIKE SNEAKERS ON PAVEMENT AND GRASS... GRUNTING NOISE, AT FIRST SOUNDED LIKE PEOPLE STANDING UP AND THEN ROLLING ON GRASS, CALLED 911, 30 SECONDS TO CONNECT... DIDN'T SAY SHE SAW ANYTHING, COULD TELL VOICES WERE FROM LEFT AND IT GOT CLOSER AND LOUDER..... 19:13:24 never said she saw anything at all.. based on what she said she heard it come from.... I talk to her about the three parts of the conversation, red car blue car red car.... in my conversation with her at that point... the initial conversation beginning at T intersection.... THAT ANIMATION POSITION IS BASED ON HER TESTIMONY.. of what she heard.... CAN I SEE THAT POSITION AGAIN.... 19:15:07 in any case, she didn't see anything... in that sense the placement is an estimate on voice... in her cross she was more specific it happened in area of T intersection.... frailty of animation based upon non visual testimony 19:15:43 is it accurate.... limited to goods specific recollection 3 different positions... vertical and parallel.. on top of pathway and further down.... then he left, kept in that position, no evidence to support changes.... 19:16:32 the positioning was changed slightly and only to more like a mounting position because of di maio's anticipated testimony of how the shot went in 19:16:57 could it be like this? yes... might be like this but that as the bodies go up, can pulls straight down.... more like this.... at least di maio's testimony lessened the angle 19:17:29 that's it for the animation as to its accuracy... suggest with all the information in this case, non are direct witnesses except good... all have vantage points to offer, attempt by defense to present that as to what happened... helped the jury in how the defense says the case happened...... understanding graphically of how situation unfolded..... 19:18:31 IN PIERCE, THE STATE OR DEFENSE... THE STATE INTENDED TO INTRODUCE AND COURT RULED DEMONSTRATIVE ONLY... ANALYSIS OF THE COURT DID, DIDN'T GO BACK TO JURY, USED TO ASSIST EXPERT IN TESTIMONY 19:19:11 didn't find exclusion for evidence... state entered timeline... this court already allowed a presentation by the state in putting together various facts in a graphic way that assists the trial fact that helps their case... that's what an animation is, no reason it shouldn't be admitted into evidence... don't know that it was the ruling to suggest information can't be entered into evidence 19:20:11 criteria of piece, qualified as expert.... certainly applied to evidence in trial... not strictly limited... be consistent with evidence, can't go into matter not presented into evidence.... does it need to be perfect frame by frame rendition... needs to be accurate and fairly depict circumstances... frailties... light. explain to the jury, sure... not fatal frailty of evidence... what could've been seen from witness 19:21:37 under that context we've met frye, now daubert.... if otherwise accepted in community, court act like gatekeeper without further foundation to its acceptance and relevance we approve 19:22:05 mantei: this animation is enigma.... court cases... start with daubert line of cases 19:22:35 burdens on defense that the standards were satisfied 19:22:50 reference a 2013 decision.... second page in head note 3... daubert factors... number of them, not exhaustive or all inclusive... ones designated are 1 if the theory can be tested.... potential rate of error.... general acceptance....whether method is proper for case.... relationship to techniques of the method.... 19:24:14 he has never testified in criminal court in exactly the same thing he is trying to here... first time ever with these motion capture suits in conjunction with other things he is attempting to do... no one else with same method and equipment.... witness said I've never testified under circumstances like these before... nor do I believe that anybody else... he's kind of right 19:25:10 as it relates to this... refer to next page of opinion... quote additional cases... give you quote from case, nothing in daubert or rules to include from expert... what's going on here... gap between data of 911 call and animation... gap between testimony 19:26:06 WHAT WOULD BE DIFFERENCE IF SHOEMAKER CAME OFF STAND AND DID DRAWING OF WHAT HE CONSIDERED TO BE CRIME SCENE, COMPUTER IS ASSISTING THE DRAWING 19:26:33 this witness couldn't draw a correlation between 911 calls and the animation. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT COMPUTER PROGRAM AND SOFTWARE... NOT NECESSARILY FALLS WITHIN DAUBERT TEST... COULD MAKE THOSE DRAWINGS... ISSUE OF RELATING 911 CALL TO ANIMATION IS DIFFERENT ARGUMENT, WHAT WOULD PREVENT HAVING DEFENSE TESTIFY TO CRIME SCENE AND DRAW ON EASEL BOARD AT SAME TIME AS PLAYING TO 911 CALL 19:27:40 wouldn't have to worry about whether the drawing is purported to be accurate... this animation is substitutive evidence, not just demonstrative 19:28:07 IF COURT ALLOWED AS DEMONSTRATIVE, SAME ARGUMENT? same from different point of view.. .much higher for submitting as actual exhibit, still objecting for some of the same reason 19:28:31 OBJECTING FOR DAUBERT IF DEMONSTRATIVE? probably not.. only applies if it's going to be given to the jury.... testified to as demonstrative, witness that would do that has already testified and done it... he testified clearly on opinions to body without referencing that... other witnesses didn't need it 19:29:25 if counsel wanted to use something like this in closing argument, but as demonstrative.... is it necessary for witness to explain opinion, only ones who would need it already testified 19:29:56 his own testimony is only function told my lawyers... nothing required for witness testimony to be explained by this.... not the purpose of demonstrative exhibit... demonstrative aid meaning what, as closing argument aid... that's different... as expert using it I do have concerns with that, some daubert related.... GO AHEAD 19:30:56 no testimony offered or presented so far as would be the defenses burden for error, maintenance of standards... use for the movies.. this is a murder trial, not Casablanca.... not iron man... it's one thing to say I'm going to strap suits and create fiction... than to create fiction and say its reality 19:31:55 nothing submitted as it relates to satisfying that... further ill continue onto the court's opinion.... under head not 8... begin quoting another case...... reliability of experts method must be for specific facts at issue not general theories.................. still accurately depicts how the object behaves 19:33:15 beginning of his video.. evidence in testimony is martin is right handed, witness think he's left handed.... idea you assume based upon location on injury and body, struck by certain thing.. invalid... it is not hard for a right handed person to punch someone on the left side of their nose.... to sit here and say a punch with left hand... expert opinion without evidence is what they're talking about without validation 19:34:26 NOT A METHOD ISSUE, FACT ISSUE... INPUTTING FACTS INTO THE COMPUTER. and creating a result from those facts... COMPUTER WILL DO WHAT YOU TELL IT DO .... 19:34:56 if your method is to make assumptions not warranted by evidence. THATS THE COMPUTER......... large problem here as well 19:35:17 page 8... peer review, no testimony... error rate... no testimony, nothing involved in this case 19:35:35 page 13, reliability and relevance... talking about particular expert, that expert reiterates..... expert testimony should not........ that is again really what this is... attempt to have an expert in graphic design come in here and advance arguments presented by defense.... or from 20 minute phone call.... testimony today is not what witness expected it to be 19:36:50 experts reiterate arguments, positions, space... those are arguments no eye witness testimony... arguments advanced by council.... question for lay people on this jury, not product of expert testimony 19:37:37 move to third case... DA opinion from Louisiana... cases that discuss factors we have here.... page 5 of the copy demonstration videos.... talking about experts who went out and conducted filmed experiment and tried to match it closely.... further down the line, court concludes it will lead and confuse the jury.... 19:39:08 idea you don't have to be exact is correct... contemporaneous movie made, nothing advanced as demonstrative aid... that's not really the standard if what you got is not accurate enough.... not enough to say I'm in the vicinity, in proximity.. they are figures in this case, their hips and length of space between them... intentional assumptions and placed in animation.. done with purpose... not based on testimony... arguments as evidence 19:40:18 next case is salvatore case... page 5 of that opinion... talking about attempted video accident reconstruction, witness themselves.... note 7.... no engineer in engineering, not qualified 19:41:07 heard this witness has testified as accident reconstructions, actual reconstructions within crime scene are two very different things... when this witness has testified before, analyze bullet trajectories... not I put people on positions based on other witnesses 19:41:56 down to bottom, higher threshold for admissibility to recreate accident... expert opinion referenced in videos are not shoemakers.. only dr. di maio who didn't need it, reference it... testified without it 19:42:33 demonstrative evidence.... courts generally require proponent to establish similar conditions... does not appear to recreate accident..... this is being purported to be a crime scene or events taking place.. higher standard applies 19:43:17 lighting... start with the more obvious depiction of visuals from another witness who described general theory 19:43:42 that's not substantial similarity with actual conditions... idea that we have no idea how we get from the T doesn't explain that this is substantial similar condition... says I don't know 19:44:16 even as it relates to di maios testimony, his opinion was at the moment of gunshot he believed defendants statement was consistent with the evidence, not that it is how it happened or only way it could happen... just consistent 19:44:54 shoemaker is taking di maio's statement to him about the statement defendant he didn't use in connection to position 3 at all... only used defendants testimony to the first punch... that's his testimony 19:45:25 not the standard for admissibility 19:45:32 further and I think as it relates to daubert, if evidence admitted as substantive or demonstrative... court should fashion significant admonishment to jury along the lines of this is not a pretended to be depiction of events.. just scenario... not just how it happened, nor should they be confused by any indication 19:46:33 just stills by shoemaker showing location of physical evidence without figures.... no problem... add figures and depict things that are unknown.... hips in certain position because of his common sense without evidence. THATS WHERE, OMARA THE PURPOSE OF THE INTRODUCTION OF THIS ANIMATION... I DONT SEE WHERE ITS ASSISTING AN EXPERT IN TESTIFYING. omara: animation itself, just as state took distillation in a format... that's what this is, substantive evidence and puts together in a way that helps jury... Zimmerman, rao testimony in context rather than the timeline... YOUR ANIMATION IS MORE THAN A TIMELINE..... ITS DEPICTING POSITIONS BASED UPON.... john good's testimony.... in effect, compare to one of the witnesses mounting me, was that how martin mounted, no but it's an example... moras prance around court room...NOT TAKING THAT BACK INTO JURY ROOM TO PLAY OVER AND OVER AGAIN AS TO A RECREATION.... do have states compound exhibit..... taking distilled down... DID NOT INTERJECT ANIMATION FIGURES INTO THAT TIMELINE AS TO WHAT WAS HAPPENING WITH TWO INDIVIDUALS IN THOSE CALLS 19:50:03 ANIMATIONS DEPICTING MORE THAN THAT... BASED ON SHOEMAKERS COMMON SENSE, BASED ON ASSUMPTION THAT HE HIT ZIMMERMAN WITH LEFT HAND, BASED ON PHONE CALL WITH DI MAIO THAT WAS NO HIS TESTIMONY IN COURT.... DI MAIO TESTIFIED THAT MARTINS POSITION COULD'VE BEEN AT DIFFERENT ANGLES.... SO I NEED YOU TO RESPOND TO THAT 19:50:56 could've been pulled him back and he said the shirt wouldn't line up... RIONDA ASKED HIM GIVEN FACT THAT MARTINS HOODY WAS WET AND HAD A FULL CAN OF IN HIS POCKET MAY DETERMINE POSITION OF HIS BODY... his response said it had to be pulled away 2-4 inches.... could've been backing away and grabbed him and shot him.. he said it would pull to one side and holes wouldn't match up any more...only one scenario.... to answer your question, I would suggest a minimum demonstrative tool for me to show evidence.... that's a given that I could use in demonstrative evidence in this argument, substantive evidence is a distillation of known facts..... he can contest its left hand shot, doesn't mean... they could've brought in an animation..... her testimony was her presentation... 19:53:24 THAT DOESN'T GO BACK TO JURY ROOM TO PLAY OVER AND OVER AGAIN.. THATS WHAT I GRAPPLE WITH... WHATEVER WITNESSED TESTIFIED TO AND INSTRUCTION TO BELIEVABILITY AND THEY DISCUSS THAT, BUT AN ANIMATION THAT GOES BACK THAT THEY PLAY OVER AND OVER AGAIN.... GIVES WEIGHT TO SOMETHING THIS COURT IS NOT SURE COMPORTS WITH EVIDENCE PRESENTED IN TRIAL 19:54:16 proper distillation of evidence.... CASE LAW TO PROVIDE ME? no... rely on pierce.... cite back to courts presented by state, once determined its similar to evidence presented it is admissible 19:54:53 BOTH SIDES AGREEING PIERCE IS ONLY CASE IN FLORIDA AS IT RELATES TO COMPUTER ANIMATION. mantei: I gave another, pierce is only criminal 19:55:21 WHEN I LOOK AT PIERCE CASE... DEMONSTRATIVE CASE FOR EXPERTS OPINION... RULED AS DEMONSTRATIVE ONLY, DID IN THAT CASE.... THEY CITED TO... WHEN RESULTS USEFUL ACCEPTED WHEN CONFUSING SHOULD BE REJECTED 19:56:17 THAT THE PRESENTATION BE RELEVANT, AND REFLECT ORAL TESTIMONY OFFERED.... 19:56:32 ANY OTHER CASES... ILL READ YOUR CASES... NO OTHER BY THE DEFENSE, I UNDERSTAND BOTH ARGUMENTS.... 19:56:56 mantei: shoemaker didn't go over that..... can't compare this to the timeline... the timeline actually testified to a witness... underlying data are likewise in evidence... none of underlying data that shoemaker relies on is in front of this jury other than 911 call 19:57:50 the map of crime scene isn't what he's testifying, it's the figures and their movement... as far as the pullback... di maios testimony could've been in a different position he said was absolutely possible 19:58:40 the pierce case makes pretty clear detective badcock would be equivalent of di maio, necessary for his interpretation... not shoemaker.. if there was any witness who could use this as demonstrative was di maio and he didn't need it 19:59:29 closing remark of that... court can't use discretion to decide and nevertheless admit the evidence... has to be accurate, not precise... but accurate.... calls made to him, police report, testimony from those who have not testified... built into animation, hasn't heard a word of court testimony... everything he's got has been filtered through arguments 20:00:35 LIGHTS AUTOMATICALLY GO OUT AT A CERTAIN TIME, IS THERE A WAY WE CAN GET THEM BACK ON..... 20:00:56 I'M GOING TO RESERVE RULING ON THIS, LET YOU KNOW WHEN WE RECONVENE... PROFFERING OF CONNOR TESTIMONY..... IF HE TESTIFIES TO WHAT WAS FOUND ON MARTINS PHONE I CAN JUST LOOK AT WHAT YOURE LOOKING WITHOUT HAVING TO PROFFER... THAT WHAT HES GOING TO BE CALLED FOR? TEXT MESSAGES, VIDEOS OR PICTURES OFF OF MARTINS PHONE. omara: correct. DONT NEED TO HEAR PROFFER TESTIMONY, JUST SEE THE PICTURES. west: need proffer. NO JUST A PROFFER OF PICTURES YOUR SEEKING 20:02:12 for him to say how he found the information. JUST WHAT HE FOUND ON THE PHONE, HOW HE FOUND IT IS NOT RELEVANT... TRYING TO INTRODUCE PHOTOS, EMAILS OR TEXTS THATS WHAT I NEED TO LOOK AT.... WHAT ARE YOU SEEKING TO INTRODUCE BY WAY OF EVIDENCE THROUGH CONNOR. I can outline it... WELL YOU HAVE IT IN YOUR HAND ID LIKE TO SEE IT... 20:03:05 several pieces of information obtained from his phone... issue is ongoing because of the discovery... report from state on June 4th... still trying to process that... information provided in discovery in late February, Connor able to do some of the extracting... two main issues.... several conversations by martin attempting to require firearm. AUDIO OR WRITTEN? text messages 20:04:10 IF ITS VERBAL VOICE THAT MAY NOT BE AUTHENTICATION ISSUE, IF TEXT MESSAGE IT IS AUTHENTICATION. I need Connor to talk about authentication 20:04:33 the fighting issue... martins text messages of being in fight, effects of being in fight, lost first, won second and third wasn't done with him yet... confirming he was in the fight and explaining he got more hits in the first round cause he had me on the ground and I couldn't do anything... Facebook post from martin's half-brother Demetrius asking trayvon when you gonna teach me how to fight 20:05:34 first text I was paraphrasing, levandria... in a hidden file in martins phone... password accessible only in addition to password required... second level of access 20:06:07 one came from hidden texts, one was hidden facebook post, and another from cellbrite extraction report from michael french... offer his testimony to explain his access to phone to show only martin could have created the texts or engaged.... 20:06:46 OK STATE? 20:06:51 MARK AS COMPOSITE NN FOR IDENTIFICATION............................ 20:07:31 west: also can authenticate another way if court wants me to proffer that as well. PLEASE. 20:09:01 DID YOU HAVE SOME OTHERS, CONNOR CV MARKED AS OO, WAS NN THE THREE SHEETS YOU WANT INTRODUCED FOR CONNOR. that's what relates to the fighting and then other exhibits that relate to the gun... I'd like to deal with fighting issue... that's the crux of this, let me assemble the other material on the gun... consists of pictures from his phone taken by that phone show a hand wrapped around a firearm, provide that... series of conversations that occur around Feb. 18th just before coming to Sanford where he has several conversations about acquiring firearm 20:10:26 MR GUY ADDRESS NN? west: I can provide him another copy, he has this information, we got it from him... 20:10:56 guy: right back where we started.... if they don't know each other, inadmissible... no idea who this person is, not reputation evidence.... furthermore in addition to authentication issue how do we know what they're talking about, verbal or slap fight... 20:11:48 it would do nothing to aid this jury, doesn't tell us about martin, not about what Zimmerman knew of martin... not evidence they knew each other... specific evidence is inadmissible.... 20:12:25 guy: its inadmissible as to who sent it, what it's about... no context to them, pulled out at certain times, no conversations surrounding them... misleading and shouldn't be allowed... provided court case to you 20:13:09 that's all I have regarding text.... 20:13:15 FURTHER ARGUMENT FOR TEXT? yes... I have substantial argument... proffer Connors testimony. AS LONG AS I DONT GO INTO LONG PROFFER ABOUT HIS QUALIFICATIONS AND BACKGROUND, KEEP IT TO JUST TO WHERE HE FOUND THIS FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE PROFFER, LIMIT TO THAT I WILL ALLOW 20:14:00 also and we can ask Connor to testify, his qualifications are important... I HAVE THAT IN A CV...HE GOT FROM A PLACE THAT WAS SECOND LEVEL ACCESS, WHAT THE COURT MEANS BY THAT I WILL HEAR THAT PROFFER... DONT NEED TO GO INTO QUALIFICATIONS.... 20:14:38 other issue to point out is that guys argument completely misses the point... not reputation evidence... directly relates to the physical abilities.... his knowledge of fighting, participated in fight, knew what it's like to be on the bottom... NOT GOING TO TESTIFY WHATS INTENDED BY THIS, JUST THAT HE FOUND IT... guys argument is misleading and to its admissibility of it legally. HEAR THE LIMITED PROFFER FROM CONNOR, NOT THE ARGUMENTS.... GET MR CONNOR IN HERE AND TAKE A STEP AT A TIME..... 20:16:40 relates to gun matters as well... THAT'LL BE PP 20:16:46 (sworn in) 20:17:44 west: another exhibit I'll ask him to speak with briefly as well.. photos that were found on the phone... ALRIGHT DEFENSE COMPOSITE QQ 20:18:43 west: evening. name? richard Connor... 20:18:59 prior to you taking the stand, we marked a copy of your CV... admitted into evidence? would I so move? PROFFER... save time for court to review it... ILL REVIEW AS COMPOSITE, MARKED AS EVIDENCE IT GOES BACK TO JURY, HAVEN'T MADE DETERMINATION IF HES GOING TO TESTIFY.... admitted for this proffer... THAN NOT MARKED AS DOUBLE N... MARKED AS 1 FOR THIS HEARING... I have another copy, suggesting that jury doesn't get for identification.... ILL HAVE TO REMARK UNLESS YOU HAVE ANOTHER ONE... I can retrieve that one and substitute another.... CLERK CAN MARK THAT AS 1 FOR THIS PROFFER 20:20:48 does your CV describe your background and training in computer forensics? yes 20:21:08 training in computer examiner and computer analysis, licensed attorney? yes 20:21:20 testified as expert? yes... 20:21:33 are some of those set out in CV? yes 20:21:42 are you certified by cellbrite? yes. I went to their training 20:21:55 familiar with most recent software program is for cell phone analysis? yes. licensed copy for private sector? yes 20:22:14 use that software to analyze martins phone? yes 20:22:25 at some point in the discovery process did you receive what's been known as bin file? several bin files... 20:22:43 one you received in late February, represented to be data dump? yes I believe Feb. 23rd 20:22:57 opportunity to use you cell brite software and offers available to analyze data? yes 20:23:20 able to ID texts, facebook messages that were hidden from phone? yes 20:23:32 describe what your process was so far as cell bright technology? when you load the data into cell brite physical software, runs scripts and analyzes that... contact list and text messages, emails, pictures, videos.... songs and music... analyzed data section of the report 20:24:23 did you.... when you began process, opportunity to look at report that FDLE had done? yes. 20:24:41 when you did own analysis, indicate there may be additional information? yes 20:24:54 what did you do then with the bin file and other resources to try to capture or identify information? report is only what cell bright reads... bin file is the physical image of phones data... all data and files and free space... loaded into software and examine any file that's from the phone whether or not cellbrite able to analyze it 20:25:49 something that struck you when analyzing bin file and report? yes. one of the first things I did with the report... for each section it lists how many items are there, loaded it into cell bright to see if they matches... off by about 600 pictures... I had 600 more than FDLE report did 20:26:34 additional information not part of the report? yes. what did you do to find them? figure out which were different and if located in same areas 20:26:56 comparing FDLE report with preliminary cellbrite? correct. did it include updated report to the previously provided? at some point there was a second report... late February early march... different than first one, contain the 600 photos? no 20:27:46 have additional data you were able to find? yes. when? first week of June 20:27:55 next time that report was updated? yes 20:28:02 talk about what you did then to identify data that was on the phone.... able to extract additional information by own application? talking in general or pictures..... 20:28:24 however you choose, once you realize more data than in the report, what did you do to try and find it? a couple things... keyword searches.... against bin files... look through report, list the databases on the phone to see what app they belonged to 20:29:06 able to identify additional photos? yes. photos include pictures of hand gun? yes. hand wrapped around grip? yes 20:29:26 able to determine if the pictures were taken by that phone? yes. were they? yes they were. 20:30:06 this is more than just pictures, generally describe what that exhibit consists of? there are several text message exchanges where martin was trying to purchase or sell hand gun... two separate pictures, hand gun on table or something and another where it's in somebody's hand 20:30:48 able to find text on the phone? yes. were some deleted? yes. able to recover deleted texts? marked as deleted but data still on the phone 20:31:16 another version still on phone intact 20:31:23 picture on phone and want to delete it, purposeful? Objection! Speculation! SUSTAINED 20:31:38 something by accident or as result of the phone... require the operator to do something? usually yes... explain? normally pictures will stay on device until deleted or removed.. text messages depends on the phone will often stay on device until deleted or removed... device goes bad and memory card goes bad... usually user initiated 20:32:31 determine as expert whether this was user accident or not? yes. were some deleted and scattered within others that weren't? correct 20:32:54 your opinion these deleted messages were act of person on the phone? Objection! Speculation! SUSTAINED. COULD BE DELETED BY ANYBODY 20:33:19 asking if deleted by action someone took? yes. deleted by someone on purpose? yes 20:33:45 were you able to determine if the phone had passcode? yes. did it? yes. what does that mean? cant access data unless you know the passcode... if you don't can you operate phone? emergency call but not anything else 20:34:22 passcode has to be re-entered? may be 10 minutes and increase each time you put in wrong passcode 20:34:43 put in right passcode, put phone down and is idled after several minutes have to reenter code? yes. any reason that's not the case? I believe it did have time-out period 20:35:16 didn't have a time-out, only enter passcode once and it would remain open forever? until manually locked or restarted... defeat purpose of passcode? yes 20:35:38 that set of texts that relate to purchasing firearm? 20:35:51 identifiers on these texts who sent them and whether or not to trayvon or by trayvon? state which folder they are in, whether incoming or outgoing, date and time, status of message if read or sent... content of message and the status of message 20:36:35 indicated on extraction reports? yes 20:36:40 conversation between martins phone and fulton about revolver? yes... clustered in date? yes. when? between February 18th and 22nd 2012... how many separate collections? several, 1, 2, 3, 4... at least 4... 20:37:39 with different people? yes. identify who they are from the phone? yes... qua fulton, two others involved in addition to martin- spoonhead zack and jay, another set of conversations with another person named ron, person named dario and another about a gun with diamond... that's it... and conversation with fruit 20:38:45 all between February 18th and 22nd 2012? yes 20:38:54 were there some texts on the phone where martin was talking about coming to Sanford? yes. when he was coming to Sanford based on those? Feb. 20-21st 20:39:15 he was killed on Feb. 26th? correct 20:39:26 marked defendants QQ for proffer...... based upon information you retrieved? yes... appears to be of martin, resided on the cell phone. self-taken picture? yes. 20:40:02 taken with that same phone you analyzed? not sure... no meta data that identifies if photo was taken with camera on that phone 20:40:29 within picture file is data about the picture.... make and model of camera, date and time, gps coordinates... meta date 20:40:48 able from that data to learn more about the circumstances and device it was taken? where it exists yes... appears to be martin based on other photos you've seen? yes 20:41:26 were you also able to extract a series of text messages and other postings that relate to martin being in a fight? yes. how able to recover data that related to that? there was data on the phone, not parced or analyzed by cell bright software... when I went and manually looked at database, contained text messages... looked at database associated.... created by android app, super android spc I think.... designed to hide text messages 20:42:39 texts that were subject to his application were not put into main database, placed into another one only accessible to super android application, not parced by cell bright 20:43:12 how did that get your attention? there were a couple things.. don't remember exact order, running key word searches getting hits what looked like text messages not in parced text messages... the spc database was listed in databases, but no parced data in report....got to look at it and it contained texts 20:44:17 something you were piecing together more on phone than what was provided? yes... keep in mind, originally got data certain things I was asked to look at.... this was one of them 20:44:45 something else going on, hidden app... familiar with existence of those? yes I knew those apps existed 20:44:59 what did you do to find that app on this phone? probably describe what I mean by hidden, hidden by user of the phone unless you know the app and the code... have to pull up app put in passcode and view those text messages... hidden from user unless you know how to get them.... not hidden once I get them.... access and view database I can see the data in full text 20:45:57 passcode necessary to unlock the phone and a second to enter in this application? correct. 20:46:13 in order to get access to texts, need to know both passcodes? Objection! Leading! SUSTAINED... leeway to stay on track? ill rephrase 20:46:37 how many passcodes would it take to get access if someone handed the phone? at least 2. 20:47:16 maybe get lucky finding the app 20:47:24 have to figure out the first passcode and then another hidden app that had text messages and the passcode for that application? yes. able to send and receive texts? yes able to see texts hidden by that application and respond 20:48:02 gotten through those levels they could respond to the messages? yes, have access to the users would have 20:48:21 looking at context in regular texting and hiding files, consider whether someone else was using this phone to send and delete messages? that's always something we look for an keep in back of our mind, something I took into consideration 20:48:57 texts relating to gun and fighting, contained within larger conversation with same person? yes 20:49:11 appear to indicate relationship between that person and martin? yes 20:49:22 I'm losing track of my thinking here.... but were you able to collect the various texts from whatever source related to firearms and assemble them in exhibit before you? yes that's what I did 20:49:55 marked as NN..... 20:50:16 familiar with exhibit? yes. what is it? composite of data relating to fights 20:50:26 did all of that come from martins phone? yes. extract in some fashion or another? yes 20:50:36 mentioned earlier there was database accessible to hidden app as opposed through cell bright? accessing by user or by me... user has to go through special app and special password... cellbrite doesn't parce or analyze, but it's there and I can analyze and view it 20:51:15 looking at first page of NN, the header at the top has identifier as SPC log sorted by person......? I created this spread sheet comes off the phone.... a database in this case... consists of several tables, log table.... log of text messages, several other tables... contact or name table have the names of the persons he was texting.... in this is presented to me in cell brite software in a table.. use that for spread sheet, what I did.... 20:52:39 table in database, log table and excel extension of the file 20:52:53 longer conversation with lavandria, extract conversation about fight? yes... other messages going back and forth, extracting these specifically because they related to a fight... show number of levandria? yes. this from martins phone? yes. which of the two sent and which received? yes 20:53:37 able to identify date and time these messages were sent? yes 20:53:56 what is the first line in your exhibit? wyd? which is what you doing 20:54:29 who sent that? levandria. did martin responded? tired and sore. 20:54:39 response? me too but what happened to you. 20:54:55 when levandria said that what did martin say? fight. y?! cuz man that nigga snitched on me. she said? they y u always fightin u got suspended... he said? nah we ducked after school 20:55:42 response? I lost first round :( but won second and third. 20:55:55 and then repeat that with a different smile face? I lost first, but won the second and third. oh so it was three rounds? at least you won, but you need a stop fighting bay for real 20:56:39 did he respond? yes. what did he say? nah I'm not done with fool gonna have to see me again. what did she say? nah bay you aint gonna be satisfied until you get suspended... didn't breed enough for me, only nose 20:57:26 objection! SUSTAIN. seen typos before in phone analysis? the word breed does not make sense and is not intended... bleed... 20:57:52 ask to be stricken! west: this is a proffer unless the court hasn't ruled... RULED ON OBJECTION TO SPECULATION, WHATS WRITTEN THERE IS WRITTEN THERE... WHAT HE BELIEVES MAY MAKE SENSE, BUT MAYBE NOT THE AUTHOR OF IT 20:58:27 in your training and experience, occasion to try to make sense out of text messages or computer messages that weren't accurate from spelling? Objection! Relevance! OVERRULED.... yes 20:59:02 in context of this text sequence as you try to sort data, does the word breed as opposed to bleed make sense? put in context with the rest of the message, not enough and only nose... I think talking about bleeding from nose. Objection! Speculation! SUSTAINED 20:59:55 were you able to find another conversation around that time that referenced that fight? yes. to whom? michael suave french. do you know that person from information on the phone? yes 21:00:31 what is the conversation martin and french had? martin said yeah cause he got more hits, had me on ground and I couldn't do nothing... he responded dang bro 21:01:07 also find reference to fighting by relative? yes. who? demetrius martin... where was that located or posted? on phone in facebook database... FB.DB... inside database there are different tables... in mailbox thread table in the database of the phone... what did the message say? from demetrius, when you gonna teach me how to fight 21:02:15 other information his relationship with martin? some kind of brother, half-brother... sharing some father... what makes you think that? another message from demetrius asking trayvon if dad had a facebook page 21:02:54 based upon context they were talking about common parent? yes 21:03:16 other references to fighting or questions... other discussions in the context of your review of text messages where they discussed fighting? yes.. didn't extract those because you didn't find related to event? correct or because I could not put in date time or who sent them 21:03:56 I would move the marked exhibits into evidence. HAVE TO TAKE THEM OUT OF WHERE THEY'VE BEEN MARKED IN THE CASE.... NN AS 2, PP AS 3, AND QQ AS 4 TO THIS PROFFER 21:04:39 in summary Connor, identifying the difference places on the phone where you found information, overall scope reflected in reports..... 21:05:03 some information in report that you were able to verify in bin file? yes. additional info you were able to extract, not contained in any FDLE report prior to June 4th? correct. information in this file that you were able to extract from applications that were hidden? Object! Leading! Asked and Answered! JURYS NOT HERE, ITS FINE 21:05:55 had to download software and review what was otherwise not visible? no it was not parced or analyzed by cell bright, manually identify it wasn't on the phone.. access to data.... 21:06:26 some of that report is reflected in pages before you? correct. as well as information extracted from it? correct... and from bin file? yes. picture of martin, profile picture and picture of hand gun with the hand? yes 21:06:59 were the pictures of the hand gun with the hand taken by his phone? yes they were CROSS 21:07:28 mantei: when did you notify defense council about additional information? soon after I found it... late februaryish? or early march 21:07:53 aware of who's name the phone was in? the mother's maybe.... 21:08:04 not trayvon martins? his name was not on bill or account 21:08:12 this was a phone on family account, one of several? correct. 21:08:20 can you tell me... referenced this discussion over a gun.... buy or sell? no the different conversations I identified.. in each of them or most of them martin was looking to purchase.. in one there was a discussion about someone else's gun and in last one someone was trying to buy one from martin. a 22? several different calibers. obviously none he had on him? that's what I've heard 21:09:18 as far as this discussions about fighting... in any of them is...... in any of discussions, who was operating keypad? I was not there when messages were not there, however when you view 8000 or 9000 texts on a phone, get a flavor or cadence for the people.... I think I can get a pretty good idea whether it's the same person or not 21:10:16 long way you would like to think so but can't tell me for sure? all appear to be by the same person 21:10:31 profile picture... 3 separate dates...? no that's the data from the phone, on their 3 times... all created on 11-15 2011? probably yes 21:10:52 same picture just repeated? correct 21:11:00 profile picture nothing to do with hands and guns, just torso and face shot? correct 21:11:13 not posted in connection with either frights or guns? posted in terms of text messages correct 21:11:28 deletion can be accomplished by anyone who knew the phone and codes? yes. not there to tell me who did any of that? I was not there when.... 21:11:55 when were they accomplished, in mass or little by little? I can't tell that 21:12:05 hypothetical, if a person parent or sibling had discovered stuff in phone and deleted it, couldn't tell me if done all at once or deleted as he went along? I can give you my opinion 21:12:41 there's nothing in the data that tells when a text was deleted, but certain ones are and certain ones aren't... look for patterns. when it was done you can't tell me? correct. and by whom, I know you have a suspicion? I wasn't there when it was deleted 21:13:16 material in the phone, any reason to suspect Zimmerman knew about it? I don't know... no communications to anyone called Zimmerman? no REDIRECT 21:13:42 mass deletion of texts, were texts deleted related to certain subjects? and people.... texts from certain people were deleted... 21:14:01 texts about drugs and drug use? yes. about the guns? yes 21:14:13 anything that would indicate to you someone other than martin got a hold of this phone and deleted messages at once? no. 21:14:29 images of porn on phone that were not deleted? Object! Beyond Scope SUSTAINED 21:14:47 I submit if some family member got a hold of phone they wouldn't have left porn on it... mantei: doesn't have to do with scope of proffer.. 21:15:17 explain that? pictures of the gun were hidden also on the phone by a separate application, created a folder in a program file with french language... renamed extension... jpg.... also changed extension from .jpg to .dpm.... this app moved them and hid them and was password protected, not deleted off the phone..... whoever using phone would have to have the code and get to the items 21:16:43 separate hidden applications? yes. there were 2 hidden apps? yes. 21:16:54 texts in one and pictures of gun in another? yes 21:17:03 casual user wouldn't see those pictures unless they knew how to access? exactly 21:17:17 not appear to be a picture? correct, just browsing content.. they'd be bin files not picture files 21:17:33 MAY HE BE EXCUSED? yes. THANK YOU, YOU'RE EXCUSED 21:17:51 TESTIMONIES BEEN PROFFERED, I'LL HEAR ARGUMENTS 21:18:00 west: additional evidence to proffer..... Rachel jeantel was also deposed over two days.... while she had denied martin talked with her about fighting in deposition in April she acknowledged conversation with martin that he told her he was in a fight and told her he knew how to fight and was in one that he won... only renew acquaintance with him after a number of years.... conversation of fights took place in weeks prior to martin traveling to Sanford 21:19:27 closes loop on authentication. PROFER FOR PURPOSE OF CONNORS TESTIMONY OR ANOTHER ISSUED IN FRONT OF JURY.... court already raised question of authentication. IS IT FOR PURPOSES OF THIS HEARING OR THE TRIAL? no for this 21:22:11 DEFENDANTS EXHIBIT #5 FOR PURPOSES OF THIS HEARING... #5 is transcript? YES... I HAVE OTHER EXHIBITS HERE, NOT MARKED BY LISA... READY FOR ARGUMENT 21:22:54 west: before I forget, Zimmerman has 10:00 curfew? EXTENDED FOR 30 MINUTES AFTER COURT IS CONCLUDED 21:23:14 argument part of this... asking Connor be allowed to testify for the fighting and the gun and discussions of the gun... I'm not ready tonight to make argument why gun I DONT HAVE THE GUN, THREE PICTURES OF THE PROFILE OF MARTIN.. exhibit marked with discussion of gun. RIGHT BUT I DONT HAVE THE PICTURES OF THE GUN... ONLY PARTS OF THIS EXHIBIT, NO GUN... does the court have exhibit referencing the gun? 21:24:37 EXHIBIT #3 IS EXTRACTION REPORT.... OH YES HERE IS IT, WELL LETS SEE IF PICTURES ARE ATTACHED... HERE THEY ARE 21:25:06 I don't want to address that tonight, hour is late... not saying Connor can testify to the gun and texts... not directly related to facts of the case, more aggressive.. supporting violent tendency... WHAT EVIDENCE CODE ARE YOU SEEKING? most squarely admissible under, well no.. different depending on what parts of exhibit... picture of martin is predicate to martin on his phone... shows his physique... gun pictures and discussion of buying gun is not directly related to the fighting issue... that central core... two legal grounds 90.803... exception to the hearsay prohibition against hearsay....relates to physical condition 21:27:00 in primary text with levandria, martin asked how he's doing and he's tired and sore... fight he was in and he won.. WHAT EVIDENCE CODE? 90.803. text messages regarding fighting 90.803... and also under legal authority chambers vs. Mississippi... not the firearm pictures yet, not connected yet with evidence before the jury 21:27:57 concentrate on fighting and its admissible under several theories, not as reputation theory but under 90.803... reflecting physical condition.... at the time martin was in the fight and explains how he won the fight... losing first round because opponent was on top of him much like testimony he rendered Zimmerman in this case. SEEKING UNDER 90.803, SUB 3? yes.. OK GO AHEAD 21:29:02 talks about having been involved in orchestrated fight... 3 rounds.... talks about how he won second and third and won the fight... also able to hit in the nose and make them bleed, not satisfied with amount of blood... not done yet with this guy... cautioned he should quit doing this 21:29:55 corroborated by conversation with michael french about this event.... we know those are connected in time and content... helping toward authentication that those were his words he communicated with people regularly 21:30:30 conversations with them on other subjects 21:30:40 also a facebook post by martins younger brother demetrius, martin has several children.... one is 2-3 years younger is demetrius martin 21:31:08 we have more loop being closed... demetrius asked trayvon when he was going to teach him how to fight... though he knew how to fight enough to ask for his training 21:31:31 jeantel deposition, told her he had been in a fight... had won the fight, know that from jeantel who knows his voice and personally and testified it was martin who told her about a fight he won 21:31:57 strong circumstantial evidence if not clear evidence... his words being sent to his friends about a fight he was proud he won, draw blood from man's noise and prevail despite difficult first round 21:32:27 connected don'ts on authenticating this.... relevant because physical abilities is relevant... jury instruction says that... this jury decide his physical capabilities and knowledge.. experience in fights having been put in position of vulnerability... in that fight, orchestrated 3 round fight.... when he lost the first round and he couldn't get up there was other rounds...... 21:33:40 been in fight, knew how to fight... knew what Zimmerman would experience when he was on top of him because similar to past 21:33:55 relevant because state took efforts to make that relevant for Zimmerman... physician's assistant folgate.... when Zimmerman spoke with her about his exercise regimen... worked out aerobically with MMA... big deal of that... experience as MMA based upon medical errors from Altamonte physician... relevant in states case, likewise in our case... jury makes that decision 21:34:59 because I think this information shows existence of martins mental state after this event occurred.... tired and sore admissible under 90.803 at time of event... not suggesting that statement was him talking about Feb. 2012, but his thinking and emotional condition at this time 21:35:47 clearly compelling evidence in support of Zimmerman's self-defense claim... testimony is martin sucker punched him... able to get him onto ground where he was mounted... know from testimony, mounting is straddling around hips, vulnerable position... limited acts one can do unless skilled to get out from under it.... know good said he saw martin mounted MMA style... know from physical evidence frankly especially testimony corroborates that... shot was fired from ground up... corroborates and is consistent with what good observed when he went out to investigate... compelling evidence and highly relevant and admissible under 90.803 21:37:32 also relevant because not to admit it would violate articles and 5th 6th amendments... confront witnesses and due process 21:38:07 this theory, constitutional principle of preservation is discussed in chambers vs. miss..... what's to be taken from that decision, states hearsay rules can't be mechanistically applied to deny an accused right to mount the defense... any rule of exclusion would be a mechanistic application of that rule.... prohibits especially under circumstances where the evidence is reliable.... his phone and words in context to other individual conversations... skill in fighting, able to injure person, not done with him yet... consistent with Feb. 26th when Zimmerman screaming for help but martin not done with him yet 21:39:53 indeed closed the loop with jeantels deposition..... talking with her about winning a fight and knowing how to fight 21:40:12 not something that isn't authenticated and isn't reliable... not just someone else typing this out, can't be the case now that you've heard context of these text messages... highly probable value of residence...default should be Zimmerman to present defense... urge court to allow Connor to testify 21:41:04 guy: he's made my point, orchestrated fight, how many rounds... someone's mounted another person... not in here... why this evidence shouldn't be before jury.... told a story that is not in these messages on this phone... don't know what type of fight he's talking about 21:41:46 don't know if fight is code for something else 21:41:53 we don't know anything about if there was a fight... who is opponent was, Andre the giant or a little girl... that's why this shouldn't be admitted 21:42:14 doesn't even address authenticity issue... we don't know who typed messages, don't know how they're connected.... levandria and french were days apart.... jeantel was weeks later 21:42:50 authenticity issue of mental state... no indication of when these fights took place..... west: mantei did the cross and now guy is doing argument... guy: it's my issue, but Connor was mantei's witness... OKAY GO AHEAD 21:43:31 so again we've got authenticity issue, no definitiveness to when these occurred or what was meant by these words, are they code.... danger is that its orchestrated fight, mounting... none of that in here 21:44:11 any probative value is outweighed by effect of jury imagining what's meant and may have been from martin and may have been about a fight... court wants me to address about photo about firearm? ADDRESS AT LATER TIME... 21:44:48 photo appears to be martin.... offered for... best photo for jury to consider if the one taken on medical examiners photo... don't know if this photo was right after a workout and was pumped up 21:45:25 I see no probative value to the photo... already in evidence... moment...... 21:45:40 they relied on chambers vs. miss... don't think purpose of that is to irradiate evidence code to allow in items subject to speculation... ask court to continue to grant states motion and deny this motion 21:46:11 ANY FURTHER ARGUMENT? 21:46:18 west: content of messages.. they are what they are... jury see them and give whatever weight based on what they mean... authentication, this issue is a mess on the discovery of this issue... rionda stood before court and said we gave defense everything... that wasn't true.... we finally got the report from brenton on June 4th... still haven't had chance to go through it... there is ongoing discovery issue... guy stood there silently when rionda said we gave them everything... we know that's just not true 21:47:45 can't get through this issue with time table..., no authentication issue, does the court think there is one is from states misconduct... COMING FROM SAME PHONE.... we did not have ability to... we were misled, given...... GO AHEAD... given a report at the same time as bin file, report was misleading, not the same information state had at this time... HE FOUND 600 ADDITIONAL PHOTOS THE STATE DID NOT KNOW ABOUT.. that's not true... testimony before this court.... SIDE ISSUE, MY POINT BEING IF YOU HAD 5 YEARS TO LOOK AT BIN FILE, STILL COMING FROM SAME PHONE, CORRECT? yes, data set is the data set. 21:49:22 INFORMATION YOU ARE SEEKING NOW, I DO HAVE AUTHENTICATION ISSUE... 90.901.A MOST COMMON METHOD FOR ELECTRONIC RECORD IS TESTIMONY OF THE PERSON WHO CREATED IT.... FOOTNOTE #3 GRIFFIN VS STATE.... ELECTRONIC DOCUMENT, TEXT, FACEBOOK... DIRECT TESTIMONY OF THE AUTHOR THAT IDENTIFY THE AUTHOR... EMAIL MESSAGES MARKED, SENDER CELL PHONE AND USER NAME AND PROFILE PICTURE... COULD BE GENERATED BY THIRD PARTY, NOT EQUATED OTHERS........2011 CASE, EVIDENCE OF ELECTRONIC MEDIA THAT BARES AUTHORS NAME IS NOT SUFFICIENT ENOUGH.... 21:52:01 MY POINT BEING THAT WHAT HAS BEEN PRESENTED, EXHIBIT 2, AND EXHIBIT 3... HAS NOTHING IDENTIFYING MR. MARTIN... DOESN'T SAY HEY THIS IS TRAYVON... GOING ON TO LEVANDRIA, COMING BACK IN FROM LEVANDRIA... ANYONE COULD HAVE SENT THESE MESSAGES... PEOPLE HAVE CHILDREN THAT PICK UP PHONE AND PLAY WITH THEM... NO IDENTIFYING MARKS THESE ARE CREATED OR SENT BY MARTIN... CONCERN ABOUT THAT 21:53:10 had double level of security... ANY SEVEN YEAR OLD CAN FIGURE OUT A PASSCODE... fdle couldn't do it for almost a year....ANOTHER PERSON MAY KNOW THAT PERSON... FDLE DIDN'T KNOW THE PASSWORD... 21:53:50 all of it came off his phone, thousands of pictures and texts... no indication someone else was using his phone..... Manuel vs. state.... suggest when the state didn't give us the information timely... WHAT ON THESE TEXTS SAY THEY ARE CREATED BY MARTIN... would've had time to find the witnesses on the other end.... caught them doing it, get on June 4th.... judge.... we asked for time, asked to delay case few days... what could we have done to further the issue under circumstances state is proprietor... not fair Zimmerman can't put on defense... now it's our fault to deny Zimmerman this right violates the Florida and US constitution 21:56:01 guy: I would offer him the opportunity to apologize to me for accusing me of standing by while rionda stated... NOT DOING THIS.... 21:56:14 COURT IN RECESS, SEE YOU AT 8 IN THE MORNING 21:56:26 COURT IS IN RECESS... SEE YOU AT 8 IN THE MORNING... DONNELLEY WHO MAY HAVE VIOLATED SEQUESTRATION... SECOND TIME THAT I'VE HEARD A VIOLATION BY WITNESSES, DONT WANT TO TAKE THAT UP AT 9 AND HAVE JURY WAIT... RECESS UNTIL 8.... omara: not able to prepare and get my witnesses together. west: can't keep up with this pace.... weekends a tonight.... (judge walking out as west continues to talk) COURT IN RECESS UNTIL 8 AM ================================== George Zimmerman's defense attorneys are flying through their case, and could finish as early as today. They plan to drive home their view that Zimmerman acted in self-defense when he shot and killed 17 year-old Trayvon Martin. On Monday, Zimmerman's lawyers called a string of witnesses who all identified the screams heard during a 9-1-1 call as those of Zimmerman. They also called Trayvon Martin's father Tracy to the stand to respond to testimony from the lead detective that Martin initially said the voice screaming was not Trayvon's. Martin said he never said it wasn't his son, just that he couldn't tell. After repeatedly listening to it, he says he became certain that was the last words of his son before he was killed.
Comminges: The mystery of fallen trees
Midi Atlantique
Basket Poitiers / Denaim
Midi Atlantique
ZIMMERMAN TRIAL POOL 070913 P8
INT BROLL GEORGE ZIMMERMAN TRAYVON MARTIN TRIAL / SWITCHED POOL FEED NOTE: Do not use any pictures of the Trayvon Martin gunshot wound shown during this morning's court testimony.It was from his autopsy and was inadvertently broadcast. Under FL law autopsy photos are exempt from public record We cannot show the picture when it was displayed or when it was in the hands of the witness KATIE HUBER LOG **NOTE: JUDGE'S COMMENTS IN CAPS **NAMES OF WITNESSES IN RED **VISUAL DESCRIPTIONS IN (PARENTHESES) **GOOD STATEMENTS/VIDEO BOLD 8:31:06 PLEASE BE SEATED. GOOD MORNING.... (defense team is not present) 8:31:37 ON THE RECORD.... STATE VS. ZIMMERMAN 8:31:56 omara: issue of the animation, deposition last night that focused the inquiry, state still has issues... not so much admissibility but applicability to the facts 8:32:19 mantei: supplemented original issue.... daubert issue and early concerns.... part 3 of the witnesses deposition... now done from states perspective, move from witness creating exhibit that represented physical evidence and police reports and witness statements... changes from animation taken to fit to theory who has yet to testify to it... now a daubert issue, simple representation and physical items to create an essentially animated picture or theory that di maio discussed with witness Saturday after shoemaker was deposed twice but before di maio's deposition 8:34:04 because of what came out in that deposition, expand hearing to include daubert hearing... daubert-Frye-pierce hearing, all issues need to be flushed out... filed supplemental motion accordingly... witness had other still-pictures and a computer diagram, haven't gotten those physical things from the witness..... apologize for telling the court we want what was said we didn't want yesterday, but given yesterday I believe it is 8:36:53 (judge nelson reading the motion) 8:39:10 DEFENSE RESPONSE? 8:39:17 omara: factual response first, concern evidence by the state addressed one fact issue that is undisputed... dr. shiping bao and our medical examiner expert... gunshot entered at 90 degree angle, closet to a straight through shot... no dispute as to that fact... the state's concern, attended to making of the animations.... well aware of deposed and given copies of.... added to that fact, the potential of the distance from gun to body.. only distance he would give was 0.4 to 4 ft. other witness says 2-4 inches 8:41:09 states concern with that, fine with not using that still... not part of the animation, use in closing as demonstrative... withdrawn to make sure that was clear 8:41:34 underlying fact the state suggests concern with the positioning of the bodies when the shot was fired... gun and body at 90 degrees, not know and depicted in animation as probable positioning is what I guess is in issue... body and gun together........ only eye witness testimony when he saw it... left a few seconds before..... state can argue to the jury something different.... it happened, based upon evidence and shiping bao's testimony, animation that has bodies in that position, suggest what they want... don't believe and never seen evidence admissibility having some argument that it may have happened differently 8:43:30 I don't understand why that makes it a Frye or daubert admissibility concern.... it is specifically in line with facts of evidence and how things happened.... if we were to go through a daubert piece Frye standing...... not certain, I know they talked but didn't come up with anything different to john good's testimony 8:44:35 saying now it's just based upon what we talked about... no its based on 90 degree angle.. 8:44:54 what you'll see is it is more than animation, series of stills... response to states concerns in the past... took out animation and placed with a still.... movement of the arms.... SORRY TO INTERRUPT, JUST START WITH HEARING AND GIVE ARGUMENT AFTER THAT... DEFENSE HAS BURDEN, CALL FIRST WITNESS 8:46:37 (sworn in) 8:46:48 name? daniel shoemaker... address? California. name of company? contrast forensic... type of business? crime scene accident reconstruction.... I take reports and photos from the scene.... I take all of that and put into context for the recreation 8:47:40 how you got into this business? information graphics for fortune 500 companies. when that began? 26 years ago. who'd you work for? viewcom systems in Ohio... did corporate presentations for tire companies in Akron 8:48:25 the days before PowerPoint? days before desktop computers.... a lot of art graphic work, poster presentation? we had a sophisticated computer and it did slides. how long with them? 5 years. position? senior artist 8:49:01 you would take on a project, create the tools? work with the client on modifications... any formal education in this area? bachelor in fine arts. 8:49:38 advertising and marketing, corporate identity 8:49:48 graphic presentation to audience? yes, the best way... various ideas and procedures. 8:50:00 for 5 years? yes. and then? to California, same thing for a lot of companies in bay area 8:50:15 contract basis? worked for company, senior artist. which company? dolphin multimedia. same job description? similar job as in Ohio... being in bay area, more access to up to date software, more up to date technology 8:50:55 any difference in first five years to now? main difference is doing a lot of information graphics for governmental proposals.... information graphics for governmental proposals and information graphics of crime scene recreation for attorneys. how long in Cali? 13 years. 8:51:50 name changed? contrast design to contrast forensic. owner/sole proprietor... 8:52:07 type of work you focused on? initially started out by working with attorneys on designing their information, court room presentations were a bit below that..... gone from information graphics to attorneys like that to drawing crime scenes... progressed quite a lot to the point with the equipment I'm using now 8:52:59 what type of software or hardware was available to you when you started? mostly drawing out a scene.... scale and accurate, mostly 2-D.... from there it's gone to 3-D to the point where the reconstruction and the software got more sophisticated.... start with you going out to scene with tape roller and get a measurement? yeah 8:54:06 software I use, I have two kinds for using my total station data.......... aras 360.... 8:54:34 start with foundation point, total station.... bring us back to an idea when you walk onto a scene and what do you create? progressed from tape measure to robotic laser, set up on tripod and measure crime scene... series of points and 3-D space 8:55:25 used now by law enforcement? yes and road crews 8:55:38 set up that laser here, bounce off points in court room and have a data configuration of the entire outline of the court room? two types... type I have is point by point... I lay out 2-500 points in a scene... I walk around with a pocket computer and prism, everywhere I go hit the computer point where I am... laser follows me around... creates a point cloud of the whole scene..... 8:56:50 how does that compare to total station software? how does what compare........ total station gathers data and then export to aras 360....... 8:57:28 once you get that information, what you do to see if information is there? look at the data and examine it, another piece of software that I have... visual statement, between those two... 8:58:10 within context of aras 360, gathering environment digitally... motion capture suit for gathering....wireless, accelerometers... capture movement accurately and bring into the scene.... accuracy of the scene 8:59:16 give court examples for the motion capture suits... in other cases? use a few ways, I use it.... a month ago I had to go to impound lot, death in a vehicle... get into vehicle and it still sees the movement.... typical one has balls on the suit with high speed cameras following it, but the cameras won't follow behind the wall or into the vehicle..... my suit is I can take it, accelerometers to measure my movement 9:00:51 perfect for court because it gives you a running log of all the movements..... somebody hits something and cause damage.... do the same action from the accelerometers see how much force I used 9:01:24 what software exists behind those suits to interpret that and make it relevant to presentation? software that came with suit, engineers that developed it... not only used it for motion capture but also biometrics for physical therapy, monitor movement from day to day 9:02:07 put on those suits if I had range of motion problem and the suits will measure progress? yes, printout of all the movements 9:02:26 software the interprets the movement of the suits, criteria that can be put in to determine force, speed and effect of objects moving through space? yes, could do that in the reconstruction 9:02:56 how this suit gives data for recreation? put on the suit, still considered crime scene... didn't want to disrupt it... t vac suit to protect the scene, somebody opened the door tried to pull the person out.... he reached for a gun and shot him.... shot the person coming into the car? yes 9:03:49 very good use of the suit, had an attorney pull me out and record it in real time 9:04:06 what you were able to recreate? in the truck? yes..... 9:04:27 I had accurate measurements of the truck, recreated the truck, my movements fit well within the truck, exports motion file.... bring into 3D program... map their movements onto figure that matches the person involved... map onto the person's skeleton 9:05:11 how do you get size of person to be accurate? from police reports and coroners reports 9:05:23 does the software recreate body in proper proportion? doesn't do any simulation, I just have a figure that I size to the size that I need.... 9:05:50 can specify what height the person is... weight? weight is more the appearance from photos 9:06:05 helpful and do you have another sample of the car one? I have another sample 9:06:22 happened in a sams club parking lot........... 9:09:33 since it's just the court, approach the bench and you could see off the computer screen? FINE YOU MAY BRING IT UP HERE... COUNCIL APPROACH 9:10:15 this is a sample of a motion filed from the scene... how is the scene recreated for the background of event? in software. where did information come from? security camera, placed vehicles where they were in the video, better representation than the security camera 9:11:04 about to see the animations, how does the movement get placed into environment? import from motion capture software. 9:11:28 how does it get placed in right location? move figures around based on scene. come up with alternatives based on witnesses and evidence? yes, can't change movement, just the location of figures 9:12:28 graphic information from witnesses and evidence? yes 9:12:37 say that the movement of the person, how do you decide the speed? timed from security camera..... nothing further as far as that... OKAY THANK YOU 9:13:06 chance to look at that animation, anything different in the software you used in that representation than one in zimmerman case? zimmerman case was more total station data, data that was provided from DA's office 9:13:43 are there any course work or training programs you go through to enhance your abilities for this work? both in aras 360, classes through that and trained through that. only required to go through 1, but I've gone to 3 total station 9:14:24 software that law enforcement uses? total station is the piece of equipment 9:14:38 total station information available from law enforcement in this case? correct 9:14:52 who does the training for that? software companies train 9:15:03 most recent time you took training? training in those courses, a couple years... on my CV 9:15:22 aras 360 software, continually update my skills... webinar every Friday that I watch. any significant changes in program or still the same? still the same, maybe an update every 6 months 9:16:00 training and certification on using the software and using it with total station. 9:16:20 have current version of software? yes. up to date with that software? yes 9:16:34 creating computer graphic animations? luxology modo... whats that 3D software? creating 3d scenes, used for animation movies. 9:17:17 allow you to present environment or frame work? yes and create the scene 9:17:42 start putting in elements? yes. how are they accurate? measurements from total station data.... 9:17:59 bounce off points and import into program? yes..... also one part is I have a helicopter, didn't use in this case... just a drone, take photo of scene I have the data points from total station and it'll lay it on or drape it onto those points, accurate out door reconstruction of the scene 9:18:46 bird's eye view, more accurate data points? yes 9:19:02 opportunity to create animations and testify as expert? yes. what period of time you did that? ongoing for last 13 years... criminal and civil cases 9:19:30 first time you created animation in court case? 2009 9:19:46 tell the court, have you ever gotten to point where animations were utilized in court? yes. experience you had in civil and criminal settings with your testimony? I used motion capture suits for animation but to verify a person's position, did one a few months ago... in a vehicle, shot through window, show a couple more times... which were done in the car... verify his position when 3 shots were fired 9:20:48 explain how... name for motion suit? initial motion capture suit. IMCS 9:21:20 matched vehicle used and recorded movement getting out... in the figure that matched the victim, put in the rod to match bullet trajectory... looked at positions getting out of car to see which positions the trajectory should be 9:21:55 talk in context....? calibrate at beginning of recording. for accuracy? yes. 9:22:24 doing movement, but computer gathering data on 16 points that are moving? yes. computer may not know it's a body, just 16 points? in real time on computer, there's a mannequin 9:22:59 not the exact video of the driver moving his arms, but rather you decided how the body moves, how do you address that frailty? look at certain things you know from the discovery, bullet trajectory, opening of the door, physical characteristics of the truck... look at scenarios to find which one matches the scene and evidence and discovery you have 9:23:48 do an animation at the point you created is specific? Objection! 9:24:02 consideration based on evidence know to you at the time? yes. modify animation to match witnesses or other things you've heard? yes, whatever's more accurate 9:24:23 put on the suit, software allows you to change configuration of body for height? yes. how do you look at body size to accomplish that on the program? most done through photos from reports 9:25:06 take measurements of those photos, ratio comparisons and put on the mannequin? yes measurements from reports.... any measurements you can take. 9:25:35 also look at photographs? yes 9:25:52 I come in after the fact, have to rely on police photos taken from the scene.... don't have certain measurements, but you may have one measurement of an item in a photograph... 9:26:22 how does that assist you with measurements? one known object with measurement you can figure out other items 9:26:50 I can tell how far from the wall you are.......................... lay down a plane in the software if you know one measurement apply to the grid and extrapolate the evidence 9:27:26 don't know the algorithms or math behind it, has been certified to work? yes 9:27:42 this type software, does that have application in entertainment industry? yes. suit I have was used in avatar, iron man, x-man... used in creating characters... also used in madden football... record suits and apply the figures 9:28:27 iron man is placed on top of him in the movie? in the computer the 3D program 9:28:42 talking about your experience in testifying... how many times in court your animations were presented? need CV? yes. moment? YES 9:29:19 come back to your CV.... experience in testifying for the animations. use of suits and presentation in court? most work since I acquired the suit in 2008.... probably 20. 9:30:00 types of cases you worked on and what courts? also on my CV, list of the counties 9:31:35 type cases and court rooms you presented? 59 criminal trials, 21 civil trials... declaration or testified in 20 of those.... 9:32:15 trying to figure out shooting incidents, worked with department of justice and police officer related shootings, stabbings, it varies quite a bit. 9:32:36 in each of the 59 cases, take on data and graphic presentation? yes 9:32:49 are we now talking about spectrum of murder cases, know the charges or just the information? sometimes told more detail and give creation from the evidence 9:33:17 what percentage for defense and prosecution? 100% on the defense, has to do with defensive police officers and police officer involved shootings 9:33:43 if the department of Justice with a civil case against them or a shooting occurred, work with them on that and presentation of their material 9:34:13 presented testimony in court in any of the criminal cases? presented personally or... after being qualified, you personally? probably all 59 9:34:48 qualified as expert various counties.... 16 counties here... all in California? yes 9:35:20 are these counties in which the courts authorized you as an expert? all the courts where my information was presented, all qualified, never denied 9:36:00 (listing counties) 9:36:47 have you ever testified in Florida before? no. outside of California? no. how long have you had motion suits? since 2008 9:37:04 in those counties, which counties were you... did you testify in those counties or was the information you created presented? both... my information was through either as expert testimony or a declaration... sometimes my material can be testified to by another witness... 9:38:01 I just speak to the accuracy of the creation... 9:38:09 have you testified in court concerning accuracy and methods used to create? yes. 9:38:24 what counties and types of cases you've testified to? I don't have a listing ..... what cases have you testified to in court, what types of cases? all the ones I've testified in court have been criminal trials 9:39:06 what you testified to and the animations? plasa county, shooting reconstruction, position of shooter and victim, the order of shots.... testify? yes. expert in this area? yes. 9:39:58 another case? contracusta county, determine position of the person from the 3 shots... determine there was only 1 through window and the other 2 were outside vehicle. expert? yes. 9:40:34 one more from another case? a couple down in Marino valley, two of them actually... one was inside house, threatening suicide, police officers responded and they were waiting at corner of garage waiting for him to come out and another officer was looking out to the street and the other office was looking at doorway, determine who shot... which officer and the position of person in house.... in my reconstruction, person in house was on floor in kitchen... two counts of murder to police officer... in house the entire time. police said person came out with gun, fired 3 shots, partner turned around and shot the partner in elbow... which shots came first and position of door....... second series, position of the door... no way someone came through door when shots went off, tight space outside the door he would've been hit, had to be in the.... 9:43:08 accepted in the court? yes. give evidence to the jury in that case? yes 9:43:24 other cases where you've been attempted to qualify as expert? no. in all 59 then, by affidavit, declaration, give your testimony to what you created? declaration or testimony was 20 cases, never been disqualified 9:43:59 experience on civil side similar? mostly info designed for attorneys to present to jury 9:44:13 any civil that went to jury? not in civil trials 9:44:35 zimmerman case? first became involved toward end of April... initial conversation in august, but my first meeting with attorneys was end of April 9:44:58 in 2012? yes. went through medical condition that took you out of sorts for several months? yes. all resolved? well se 9:45:14 back to work, talked in April this year? yes. what information did you gather and review, what tasks given on behalf of this case? to do a reconstruction of the scene with the information we had and creation of an animated timeline... 9:45:50 inside your qualifications? yes. not a lot of opportunity to have live audio of the occurrence, different in this case 9:46:23 unique because we had audio evidence, real time available for your recreation? yes, helps with the timeline 9:46:39 similar to security camera makes its more accurate? yes. video surveillance not in this case? no 9:46:59 what information did you gather to assist you in the work? discovery from DA office, photos, reports, audio from 911 calls, questioning at PD of witnesses... depositions? yes. photos from scene and total station data 9:47:48 any information you needed to create animation that you did not have available? use of motion capture suit at the scene, not available to me... made two visits to the scene 9:48:16 came back to utilize motion capture suits? yes. when that was done? second week in may 9:48:40 explain what you do then, who did it, how you assure accuracy? good where I can interact with suits at the scene, 9:49:26 7 points that were labeled windows and they were not in position to be windows.... laser bounced off and was different than what it was? yes... laser pointed up to 2nd story window, went through tree and picked up branches... 6 points on one side and another point that are in the wrong location, not to use it 9:50:20 address that or fix it? I didn't manipulate the data, just didn't use them 9:50:41 any other measuring of the scene now that you're on scene? matter port scanner.... sets up on tripod, has a little computer and cameras.... one that takes photos and another one takes infrared for distance 9:51:19 iPad interface, twirl in 360 and scan around scanner, walk it through the scene... captures intricate parts of the scene as well as textramap of the photos 9:51:49 helpful to get the slope and positioning of buildings and sidewalk. more accurate that total station then? yes it added to the total station data, verified the scanner with the total station data so it all matched 9:52:31 did matter port allow for better graphic representation of the sloping? yes. total station had not done that? didn't measure very many points.... mainly measured the drains and sprinkler fix... didn't do measuring of slope 9:53:08 matter for even more accurate rendition of sloping of ground? yes 9:53:25 SHOEMAKER STANDING FOR AN HOUR NOW.... I THOUGHT IT WAS GOING TO BE SHORT, WOULD YOU LIKE TO TAKE A SEAT SIR? how much longer.... omara: drag him back down here in a moment, so I'll move it along 9:53:58 go to scene to start working on project? correct.... motion capture suit, who did them and frailty of others using it? a couple volunteers from your law office that put the suits on, timing for scenario where they were on the ground, used audio on the 911 call to time it with shot of the gun 9:54:46 also john good's statements and deposition testimony? yes. used for the positioning.... information from Ms. mora, saw zimmerman on top of martin after shot? yes. assist in your creation? yes 9:55:18 also have Lauer 911 audio, has a shot and matter of time before shot? yes. 9:55:36 what other information? Ms. Lauer's police report. she first heard altercation at the T? yes. and Jeremy's? yes 9:55:58 created poster graphics, stills of the scene based upon that testimony as well? yes. recently removed Jeremy's statements since he didn't testify? yes 9:56:24 modifying animation and the posters to come in mind with actual trial testimony? yes. as disclosed to you by me? yes to get most accurate representation of it 9:56:47 able to create animation based on info available to you? yes 9:56:57 sources of that information, seen discovery- witness, depositions, autopsy, reports.... also diagrams made by witnesses and other information in discovery? correct. 9:57:36 a lot of information from defense? yes. extraneous to recreation but to see if it was relevant? yes 9:58:03 conversations with me and others on my behalf for the creation? yes 9:58:13 sources of information? everything you mentioned. anything else? my going to the scene and scanning the scene during motion capture 9:58:41 anything you would have liked to have had in creating the posters that was not available to you? I believe I had everything I needed to create the scene 9:59:06 present the animation.................... 10:00:33 BRING UP TO THE BENCH AND I'LL LOOK AT IT UP HERE.... 10:01:40 (video playing on shoemaker's laptop, audio of 911 call.... no visual of the video) 10:02:47 there are posters that he created.... mantei: new ones? omara: some are new.... 10:03:22 advise the court what this is and how created? from 3d image of how it was created, to explain location of markers...... where'd you get the markings and put at that location? straight from total station data, also have a flat 2D illustration of the scene. incorporated as well? yes 10:04:15 basically the same thing, different view. 10:04:33 to show the slope.... 10:05:28 this is just to show photographs from discovery of what was at those markers 10:05:42 different parts of different items, where located and top left hand corner... imported and picture we gave you? yes. 10:06:12 IN THE MIDDLE? from the point of view from good. to the left is good head? his ear... taken with 50 mm lens in the software, closely resembles what a person will see 10:06:42 line going above the case, distance measurement? edge of porch to marker number a 10:06:58 what it looks like? 49.5 mm., rounded to 50 10:07:10 perspective one would see as humans looking at it? yes that's how they would appear 10:08:06 john goods to the left? yes 10:08:15 states what john good testified in trial regarding what he saw and the peoples descriptions? yes. yes 10:08:34 that is Ms. Mora's testimony in trial to what she saw from her column? yes. 10:08:52 what she would see from her location? yes 10:08:57 in these photos I didn't try to reconstruct the lighting, more important to see detail.....frailty of the posters, lighting was nothing for this evening? jury would have a hard time seeing detail 10:10:07 moment? YES 10:10:34 PROBLEM THEY'RE HAVING IS WITH THE APPLE COMPUTER, CHECK IT OUT OVER LUNCH... get his presentation on a PC. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? just briefly: have been doing this graphic information in court for 13 years? yes. has never been disqualified in court? correct. 10:11:20 awareness of industry and others who did this? only one in US with wireless motion capture suit.... older style ones available? reconstruction are using, but very rare to find one with motion capture suit, whether the balls or the wireless 10:12:21 used in video games and videos? yes 10:12:25 software you utilize, tell the court where that fits in to industry 10:12:56 how long? luxology around probably 4 years.... I believe 4.... started as version 201, now up to 701 10:13:16 ever attend seminars or conventions where others interact? yes.... 10:13:32 users group that gets together, presentations there. how often? just presented once 10:13:44 made up of people who use software on ongoing basis? yes.... 10:13:59 aras 360 gets together every Friday.... keep up on that part of the industry? yes 10:14:11 is this software accepted whether accident recreations or others? yes, highway patrol uses it... 3 basic software... visual statement, aras 360... another software called crime time or something like that.... Sanford police uses on there's 10:14:57 is the software you use the most up to date software for this work? yes,... industry standard for accident and crime scene reconstruction 10:15:18 use this type of software to do the work? mostly used in police departments 10:15:34 80% of aras 360 are police departments, others are accident or crime scene reconstructionist like myself.... user group meetings interaction? yes, get an answer at the end of the week 10:16:07 accident reconstructionist, type of software used in this industry? yes, mines cutting edge 10:16:24 more advanced, only one who uses new style of motion suits for your work? correct. are used in entertainment industry? correct and medical rehabilitation 10:16:50 limited based on expense? yes. nothing further CROSS 10:17:00 mantei: 5 minute break and the witness sit in stand? 10:17:10 COURT IN RECESS FOR 5 MINUTES ============================================ 10:24:29 PLEASE BE SEATED. IS SHOEMAKER HERE? he is. HOW MUCH LONGER IS THIS GOING TO TAKE.... JURY IN BACK SINCE 9, I STAYED LATE TO GET THIS ACCOMPLISHED....mantei: 45 minutes. NO. DO IT LATER... SHOEMAKER REMAIN OUTSIDE, CONTINUE HEARING AFTER COURT.... READY WITH NEXT WITNESS? READY TO BRING JURY IN? omara: approach VERY BRIEF (sidebar) 10:26:55 (zimmerman walking in, tan suit, white shirt, gray tie) 10:27:16 (omara talking to zimmerman) 10:30:53 (sidebar) 10:34:21 MR ZIMMERMAN, PLEASE STAND.... INFORMED BY COUNCIL THAT TESTIMONY OF DR. DI MAIO IS CARVED DOWN... DID YOU HAVE DISCUSSIONS WITH OMARA ABOUT DR DI MAIOS TESTIMONY? yes. AGREE WITH HIS REPRESENTATION NOT TO ASK CERTAIN AREAS, YOU AGREE WITH THAT? yes. HAS ANYBODY THREATENED YOU TO DO THAT? no. READY FOR JURY? west: not yet. HOW CLOSE ARE WE? need the physical evidence in the court. PLEASE OPEN LOCKER DOOR AND GET OUT WHAT YOU NEED...... 10:37:48 NOW READY FOR JURY? LET'S BRING THE JURY IN.... 10:39:59 PLEASE BE SEATED, WELCOME BACK... I APOLOGIZE FOR KEEPING YOU BACK THERE... QUESTIONS: DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE CASE? NO HANDS RAISED. READ OR LISTEN TO REPORTS ABOUT THE HOUSE? NO HANDS RAISED. USE ELECTRONIC DEVICE FOR RESEARCH? NO HANDS RAISED. READ OR CREATE SOCIAL MEDIA? NO HANDS RAISED. 10:40:53 west: call Vincent Di Maio 10:41:27 (sworn in) 10:41:54 west: good morning.... name? Dr. Vincent Di Maio 10:42:13 profession? physician, employed in private practice of forensic pathology.... degree? yes back in 1965 in NY 10:42:39 educational background? graduated med school 1965, 1 yr. internship in pathology, did a 3 year residency, 1 year fellowship in forensic pathology, specialty board exams 10:43:39 board certification? yes... it means you've successfully completed training in specialty... taken written and practical exam and certified and recognized as specialist 10:44:07 mentioned anatomical, pathology...? pathology is branch of medicine with death from disease..... examine tissue removed from someone.... mole, breast tissue... tells your physician the disease, and tells you the diagnosis... wont contact them, physician has contact 10:45:10 clinical pathologist is concerned with tests done... blood test, urine test... 10:45:23 forensic pathologist is concerned with application to medical science and the law... function as medical examiner, determine cause of death and manner of death... individuals thought to have died of violence, accidents suicides or homicides..... exact course of death is not known... autopsy..... based on circumstances, the findings and tests done make determination on cause and manner 10:46:25 professional positions following training? having trouble hearing you..... 10:47:09 following training you've outlined, idea of the professional position you held? after training, went into army for 2 years... armed forces institute in pathology.... chief of medical legal section, then wound ballistic section... moved to Dallas, TX medical examiner there summer 1972- Feb. 1981.... became chief medical examiner for Bexar county Texas.... san Antonio...... from march 1981-until I retired Dec. 2006. 10:48:40 for 16 of the years I was there, I was in charge of crime lab... retired and went into complete private practice, doing since then... also the editor of the American journal of forensic pathology.... chairmen of Texas crime labs....... 10:49:30 director of crime lab for 16 years, role? police had crime lab, county took over when I came..... basic documentation, established DNA Lab.... usually things, drug ID, DNA, trace evidence 10:50:11 work include knowing how to package evidence that may have biological or DNA evidence? yes. but you teach the forensic pathologists, they know that even if not in the lab.... technique to packaging... 10:50:50 certain requirements when packing biological samples, wet fluids? yes, dry out material... package each in paper... if you don't let it dry and put in plastic, the bacteria love that... multiply... mold... stinks and everything deteriorates 10:51:35 well known for a while? yeah I'd say... 30 years that I know of 10:51:45 back you've done with group that monitors labs? Texas forensic science commission... yeah what does that involve? government agency.... problem with labs reported and investigated and issued a report... want tests to be done proper.... labs reporting themselves 10:52:50 in addition to professional positions, also had academic appointments? University of Texas system.. assistant professor, associate professor and full professors before I retired. what subject? pathology 10:53:21 have you in addition to your day to day work as medical examiner and work at the University as professor, published any books or articles? 88 articles and 13 book chapters and then I've published 4 books.... first was gunshot wounds, wrote myself... published in English, French and Spanish... forensic pathology with my father, he's deceased now... third book was handbook of forensic pathology wrote with a colleague, 4th book is excited delirium syndrome... I'm the junior author of that book, wife is senior author.... 10:54:51 your work in gun shots.... first book you wrote, updated over time? 2 editions published and the 3rd edition is going to the publishers in another week or two.... 10:55:17 describe for jury the purpose of focus of that book? book starts out instructing about fire arms, wounds, riffles, hand guns, how to do an autopsy, collect evidence and what you can do with analysis 10:55:51 gunshot wounds, how a pathologist could learn things like the distance from the shot? right, contact, near, loose, distant... range, nature of wound 10:56:20 work you've been doing your entire career? yes, very strong interest in gunshot wounds 10:56:35 written 13 chapters, in others books? correct. how does that work? solicit me to write the chapter 10:56:55 are some of those books more comprehensive look than what you wrote? I don't think so... depends, chapters aren't always about gunshot wounds 10:57:23 how many of those chapters that you recall involve gunshot wounds? I think about 7 10:57:36 authored or participated in 88 peer review article? it's a scientific article submitted to journal... when the journal receives it, sends to others to see if it should be published and editor decides to publish. peers mean other pathologists? yes. published becomes available to other researches to use or educate themselves? it is.... central on computer with articles listed, review articles on the computer... essentially a library. 10:59:14 how many articles involved gunshot wounds? 35 or 37 10:59:28 over entire span of your career? these events, these writings were developed over time you worked? yes, over 40 years 10:59:52 worked in baxer county as medical examiner, perform autopsies? yes, about 9,000 and then I reviewed autopsies that were done under my jurisdiction another 28,000..... 11:00:43 called by prosecutor, typically? yes 11:00:50 as medical examiner testified in court to the autopsies I did 11:01:08 staff that helped? 4 full time, 1 part time physicians... approved for program to train fellows.... 38 or 39 approved to train 11:01:42 how many autopsies would be done in the year? 1500 autopsies and another 1500 we would just do external exams 11:02:04 last autopsy I did was in October and retired in December 11:02:14 takes week or a month to complete an autopsy 11:02:23 since 1981 when you began work in baxer county, private consultant? yes. mostly civil, a few criminal cases.... outside baxer I could testify for the defense 11:02:58 don't do many private criminal cases such as now 11:03:09 working as consultant since 2007? right 11:03:26 private practice as consultant since then? yes 11:03:33 majority of work in connection with civil cases? yes. include gunshot injuries? yes.... alleged suicides, accidental discharge 11:04:05 mentioned you were in the military? yes that's when I started my firearm research... study mechanism of firearms and review gunshot wounds 11:04:43 when I was in charge of the wound section I had another study in Vietnam, photos of those injured or killed by different weapons, attempt to study those.... 50,000 slides of this 11:05:16 mentioned microphotography... what a picture of bullet leaving gun looks like? micro flash... only this flash is very quick, take photos of things moving through air, freeze them when the flash goes off 11:05:56 take moment the mechanics of what happens when bullet fired from gun? firepit hits the cartridge case...................... gun powder burns, converted to gas... gradual pressure to build up... bullet at front, fixed in.... push out of bullet into barrel, gripped by riffling, takes a while.... during this time some gas will get around the bullet... gas in front, the bullet, and then bulk of case... barrel filled with air, as bullet goes down, pushes the gas in front and behind... first thing you get is a little cloud of gas, not big, pretty soon after that get the bulk of the gas... in that, the bullet and unburned or burning grains of powder 11:08:13 can the gas that comes out first, combined with air in barrel? will to certain degree, mostly the larger cloud of gas... column of gas and air pushed straight ahead.... hold gun against clothing, this column of gas and air tears hole and then the bullet gets to clothing and the soot gets to the clothing.... that material after hole is made comes back to the other side.. 11:09:21 hole made by gas first, followed by bullet and then followed by soot? right...... blank cartridges are not dangerous, you can kill yourself with it.... the gas form will tear through skin and muscle in your lung... you don't need bullet to kill you with contact wounds 11:10:17 written articles about head trauma? yes... one peer reviewed article, one chapter 11:10:35 blunt force trauma to the head? right 11:10:42 served as editor of peer reviewed scientific journals? yes 11:10:55 does that work include whether or not to accept submission for publication? yes I have final say 11:11:20 work you've done specifically..... expertise in firearms and injuries, have you done work for united states government? yes about 2 years ago.... US attorney's office during hurricane Katrina, police officers shot and wounded a number and killed 1.... done 1 or two other cases 11:12:10 for the marines? war crimes... testified for marine corp 11:12:20 British government? the bloody Sunday massacre.... and another case going in 2 months in Britain with a concussion head injury 11:12:52 united nations? yes. 11:13:07 jurisdictions you've testified as expert? in most states of the union, state courts, federal courts... Canada, Columbia.... by video.... south Africa, Israel 11:13:44 I don't believe we've touched upon.... state and federal? yes 11:13:56 professional awards? yes, from my medical school master teacher award, outstanding service awards...... 11:14:32 professional background and all detailed in CV? yes they are 11:15:04 defendants MM? yes. your CV? yes it is 11:15:24 offer as exhibit... ANY OBJECTIONS? rionda: we object! May we approach? YES YOU MAY (sidebar) 11:18:11 COME IN AS DEFENSE EXHIBIT 23.... 11:18:42 turn to work in this case, describe the materials that you have received for review and if you have notes reflecting that, happy to do so..... 11:19:14 material I reviewed were scene photos, zimmerman photos, autopsy report, medical records, witness statement and transcribed conversation by good, 911 calls, reenactment tape, firearm, examiner reports, and deposition of dr. rao 11:20:14 talk with you about...... opportunity to review the video recording of zimmerman reenacting the events surrounding the shooting? yes., access to witness statements? yes. reviewed all witness statements? I haven't 11:20:54 more about determining whether evidence is consistent with his accounts of what he said happened.... witness statements are all around, vary greatly... easiest way to hear is examine physical evidence and compare to defendants statements and see if consistent.... say bullet came in front, and it came from the back inconsistent 11:21:46 look at what zimmerman said and the forensic evidence which includes the pictures from autopsy, include looking at report from firearm expert who analyzed clothing? correct. two most important are the autopsy report and the reports by the firearms examiner.... secondary, scene photos... looking at autopsy and detailed report by firearms examiner.. 11:22:49 reach opinion as to the distance? yes 11:22:57 opinion from end of barrel to clothing? yes 11:23:03 what affect if any the clothing had on appearance on the skin? yes 11:23:16 well talk about those details in a moment, also talk with you about is your opinion of how long martin may have been alive, how long martin may have been conscious.....? they are different opinions because you can be alive and unconscious.... 11:23:57 the injury zimmerman sustained, reflected in photos from Sanford PD, review them? yes 11:24:12 talk with you a little about the injuries that you observed through photos sustained by martin from gunshot wound 11:24:34 general frame work for today.... talk about gunshot itself and the mechanics involved in that...... 11:25:08 evidence in this case, describe for jury what you saw when you looked at photos from the clothing and the wound to his skin, the gun shot or tattooing referenced in autopsy report, put it all together? photos show contact discharge of weapon against clothing, agree 100% with firearms examiner, at time of discharge, against clothing, tore clothing, soot all around, know the muzzle was in contact with clothing.... firearms examiner said it 11:26:29 look at the wound in the chest, different picture.... circular punched out wound, lay in area of powder tattooing 2x2.... marks on skin due to powder that comes out of the muzzle of gun... not powder burns, means whole bunch of things 11:27:14 when bullet comes out, mark and reaction, reddish..... marks are called powder tattoo marks... stippling. indicates that grain of powder hit skin and person was alive at the time, don't get that in dead people... distribution 2x2... certain density in the tattoo marks, not against the skin.... more than an inch away. based on concentration and the size of pattern, muzzle of gun was 2-4 inches away from the skin.... the barrel of gun was against the clothing but clothing had to be 2-4 inches away from body. 11:28:52 states 96... photo taken at medical examiner's office, showing entrance wound.... ? if you look, you'll see the hole from the bullet, punched out entrance, all around the entrance you see these little marks like ant bites..... powder tattoo marks.... redding brown the person was alive.... this indicates he was alive at time he was shot... muzzle was not in contact but had to be back... first time you see powder tattoo marks is when muzzle of 1/2 inch away, less.. you won't see.... area of tattoo gets bigger and bigger... increases in range, density will decrease.... this is very heavy density.... decreases until tattoo marks disappear..... 11:31:17 opinion to distance based on training and research? yeah, a lot of research....firearm examiners use heavy white paper and fire the gun, hole, and marks around it.... based on size and pattern give opinion from the range..... problem was it doesn't really reflect what happens on the skin..... did experiments, living animals... yes its valid.... to determine size of pattern by shooting against white paper is valid to at least 18 inches..... hand guns to rifles and shot guns and how it extends, how different types....... denser pattern, actually go out further bull powder because its stated in the report 11:33:11 exhibit is now on the screen, this is the 2 inch by inch tattooing pattern? yes sir 11:33:33 helps you to be precise with distance from 1/2 inch to 18 inches? less than 1/2 inch a hole with dense soot, no powder tattoo marks..... 11:34:11 how does pattern get broader? like a hose, the cone shape, farther you get away the bigger the spray pattern 11:34:34 water droplets just fall off, same with powder.. loses velocity and falls away 11:34:50 would the clothing, not disputed in this case.... clothing in between muzzle and skin, what affect if any would clothing have on the appearance of wounded skin? in this case none, clothing wasn't between powder and skin at time of discharge 11:35:38 hole there produced by gas and bullet.... if you had gun 6 inches away from clothing, clothing will filter out powder to a degree... in this case, clothing didn't filter that, you had a hole there and muzzle against the body.... everything coming out of muzzle was going into the hole 11:36:35 if pressed in his chest, what would you see differently? hole like that, surrounded by a halo of black soot and maybe on the skin, a grain or two of powder, but not powder tattooing... disperses the shoot, not the powder.... powder would be inside the body 11:37:11 medical examiner standpoint, hard call for you? no... this is basic 101 11:37:52 trajectory, photos of examine? no... x ray 11:38:06 reference the x ray if you wish, you know the path of the bullet through the right ventricle into lower right lung? right.... bullet hole in left chest, goes through the fifth intercostal space, space between 5th and 6th rib, went through there, hit sac surrounding heart, went through right ventricle and into the right lung.... you can see the led core of the bullet, see the jacket fragments.... bullet went front to back, left to his right because it went into the right lung, but it started on the left side 11:39:34 based on your review, must've been a slight left to right trajectory? yes. there's some, I can't quantitate it. not radical... bullet was go from his left to his right.... martins left to martins right? correct 11:40:09 standard way of describing wounds, talk left to right, deceased's view point 11:40:36 not precisely straight on? does not appear so 11:40:49 mechanics of that shot, putting together the defect on the clothing... result of contact on the muzzle, distance between clothing was 2-4 inches, not a contact.... you're understanding of Zimmerman's statement because of video, work essentially was to determine whether medical evidence was consistent with what he said happened? that's correct 11:41:39 aware zimmerman said martin was straddling him and leaning over him? yes. and zimmerman had gun in right hand? yes... describe what you know of that sequence of events? the medical evidence is consistent with his opinion/statement. reason it is, simplest thing is his gun was in his right hand.... shoot someone with right hand, natural to twist your hand, go from deceased left to right.... nature of defect in clothing and the tattoo.... lean over someone, clothing falls away from the chest... if lying on your back and someone shoots you, clothing against your chest... so the fact we know clothing was 2-4 inches away is consistent with someone leaning over the person doing the shooting and clothing is 2-4 inches away from person firing 11:43:38 clothing was wet, described as being damped.... the responding officers found an unopened can of a beverage in the front pouch of this sweatshirt.... find those facts consistent with what you saw? tend to reinforce.... clothing falls away from the body is gravity, have wet clothing, its heavier... pulling the shirt down, tends to pull away from body 11:45:03 wound itself by gap, tattooing and the face of the contact of the clothing, consistent with Zimmerman's account that martin was over him leaning 11:45:41 talk about martin's mechanics.... effect of him receiving that shot, how long he survived and how long he may have been conscious... what if anything he could do voluntarily at time of consciousness? #1 is the ability to move.... that is determined by amount of oxygen in your brain, you have a reserve of 10-15 seconds.... if right now I grabbed your heart and ripped it out, you could stand there and talk to me or walk over to me 10-15 seconds, brain controlling you.... that's minimum, assumes no blood is going to brain.... if more blood going to brain could be longer.... depends on blood pressure and how severe your wound 11:47:32 answer getting complicated, some get shot and immediately collapse and some get shot and don't know they got shot... 11:48:02 cardiac, in this case you have a through and through hole of right ventricle and at least one if not two into right lung.... losing blood, every time the heart contracts it pumps blood out the two holes in ventricle and at least one hole in the blood...... engage in struggle, heart rate increases... martin was healthy young man, if he's in struggle heart going/ beating more than 100 times a minute.... 11:49:08 every time heart beats, out comes the blood... say he's only beating 100, slow... loses a tablespoon of blood every time heart beats.... that's not much, 15 CCs, heart beating 100... losing 1500 CCs in a minute... quarter of blood supply.... second minute, lose another 1500.... lost more than 50% of blood supply.... 11:50:16 he's not pumping sufficient blood to anywhere, reached point where he's going to die.... assuming these conditions and all probability, nothings 100%... he's going to be dead within 1-3 minutes after being shot in this case.... heart effectively pumping blood, still get electrical activity, but not pumping.... how long as he conscious, significantly shorter than time necessary to die wouldn't have sufficient blood to brain 11:51:23 best you can give in estimates 11:51:33 in training and experience, familiar with incidents where individuals received similar or more serious and could still talk, move, voluntary actions for 10-15 seconds? yes, 12 gauge shot gun at point black range... heart was shredded, rain 65 ft. before he collapse 11:52:33 being shot in heart itself, quickly losing blood? nothing else than that..... not same as being shot in head? right. swat team immediately immobilize someone is to shoot in head 11:53:18 15 seconds capable of movement? potential for 10-15 seconds. moving arms from outstretch to underneath? Objection! SUSTAINED 11:53:49 could that include moving arms from outstretch to underneath in those 10-15 seconds? yes 11:54:10 lose consciousness, lose ability for voluntary movement? oh yeah... not feeling pain? correct 11:54:38 talk about the injury to martin's knuckle, remember in the photos an abrasion on left hand 4th finger? 1/4 by 1/8 scrap. agree its abrasion type? it appears to be 11:55:08 consistent with coming in contact with hard surface or impacting another surface? impacting another surface. concrete qualify? yes 11:55:35 would you expect to see bruising on knuckles if punching were going on? depends on what part of body you punch, softer portion you may not see it... may have been bruising that we didn't know about, doesn't make a difference.... too variable 11:56:29 take blood pressure to get bruising? yes. once blood pressure goes, then you don't have bruising.... can't bruise a dead body 11:56:52 in this instance, martin lost blood pressure very quickly? yes 11:57:02 dr. bao looking for bruising, better course would be to take a look internally? right 11:57:17 that was not done in this case? correct 11:57:31 move to the injuries that zimmerman sustained........ provided photos from the scene of his bloody nose? yes.... and photo taken of the back of his head showing streaming blood? yes 11:58:00 also provided photos taken later that night by Sanford PD? yes 11:58:15 talk about head trauma, mechanism of blood force injury to head? yes. what happens when hit in head by fist or concrete? well, ok.... what happened is the head wound...... say the heads fixed, made to move or is moving and stops suddenly, brain will shift... brain like gelatin, move back and forth inside cranium... as it moves, 3 possibilities, bruising by impacting the inside or you get bleeding, intracranial hemorrhage sufficient it could kill you, other type is brain cell injury..... connected through fibers which activates.... when brain moves back and forth from impact the axons will be stretched, within limited motion the way we are walking around and such.... no big deal.... if movement is violent, stretches the axons, causes injury to the wall if the movement is mild, the injury is prepared by axon... gradual increase in force like running into something and head goes forward and hits panel, so great it will injure axons and they won't be able to prepare and they die..... lot of brain cells and a lot of connections, can lose a good number and still be alright... at some point you'll have impairment and die 12:02:11 impacts like concrete, worry about intracranial bleeding and the axonal injury.... more bleeding than axon injury... always dangerous... if you hit your head here on the floor, carpet it absorbs.... if your head hits concrete, dangerous... but to kill somebody sure if you banged them hard enough.... didn't impact brain significant, still have stunning effect..... football players with concussions is just axon injury... could get mild concussion.... fall and hit your head, don't lose consciousness, appear stunned..... 12:03:45 stunning goes to concussion to injury..... stunned from the impact... better than concussion 12:04:07 progression depending on how hard the impact? yes and how many times, how much force is used.... if you get head hit against concrete with sufficient force to tear the scalp, you're going to be stunned..... not that common... hair cropped or bald removes the cushion... lacerations there's some trauma 12:05:08 talking about lacerations to the scalp, zimmerman had 2 lacerations to the back of his head, states 76..... identified as the photo taken of zimmerman that night, Jonathan manalo... evidence bleeding to head? yes two sites on the head 12:06:24 later saw pictures where blood was wiped away? right 12:06:42 take a look at 74.... what do you see in this picture? bruise on left side, not a good photograph 12:07:56 do you see in this photo what looks like 2 separate areas of swelling? yes... injury here and here, represent lacerations since it looks like clouded blood.... valley, impact site is swollen and then this is swollen here... this is not swollen, two separate impacts two different lacerations with area in between not swollen.... bleeding under the scalp 12:09:19 lump they get after hitting head is blood as opposed to another fluid? yes its blood.... 12:09:36 talk about curvature of the head, why its two separate impacts? real simple, unyielding surface, circular area hits it.... flatten on contact, you can see if it was one impact it would be swollen between the two 12:10:22 commented earlier, not easy to get laceration from flat object? yeah because it takes a force... everyone bangs their head, you don't get laceration 12:10:47 mechanism where laceration occurred? one is if direct impact, crush the skin and as you crush it and push inside the impact, get a tail... if you hit it at an angle so you slide, the surface holds it, and the rest of it pulls against that... so you tear, laceration is nothing but a tear.... 12:11:45 exhibit 57.... anything here that shows what you're talking about? see the swelling here and a little valley here, swollen here and swollen here... laceration here and a blood clot over the lacerations..... one of them is almost an inch and the other is 1/5 of an inch 12:12:33 laceration significant? in this case.... marker of force, real bad laceration rarely rarely.... people bled to death.... not this type of laceration.... indicates you had severe force, not just a bump 12:13:11 possible to have head struck on something hard enough to ring the bell, stun you and not leave mark? oh sure, see that in abused children.... not a mark on their head, but skull fracture 12:13:50 the presence of the injury on the outside, doesn't mean there wasn't additional impact or the impact was minor? you can get severe head trauma without any marks, or you can get marks and have head trauma.... more commonly you have trauma, but can get it without mark 12:14:30 amount of force necessary to cause those injuries, enough to cause stunning effect? oh yes. don't need to have a laceration or big bruise to..... get stunned.... medically referred to ultra-mild concussion... experience that when you hit your head 12:15:19 if you sustained a stunning blow like this and continued to receive additional blows to the head, would the additional blows continue to cause stunning effect? yeah. 12:15:46 short period of time, get multiple other concussions, people have died..... recognized syndrome 12:16:06 could be accumulative just that night into multiple stunning effects leading to concussion? oh yeah..... I'm using stunning because it's just a mild concussion.... not incapacitated, not knocked out.... hit head hard is stunning 12:16:55 there has been some discussion in testimony about punctate abrasions.... punctate in this photo? right here.... reddish markings, indicates impact with a flat surface that was not smooth 12:17:46 would concrete from every day sidewalk have that surface? yes 12:17:58 consistent with his head impacting a sidewalk? yes 12:18:17 punctate abrasion is around the temple? right, it's not smooth.... area here and here and here and here 12:18:36 noticeable lump higher up? right over here.... consequence of impact? yes.... a knot... hematoma 12:18:58 associated with the impact that caused punctate abrasions? yes sir 12:19:08 could that then be caused by 1 or more impacts with the sidewalk? yes sir. 12:19:22 let me show you states 70, a view of the right side of Zimmerman's head, see anything here that would suggest impact with a fist or sidewalk? start to see punctate and adhesion over here 12:19:55 another photo of same side, 71.... ? injury here, reddish areas 12:20:15 other side of the head, 73.... approach the witness? oh I can see its not problem 12:20:38 in this photo with blunt force trauma? marks here too, assume a print photo would show better, some punctate marks here. approach witness briefly? YES YOU MAY. 12:21:20 right here, you see an arch of punctate of abrasion, pile here and another arch.... hematoma anywhere? suggested, but not as distinct as other side 12:21:58 this area above the ear? swollen in that area, hard to say definitely 12:22:14 consistent with swelling as blunt force trauma? yes 12:22:25 this general area here? right 12:22:53 have seen exhibit 79... first photo taken at scene? yes. what signs of trauma do you see? have to look at original, this appears bruised... look at outline... swelling and abrasion there.... 12:23:39 if you look at this, see the congestion in nose and the abrasion, outline here is smooth and here it bulges out and comes back... compare to another photo, this is consistent with possible fracture.... next photo a few hours later, this swelling is not as prominent... that's what ENS thought he had a fractured nose 12:24:42 injury consistent with being punched in nose? yes sir. 12:24:53 exhibit 48.... take several hours later..... point out what you were referring too? swelling appears to be gone, it can't be gone if just blood... suggestive of fact he had displaced fracture here, when examined by ENS they just pushed it back in either consciously or not... held there by muscle 12:25:47 if displaced or not or even fractured, does trauma consistently show being struck in the face? right and of course another blow here 12:26:15 states 72.... part of forehead you were talking about? right.... vaguely see this line here, and another... when you look at the prints they're redding markings..... those are redding areas, not consistent with concrete, more like a punch than concrete 12:27:16 skin is intact, injury underneath skin.... something that doesn't wash out? oh no it doesn't wash out... underneath the skin 12:27:36 would it likely be a different impact than the one that caused injury? yes too far down, not the same thing 12:27:52 more to the right, see evidence there of some sort? right. mark like this and then mark here.... photograph myself.... 12:28:29 separate red mark on forehead? this and this are same impact.... I think you have 6 ID injuries, 2 lacerations on back, impacts on temple, that's 4, nose is 5 and the forehead is 6..... 12:29:12 may there also have been impacts that for one reason or another, land but didn't manifest in injury? Objection! Speculation! SUSTAINED 12:29:34 in a fight situation where someone may be resisting attack, expect them as being pushed to concrete to resist by trying to sit up? I would assume so 12:29:59 possible there may be other impacts, not as pronounced, some ability to resist? Objection! Speculation! OVERRULED 12:30:19 the head wasn't clean in some photos, definite evidence of 6... doesn't mean only 6, but the 6 I can say. moment? YES YOU MAY 12:30:53 (sidebar) 12:31:51 LADIES AND GENTLEMAN, RECESS FOR LUNCH. NO DISCUSSIONS. NO REPORTS. NO ELECTRONIC DEVICE. NO SOCIAL MEDIA. NOTEPADS FACE DOWN... RECESS UNTIL 1:30 12:32:53 FREE TO TAKE LUNCH BREAK, BE BACK AT 1:30, DONT DISCUSS TESTIMONY 12:33:08 COURT IN RECESS UNTIL 1:30 ======================================== 13:30:00 PLEASE BE SEATED, BACK ON RECORD. DR. DI MAIO OUTSIDE? 13:30:58 HAVE THE JURY COME IN..... 13:31:48 omara: approach for a moment? YES (sidebar) 13:32:31 WELCOME BACK... QUESTIONS: DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE CASE? NO HANDS RAISED. READ OR LISTEN TO ANY REPORTS ABOUT THE CASE? NO HANDS RAISED. USE ELECTRONIC DEVICE FOR RESEARCH? NO HANDS RAISED. READ OR CREATE SOCIAL MEDIA? NO HANDS RAISED CROSS 13:33:24 rionda: afternoon.... 13:33:38 not saying or testifying as to who started? correct. whether who attacked who, can't say? correct 13:33:59 in fact you can't testify as to who threw first punch? correct. whether there was a first punch? correct 13:34:18 you can't say whether it was martin defending or Zimmerman defending himself? when it first started, correct 13:34:34 only focusing on time of actual shot? that's correct 13:34:42 not stating that everything Zimmerman said in the reenactment is the gospel truth? correct. just the nature of gunshot wound is consistent with his accounts 13:35:10 gave 5 statements prior to that one? mentioned that to me before. in your depo? yes 13:35:22 why only the reenactment and not the other statements? I know what the reenactment says, holding to that account being presented here 13:36:05 correct in stating the 1st statement is most accurate? 1st is usually more accurate when giving weeks or months later... get that in depositions 13:36:27 mentioned prior experience in san Antonio, go to Alamo and go down to water? about 2 levels down 13:36:48 mentioned when you worked there for 15-20 years? 25 years 13:36:58 important for you to make sure you understood all facts? depends on the case, sometimes you want all the information, personal 13:37:20 bring you a case, want to know what all witnesses said, not just one... make sure consistent? in most cases yes sir 13:37:37 in this case, focused on defendant's statement and good's statement? focused on defendants... all that I'm concentrating on.... went to see if his statement was consistent with what I found... the rest I can't say. weren't provided statements from other witnesses? have to disregard them in regards to gunshot wound; only Zimmerman was there 13:38:31 another person was there? a couple witnesses.... well the other person there is not here? right 13:38:50 aware the deceased/ victim was on phone with lady? yes. didn't review her statement? no 13:39:09 worked with medical examiner, find all info before opinion? depends on the case... often info from witnesses goes toward manner of death and not cause of death 13:39:35 suggesting all witness testimony should be disregarded? not for the jury, in my purposes not important in my opinion 13:40:08 not saying that should be disregarded? not what I'm doing, for the jury 13:40:26 west asked you hypotheticals; in order to give opinion.... has to be based on accurate and truth? no, just supposed this and this happened. speculating? just giving presentation and asking what it is 13:41:06 agree that at least 1 statement you relied on, the reenactment, Zimmerman has self-interest? yes 13:41:27 argue he has bias in not telling the truth? one could argue that but I think that's your argument 13:41:41 if his statement doesn't match evidence, it's not the truth? that's correct sir 13:41:53 I guess in your review, aware that only person armed was Zimmerman? yes 13:42:04 aware that he wasn't armed with firearm, but also armed with a flashlight? yes, photo of flashlight in scene photos 13:42:23 this right here? yes. could this do damage to someone? I thought it was one of those old steel heavy things, not a really dangerous weapon... hit hard like that? may cause bruising, not of significance 13:43:11 not provided with statement of surdyka who described Zimmerman on top of martin before the shooting? not provided that statement 13:43:29 not provided statement of bahador were you? no sir 13:43:38 provided john good statement? yes. aware he gave additional sworn statement, didn't hear this at all? no sir, I don't think so (smacked hands) 13:44:00 aware that he also stated he didn't hear anything hitting concrete at all? no sir (smacked the desk) 13:44:31 mention that... shooting animals, animals were alive? yes.... animals kept in federally approved area; vet present at time and the animals have to be anesthetized. how many times were they shot? I'd have to read the paper, determine if testing firearm was valid. found it was? yes. 13:45:27 testified all over the world? a couple places. criminal matters for government and state? yes 13:45:43 testified....... in your years? 6 going on 7 now 13:46:06 said over 50 times or so? no I don't think I said a number of times I testified... most are civil cases 13:46:26 drew Peterson case? criminal... testified for defense? yes. how much are you paid today? same thing I charge everybody $400 an hour. how much charged so far? up to yesterday $2400, not a complicated case forensically.... 13:47:11 mention that..... notes, to refresh your memory? if you get a whole bunch of papers, easier to put the facts down 13:47:41 prepared a 5 or 6 page notes you provided to me and west? uh yeah 5 pages, double spaced/double sided... closer to 10 or 8 13:48:09 weren't there, viewed autopsy report? yes. opinion comes from Dr. Bao's medical report? yes 13:48:25 shot to the heart? yes. no dispute about that? correct 13:48:35 did I understand you correctly that if you pulled my heart out I could sit and walk and talk for how long? 10-15 seconds 13:48:56 I could just keep talking and talking and talking without a heart? that's right.... it's between 10-15 seconds, dependent on oxygen supply to the head... that's why SWAT will shoot in the head 13:49:25 even though my heart is gone id still feel pain or not? oh you'd still feel pain 13:49:38 believe it was 10-15 seconds....? I said I can't said, minimum amount of time was between 10-15 seconds. maximum was 3 minutes? in all medical probability no cardiac function after 1-3 minutes 13:50:16 not here to testify as to while this was going on who was yelling for help? no sir... not testifying to that 13:50:29 can't testify as to the statements George said he pulled gun from holster and shot? right I can just say the injuries are consistent with how he shot him, but not how he got the gun 13:50:56 how he claims he got the gun while someone was straddling him, can't say that happened that way? can't tell that by scientific method.... but Zimmerman said it happened that way, means its true right? can't testify to that 13:51:27 physically impossible to do what he said happened? I would say it 13:51:37 not here to say that and how he took the holster? right, outside my ability to make conclusion on that 13:51:49 just to say how close it was to skin and clothes? right 13:51:59 is it not true that one possibility is martin was over Zimmerman and he was like this.....? he'd be someway over him, not sure of the angle 13:52:24 this angle? I can't tell you... if you put your hand out, since it rotates.... still get the path, consistent with him being over 13:52:44 also consistent he was standing up? problem with that is the shirt would be pulled down.... if you shot through the shirt in that area, when the shirt is let go and put back in position, defect in shirt would be over here if pulled this way.... moved it to where it over lined the gun shot to get away from the chest 13:53:38 saying martin had to physically be on top like this? saying that physical evidence is consistent with martin being over Zimmerman 13:53:56 not also consistent with martin pulling away from Zimmerman on the ground, same angle, and Zimmerman shooting at that time? yes 13:54:40 the other question I had.... possibilities, blunt trauma to Zimmerman's head, concrete as possibility or maybe a tree branch for any of those bruises? if you hit someone with a tree branch 13:55:10 if you bump in it? where in face or back of head... either one? well you would expect abrasions.... he had contusion up there... abrasion is scrap. did he have any? yes. small on right side of nose and impact abrasions on temples and in the back 13:55:55 struggling with you, I push you and you hit the tree, caused that way? well you'd have to have a tree branch there and I didn't see any 13:56:20 if you just bumped a head.... wood gives, police used to carry wooden batons, less dangerous than metal... hit someone hard enough on back of head you get a laceration 13:56:50 any gardening at all? no my wife does 13:56:56 I do gardening and I get a bald head, bruise from tree branch? yeah an abrasion, abrasions back here 13:57:15 not aware that there were trees out there.... defendant says struggle near trees? I thought you meant trees on ground 13:57:40 possibility then correct for some of the abrasions? you could have one from the tree 13:57:54 could be from rolling on concrete as they both struggle or fight? yeah... impact with concrete 13:58:15 curious what you mentioned about martin, described injury to left hand..... what did Dr. Bao call it...? he called it so I have to go to with it. you saw the photo though? not sure if I did or not 13:58:51 assuming that's an abrasion, may be additional injuries under knuckles? no. can't disagree with it as an abrasion, but if you punch someone will you get bruises on knuckles, yes or no... if they suspected something they should've cut into hand and saw underneath 13:59:36 if persons alive, just wait a day or so and see if you have hemorrhaging.... but you said sometimes you won't see it? yes....... if it's not there it's not important 14:00:05 can hit someone and not leave bruising on knuckles? correct. Zimmerman could've hit him and not had bruising on knuckles? correct 14:00:26 shown photos of Zimmerman's head, opinions to what they were? yes.... someone familiar with his head, doctor from the past would know what's existing and what's not? may or may not.... you don't really remember a patients shape of head, especially if seeing multiple patients 14:01:04 that would be the best person to see George alive the next day, what he had and didn't have? in theory, if done correctly, yes..... emergency room records and doctor records are lousy in describing injuries 14:01:36 fire rescue do an honorable job? yes, not incompetent, treat them.... not document injuries 14:02:03 fire rescue are interested in injuries? in treating a person.... mention two lacerations, don't say where they are 14:02:22 folgate measured for you? yeah, but didn't say which one was on which side.... 14:02:52 talking about same photograph? the one with blood... clouded 14:03:07 agree with treatment it didn't need stitches? I agree, but outside my area of expertise... its treatment 14:03:47 you did review fire rescue report? yes 14:03:56 patient has GCS 15? glascoe index thing. what does it mean? that he's perfectly fine 14:04:19 people that dealt with him right after his interaction? correct 14:04:28 did I understand correctly you're saying difference between photo at scene..... 14:04:57 blood on front taken by police, something wrong with nose? yes... if you look at the photo take 4 hours later that deviation is not there 14:05:29 your opinion is you believe fire rescue did it without noticing they did it? its consistent with a fracture, since no one.... ENS thought there was a fraction, if it's now replaced that would account for differences... agree his nose is perfect? not swollen to right side as deviated in first photo 14:06:18 possible not fractured at all? the swelling would still be there and it's not 14:06:57 one is smaller than this and ones about like that? correct. that he'd die from those? no, indicative of hard impact 14:07:15 or just tree limb or rolling around? indicative of hard impact. 14:07:26 don't know if someone hitting him or rolling around? hard impact, that's all 14:07:45 aware that he was offered medical care and he declined? yes sir 14:07:57 also I believe folgate and fire rescue didn't notice other injuries to top of head, missed it? no.... the bleeding continued after ENS, or didn't notice it because they didn't consider it significant 14:08:31 went the next day to facility and folgate treated him and she didn't note all the injuries? medical personnel don't describe injuries properly 14:09:06 other thing I want to ask is... the photo taken at the scene, got blood there.... put my hand over that, expect my hand to have what? blood 14:09:54 agree that photograph I just showed you, bleeding like that... blood will go down if standing? depends how profusely... laying on my back, blood will go inward? partial, some will go in and out 14:10:32 more difficult to swallow or say anything? depends on how profusely 14:10:43 blood will go into my mouth eventually? yes. harder to swallow or talk? yeah unless you start swallowing it 14:10:59 you did not view the video taken of Zimmerman when brought to police and could walk fine? I've seen it.... kept playing it on TV all the time... seemed to be walking fine? correct 14:11:28 recording you saw of his interview was after that? yes. but that evening, he was walking and talking fine? yes 14:11:52 agree there's no witness to the actual shooting except defendant and deceased? correct 14:12:09 regarding gunshot wound, it was up to 4 inches as max and 2 as minimum? right... 2 inches accounting for sweatshirt and hoody? no. the hole creates barrier? right.... between the skin and muzzle 14:12:45 ever worn one of those hoodies? not that type 14:12:52 seen others wear them? yes sir.... wear them big? yes. hang down? yes. something in it, wouldn't it hang down? Objection! OVERRULED. yes sir 14:13:22 make it a little tighter? yes 14:13:49 asked about DNA, head of lab in Texas? yes. asked about DNA and possible packaging or improper packaging? yes 14:14:07 surprised that same object or evidence..... plastic would cause mold and degrade DNA? no I said you're supposed to dry the blood, package separately so that one piece doesn't contaminate the other... don't put in plastic bag, plastic is air tight... wrap in paper, the paper breathes 14:15:03 put the clothing in a bag....? always get mold into it, but if it dries... that's why you dry to get mold. assuming you don't? you'll get mold.... DNA gone? yeah you can lose some.... surprised if DNA was found in area that was mispackaged? no 14:15:49 said you reviewed firearms report? yes. 14:15:56 agreed with that in the sense that the findings and range, stippling, soot, gun powder? right 14:16:31 safe to assume that your opinion is that somehow after George was punched, injury to his nose... you believe it may have fractured and displaced and someone put it back? sure he could've. would've been painful? yes. 14:17:09 anybody could've done it? yes. and nobody could've done it and it wasn't as bad as it thinks? well if just swelling wouldn't go down in 4 hours... deviated because it was fractured 14:17:44 when we bleed, its profuse? scalp bleeding is always profuse... more than other areas? yes. why? no idea, that's how its designed 14:18:14 so the bottom line, possibilities about how the gunshot wound occurred? to a degree, consistent with his account 14:18:33 not saying his account, just when he already had gun out and pointing it at martin? yes. at that point, don't know if martin was backing away or going toward? consistent with Zimmerman's account 14:19:10 also consistent with martin pulling back? I told you that too, yes sir 14:19:31 not here to testify about holster or how it works? no. nor about firearm either 14:20:08 sweatshirt with hoody.... still going to grab if big? yes sir.... 14:20:38 testified about your expertise is once body is dead, just trauma? trauma is pathology, will testify to that... don't testify to treatment at all 14:21:06 aware that out there at the complex, also sprinkler boxes? I didn't see any of those 14:21:43 moment? YES.... 14:21:52 know whether Zimmerman is right or left handed? right handed 14:22:10 thank you very much REDIRECT 14:22:38 notes you prepared, a summary of measurements that martin was 5'11 and weigh 158 lb.? right. BMI was 22 which would be normal range for a person his size? correct 14:23:07 indicated that the location of gun shot? Objection Leading! SUSTAINED 14:23:18 where the gunshot wound was on martin? yes 14:23:25 do you need your notes to form your opinions once you have facts before you? no 14:23:35 do notes include several pages of photos that were most pertinent in assessing trauma? yes, 4 pages are just photos... shown those here? yes sir 14:23:56 the scope of your work was to consider the statement made to police about how the shooting took place at moment shot was fired and for you to consider forensic evidence to determine whether or not Zimmerman's statement is consistent with physical evidence? Objection! Leading and Compound. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION? yes. yes 14:24:54 I have to interpret objective evidence, not basing opinions on witnesses... they're wrong all the time... 14:25:08 review witness statements that contradicted physical evidence? all the time... someone stood over man and shot him and two architects and a secretary saw that, bullet from gun didn't match... half a dozen of those cases 14:25:51 bahador and didn't claim to see the individuals at time shot fired? no. surdyka said she was looking at individuals some distance away and believes she was looking at the fired shot, described Zimmerman on top of martin? Objection! Mischaracterization! REPHRASE 14:26:52 surdyka said she was looking out window and believes she was looking at individuals when shot was fired... at that time, Zimmerman was on top and martin was faced down... is that possible given forensic evidence you know? no sir, not possible.. he was shot in the front 14:27:35 would her statement do you good? no sir... example of how an eye witness gets it wrong? yes sir 14:27:53 did consider john goods statement.... ? Objection! Leading SUSTAINED 14:28:07 john good testified he saw Zimmerman on his back on the ground and saw martin straddling him on his knees, striking Zimmerman in an MMA style and then went back inside, some seconds later shots were fired.... position he saw consistent with forensic evidence? yes sir 14:28:54 that statement is separate and apart from Zimmerman? right, but wouldn't use that to give my opinion, use the evidence in conjunction with Zimmerman's statement 14:29:27 you pointed out in your direct evidence, there were two lacerations on the back of Zimmerman's head.... testified you believed those two to be from separate impact? yes sir. could see valley in between? yes 14:29:52 two blows that created lacerations? yes, so separate you couldn't get the two from one impact 14:30:22 are the two lacerations on the back of his head, consistent with two separate impacts? yes 14:30:38 is it... trying to figure out how to ask about tree branches, any big branches on ground to use as club? only trunks on ground and I didn't see anything 14:31:14 to receive lacerations from tree trunk, what would have had to happen? upright sitting and go back violently against the trunk on two occasions... still blunt trauma to back of head, twice 14:31:42 or it could have been on the sidewalk? right Objection! OVERRULED 14:31:58 is that scenario more plausible? cement is more plausible especially from the side of the head 14:32:18 commented of course, different role professionals play in dealing with people injured? right. 14:32:35 their objective is to treat someone, mine is to document injuries and interpret the injuries... their job is different than my job 14:33:07 opportunity to review the physician assistant notes that folgate took next day? yes. notice that she documented what would be black eyes? yes. 14:33:27 consistent with showing up later from blow to nose? secondary blackened of the eye, shows up later... punch eyes directly it would be more immediate 14:33:56 not surprising to you that the blow to the nose from the photos... might be associated black eyes the next day? wouldn't be surprising at all 14:34:17 issue whether his nose was actually deviated or just swelling, is that significant whether or not he was punched in the face? still punched in the face.... swelling is gone 4 hours later, nose displaced and put into position 14:34:55 possible his nose wasn't deviated.... does that matter if he was punched? obviously hit in the face and forehead 14:35:22 the GCS 15 scale, reference to paramedic note? area on the form where a 15 means they're walking, talking, breathing, heart rate, not really bad.... most people come into ER are 15... to go down you to get into trouble 14:36:00 not claiming that Zimmerman wasn't able to walk or talk that evening not withstanding his injuries? correct... more a stunning injury, not significant concussion 14:36:37 something that happens after the actual impact? Objection! Leading. REPHRASE 14:36:47 consequences of blow, those that develop over time? concussions show up immediately, problem is they can be subtle... that's why sporting events like having doctors there.... lay people won't pick up on concussions 14:37:24 feeling it when getting hit like that? oh yes. if you get punched in the nose, you know it. continue to hurt for a while? yes. what about getting head hit on concrete? could... especially if lacerations 14:37:59 able to know what was happening to them was life threatening? no because they're stunned... cant interpret 14:38:17 even looking at them outside, could say they're alright and then die a few hours later... that's why police should've taken Zimmerman to hospital, if he died in station family would've sued 14:38:54 even if no evidence of not walking or? you don't play around... jails always lose the lawsuits 14:39:14 if someone is in the process of being hit and having head struck on cement, stunning affect and the pain associate with it... in the moment, not knowing when it'll stop... say I can take 3 more of these? Objection! Leading! SUSTAINED 14:40:07 these circumstances.... overwhelming person on receiving end? Objection! Leading Argumentative! OVERRULED TO BOTH.... yes 14:40:31 some questions about the packaging of evidence, if wet and bio material... testimony that the wet outer shirt was sealed in bag while wet and placed in paper bag outside of that... good evidence handling? no sir.... when bag was open it smelled of mold? its decomposing... air dry and put in paper bags, not plastic 14:41:22 accepted forensic practice subjecting evidence to that type of packaging... in that condition for a month.... that would promote degradation or the integrity of DNA? oh yes 14:41:55 rionda mentioned if martin put hand over Zimmerman's nose at this point in time there may have been transfer of blood? yes. Objection! SUSTAINED 14:42:25 if martin put hand over Zimmerman in this condition, testimony there may have been transfer of blood? yes 14:42:40 I take it you would have no additional information if his nose was bleeding at some point during the incident? correct... impact to nose, eventually bleed can't tell if you'll bleed immediately... depends on position your head is in? yes 14:43:24 if you find something important but if you don't, absence doesn't make it important? right... general fact that's understood... especially if you don't know the statistical probability... how often do you find something, how often it occurs 14:44:09 do you agree environmental conditions affect physical evidence? oh yeah 14:44:24 about 3 hours from the event until martins body was transported, during that time... covered by blanket...body and hands were exposed to elements? right, do you wrap it tightly or wrap it loosely... plastic tends to rub and be stiff 14:45:07 also consider that there's been testimony, the weather varied from light drizzle to heavy rain... could affect DNA evidence collected? true. or how the hands were handled... or how they were washed prior to photo? that's why pathologist is supposed to be with the body, should never leave the body even if you have assistants helping you 14:46:06 why you may trust your assistants to follow protocol, you would verify? right... examine clothing on body before you take it off and then stand there to make sure they're doing it appropriately.... 14:46:53 marked as states 28..... Object! Beyond Scope of Cross! I DONT KNOW WHAT IT IS 14:47:14 states 28 offered in evidence, picture of martins chest on scene.... states 95 in evidence, photo at time of autopsy, before cleaning or washing? Same Objection! PLEASE APPROACH (sidebar) 14:49:50 states 28 was taken at the scene, any blood present in photo? yes blood around nipple. 14:50:06 look at states 95, taken at time of autopsy before body was clean, any blood? no... in the original photo, stream of blood and its missing in this photo. been cleaned? Objection! Speculation SUSTAINED, OVERRULED TO ARGUMENTATIVE RE-CROSS 14:51:08 photos shown to you....? gunshot wound, one at the scene 14:51:22 show the sweatshirt is up? yeah been pulled up 14:51:30 at the scene and transporting the body, sweatshirt down absorb the blood? sure 14:51:49 expect the blood in the sweatshirt? right 14:52:00 asked questions by west, agree he is not evidence? right. use his words to form opinion? no the reports and my report 14:52:37 agree there was absence of x rays or proof of broken nose? correct 14:52:48 agree there was absence or documentation of brain injury? oh yes 14:53:00 absence of anything being washed off the body? can't say it was washed or not... if that shirt was lying and they pulled it off, could wipe off blood... not supposed to do that.... take photo of wound intact before cleaned it 14:53:39 at the scene, remove clothing or stay on? the clothing should remain on body so the photo at scene is proper, but at medical examiner's office.... shouldn't have undressed body would be wiping it, techniques weren't correct. but you did rely on his findings? I had no other choice. document what occurred? right 14:54:44 absence of evidence anything was washed by rain? it would have to be, have to know how much was raining.. needed observation. pure speculation? yeah unless you were there 14:55:16 there was a baseness of vomiting, no vomit out there? no 14:55:26 agree that a jury who heard john good should rely on what he said on the witness stand? interesting, if he has a good statement at first and then not as good on the stand... depends 14:56:00 rely on his statement? disregarded witness........ supported or validated statements. witnesses are all over the place... but isn't what George said, in effect a witness? yes, but that's why you don't believe him.... check the tests and the autopsies 14:56:58 relied on one of his statements, gun was out and was 2-4 inches? right RE-RE-DIRECT 14:57:14 absence of evidence notion..... if good didn't testify that he heard George's head hitting cement like this, mean that Zimmerman's head didn't get hit? no 14:57:42 if good didn't hear martin hit Zimmerman in head, mean he wasn't hit in head? no 14:57:58 MAY HE BE EXCUSED? yes. yes. CALL NEXT WITNESS.... 14:58:24 omara: one moment...... 14:59:26 (sworn in) 14:59:43 rionda: approach? YES (sidebar) 15:00:23 name? norton bonaparte jr. occupation? city manager. employed? 1 yr. and a half. when this happened? yes 15:00:51 event of playing the 911 call to martin family.... decisions made for that point, not important now.. just event 15:01:23 decision was made to play tape for martin family? to play a number of tapes 15:01:34 police evidence tape? 911 and non-emergency number 15:01:47 focus attention on one even though several were played.. 15:01:54 who took care of process of playing the tapes? mayor's office, myself and mayor 15:02:09 was there any conversation with law enforcement as to how to accomplish? not witnesses, they were parents 15:02:24 conversation with law enforcement as to how to play the tapes to these people? no 15:02:43 you just... decide on your own? make them public, wanted to play to family first as courtesy 15:03:07 when decision to play the tapes for family, your decision or mayors decision on how to occur? decision to just play them 15:03:27 to play them separately? no there was not 15:03:42 it occurred then from other testimony, tape was played with entire family present? yes. you the one playing? I don't recall who was playing we used a computer 15:04:03 who was doing what with the tapes? disk, laptops so they could hear. who was doing what? I don't recall either myself or mayor. who was present? me, mayor, family, attorneys 15:04:32 law enforcement present? no. decision you and mayor made? I asked family and they said they would rather not have law enforcement present. discuss with chief lee? just informed him and other officers to not be in the same room 15:05:05 how many times the tape was played? which tape... the 911 tape? no I do not. always there? in the vicinity, not always in the room 15:05:23 either you or mayor in room at all times? I do not recall 15:05:32 how many times was the tape played while you were in the room? I don't recall. more than one? the tape with screams, yes... anyone in particular? I don't recall.. just wanted to hear it again 15:06:00 did you record or take notes to any responses they had from that one tape? no. record the even in any form or fashion? no we did not. recorded by audio or video? no. court reporter there to document? no it was not 15:06:27 was any consideration given to you or mayor to record it for law enforcement? releasing to media that evening, wanted family to have courtesy to hear it first 15:06:50 any consideration to concept to record it in case law enforcement needed it when half a dozen family members listened for the first time? that's a no 15:07:32 attorneys present, were martin family attorneys? correct. CROSS 15:07:55 rionda: bottom line was that it was the decent thing to play for family before release? our intent. that's why it occurred the way it did? that is correct 15:08:17 MAY HE BE EXCUSED? CALL NEXT WITNESS omara: approach? unique way to appear witness (sidebar) 15:10:31 TAKE A 15 MINUTE RECESS, NOTEPADS FACE DOWN ON CHAIR, FOLLOW DEPUTY OUT OF COURTROOM 15:11:03 PLEASE BE SEATED. COURT IN RECESS FOR 15 MINUTES =============================================================== 15:25:20 (Zimmerman talking with attorney assistant) 15:30:42 PLEASE BE SEATED... BACK ON RECORD... omara: have the witness ready on ipad, waiting for that to get ready.... my client is ok with representing this witness in this fashion. IS THAT CORRECT MR. ZIMMERMAN? yes your honor 15:37:25 (setting up the witness) omara: this will probably be my last witness and then begin proffer.... should be done tomorrow 15:39:17 PLEASE BE SEATED... defense calls eloise dillegard 15:39:29 (sworn in via FaceTime) 15:39:53 home sick, appreciate you spending time with us today. name? eloise dilligard. live at retreat at twin lakes? yes. how long? 2.5 years. moved out since then? yes 15:40:45 time you lived at retreat, knew George Zimmerman? I did. how long? ever since we moved in October 2009 15:41:06 friends? he was my neighbor, spoke on friendly basis... no problem with one another 15:41:15 knew of his involvement with watch program? yes 15:41:28 see him patrolling as part of the watch? no. knew him as friend or neighbor? friendly neighbor 15:41:41 focus attention on February 26th, the night martin was shot, remember? I do 15:41:55 tell the jury what first brought your attention to the event you came to find out was the shooting? I was coming from Wal-Mart, down Rinehart to go to Oregon and make left, police approached me from rear, he wanted to go around me.... coming up Oregon I noticed police were pulling into neighborhood... I looked down from mail station to left and saw crime scene tape.... I didn't want to go directly down, came around right hand side to go around back way, asked a couple guys.. they didn't know but another police was coming.... 15:43:10 weather like at that time? it was very rainy that night 15:43:19 at some point as you got closer to the crime scene, notice any familiar vehicle? yes. which? George's truck. describe? gray Honda ridgeline 15:43:49 where you noticed the truck? because of the way our street is, it was nearing the curb down by the crime scene which I believe was on retreat view circle 15:44:14 know the area as the T intersection? yes. 15:44:21 may not have known names then, a woman who lives on end section jenna lauer, know her? no 15:44:40 she was living in that first townhome just past at the intersection of the T, know what I'm talking about? yes 15:45:10 presume jennas was first in that row of houses, where was the truck parked in reference to that? truck would've been looking toward the east... slightly south of where her condo would be 15:45:36 walk out her front door, looking right at the truck? look to the right from her condo 15:45:52 that would put the truck on the curb to the right of that street from her condo? correct 15:46:07 retreat view circle, the one that circles around as perimeter? it does 15:46:16 is lauer on street that comes off of retreat view circle? her condo would be facing retreat view circle, yes 15:46:36 straight out her front door, into the clubhouse? no down the street to the west 15:46:52 saw it in the area of the crime scene? yes 15:47:00 may come back to map.... came up to the area describe what you saw? a few people standing on the sidewalk, people who were down by the yellow tape, I looked around to see if I saw George because I saw his truck, after I didn't see him I recognized a lady from HOA and asked her... she said Objection! Hearsay! SUSTAINED 15:48:12 omara: your honor.... did you know the person's name who you spoke to? I don't, she's from Pembroke pines 15:48:30 conversation with her about the events? I asked what was going on 15:48:39 at some point then, did you speak to any law enforcement officers? after I could not find George, I attempted to talk to some of other witnesses that were there and after I felt like well I'm not in harm's way, I was walking away and police came up and said you don't want to talk to me.... and I said I wasn't here when anything happened. 15:49:26 he said? we're trying to find someone who knows the people involved in shooting. further conversation? he was going to take a picture and bring to us. 15:49:55 did that officer identify to you by name? he did not... I'm usually pretty perceptive to look at name badge, but I don't remember 15:50:13 did he show you a picture or two of people involved? came back with an iPhone with two pictures.... 15:50:35 identify either by name or description the others who were present? young Caucasian man, either Jeremy or Jonathan.... and a couple there, married but I didn't get their names 15:51:01 present when the pictures were shown? they were. able to identify anyone in the two pictures? George Zimmerman my neighbor 15:51:20 seen those pictures here quite a bit in the court room, was that a picture where Zimmerman had a bloody nose? he did have a bloody nose, yes 15:51:41 describe the difference you saw between the picture that night and Zimmerman you knew before? nose was bloody and to me it looked disfigured, it was somewhat to the left or right, not the way I knew him.... 15:52:16 did it take you a minute or two to figure out that was the same person? his face still looked the same, only difference was disfigurement and the blood... advise police his name? yes. did anyone else identify the person as well? Objection! Hearsay! SUSTAINED 15:52:59 after identified George, shown a second picture? I was. identified that person? I didn't know his name, seen him in passing probably earlier that day, didn't know who he was. know now that was trayvon martin? yes 15:53:32 after you identified Zimmerman, who did you talk to about that event? that night..... if I can remember correctly, where his wife was.... I knew he was married and I didn't see her... looked to be heart, where's his wife 15:54:19 after that? nothing else I could do at that point, I was no longer in harm's way... went to my house, parked in my driveway, went up to George's house to see if Shellie was there, nobody came... shortly after Shellie pulled up.... perpendicular to the driveway and she asked me... Objection! Hearsay! SUSTAINED. omara: offered to be heard. NO SPEAKING RESPONSES. PLEASE APPROACH (Sidebar) 15:59:27 talking about conversation with Shellie Zimmerman? yes. brief. what did she do after that? once I completed my conversation she sped off to the crime scene 15:59:53 there with police... did you go back to the area that night at all? yes I did go back down there to make sure she was ok.... 16:00:13 present during, questioned by law enforcement, present during any other witnesses discussions? yes, the young man there alone and the other couple spoke to policeman about what they knew 16:00:46 were you there when those people gave statements to law enforcement? there for verbal, not written 16:01:00 be more precise... one might have been Jeremy and another Jonathan? that's what I think I remember, not sure 16:01:18 do you recall were there more than 3 that gave statements in your presence? in my presence, a couple and a gentleman by himself 16:01:43 did you give any verbal or written statements to police that night? no... he asked me my name and I gave it to him and my phone number 16:02:07 back to the time where you left the area and ran into Zimmerman and went back to look for her didn't find her and left? correct 16:02:28 give statements to law enforcement regarding what you heard? yes.... request that I called him, so I called.... he and another agent came to my house and interviewed me 16:02:53 gave statement about whatever information they gave you? correct 16:03:04 opportunity to listen to the lauer 911 tape? yes 16:03:25 tell me circumstances of the setting? first time I heard was when it was played on local news channel. by yourself or with others? I don't remember... how many times? besides that time, maybe 2 or 3 times 16:04:02 did you hear a voice screaming for help that you were able to recognize? heard the voice screaming in background and of the two I only heard George talk 16:04:26 who was screaming for help? based on fact I've only heard George's voice I would say that it was his... his who? George Zimmerman 16:04:44 when you say you heard him talk, how long you've known him? by that time 2.5 years. speak to you and speak to others in your presence? yes. ever hear him yell for his dog or laugh at a joke? never heard him yell at the dog, commands were like a regular voice... has a white male voice.... 16:05:36 states exhibit 1... can you identify the picture and walk us through a location you may have seen his truck...... 16:06:29 I'm going to move it a little bit to an area, can you describe what is barely on the screen on this point...? a blue line, a little bit of grass... 16:07:01 see the pool in the center of the photo? I can 16:07:26 (west and omara discussing the photo) 16:07:43 mirror images so ill move on.... 16:07:49 try and do it verbally.... familiar with complex? I am 16:07:58 gave us a drive through of how you entered into complex, which one? I came in the entrance that is in front of the elementary school 16:08:18 have the clubhouse in front of you and to the right? that is correct 16:08:30 from that point, coming in Oregon... took a back route to your complex, right on retreat view....? if you say back route, you're talking about Oregon that goes to.... 16:09:20 ok.. sorry about that, I think I confused my question a moment ago... first came in to subdivision and saw crime scene tape? correct. which way was crime scene from where you were driving in? to the left or east 16:10:00 normal way you would go to the left? no I would go to the right 16:10:10 start at the Oregon main entrance with clubhouse on the right, walk or drive us to the area where you did drive up to get better view of crime scene? if I were to drive in to the entrance, I would've made a left to the crime scene 16:10:52 where on that scene would you have scene George's truck? not even 3/10 of a mile down 16:11:08 have a present memory today as to where the truck was? parked on retreat view circle.... the T 16:11:31 could the truck have been parked not on retreat view but the second street in? yes.... not your first left, but second left on twin trees lane? right 16:11:55 that the street you turned down and saw his truck? it could've been, all I know is it was on one of those cubs 16:12:10 directly in front of, touch to right of lauer's townhome? yes 16:12:23 lauer's townhome... look out front door and to the right for his truck? correct. moment? YES YOU MAY 16:13:10 no further questions.... CROSS 16:13:40 I remember you 16:13:53 rionda: bottom line is that day you came into contact with police, suspect and victim, recognized one photo as George... now know the other was trayvon? correct 16:14:13 seen him earlier that day, just walking around? right 16:14:22 asked about the voice, saw on TV? right. no point of reference knew Zimmerman's voice but not martins? that's right 16:14:58 MAY SHE BE EXCUSED? yes. yes. 16:15:18 WHEN FINISHED WITH THAT, APPROACH FOR MOMENT? (sidebar) 16:21:04 MORE MATTERS WE NEED TO TAKE CARE OF TONIGHT, YOU CAN GO HOME AT THIS TIME.... ADMONITIONS: NO DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE CASE. NOT TO READ OR LISTEN TO THE CASE. NO ELECTRONIC DEVICE FOR RESEARCH. NO SOCIAL MEDIA. ASSURANCES? yes... NOTEPADS FACE DOWN, FOLLOW JARVIS INTO JURY ROOM... JURY BACK TOMORROW AT 9 AM 16:22:25 PLEASE BE SEATED. 10 MINUTE RECESS AND THEN CONTINUE WITH ANIMATION ISSUE AND PROFFERING FOR CONNOR'S TESTIMONY... WE WILL BE HERE TOMORROW AT 8 AM FOR DONNELLEY'S...... 10 MINUTE RECESS ====================== 16:44:54 PLEASE BE SEATED.... BACK ON RECORD, SEE SHOEMAKER SITTING ON STAND, MANTEI READY... GO AHEAD 16:45:10 mantei: going through your CV, graphic design degree in 1985? yes. additional degrees? always ongoing education. nothing in terms of post grad work with degree? no 16:45:44 not held as engineer or physicist? correct 16:45:56 take computer software and draw things or create things? that's one version. what's another? a lot of different types 16:46:16 as far as your prior experience testifying, other appearances? declarations and testified. how many times you were present in front of a jury? 17 16:46:43 how many of those were your testimonies objected to? you mean challenged.... 16:47:04 how many times did they object to you? whenever I testify in court, pretrial hearing 16:47:22 17 times, how many of those were animations created with motion suits? probably a dozen. title of the last one? people vs. green in Placerville 16:47:58 create these animations based on surveillance footage, how many of these involved situation like this one where you had nothing... just inserting figures? very rare that I had film to match animation, so pretty much the only one where I matched onto security camera 16:48:40 how many were figures in mid-lay or fight, in front of the jury? twice... that includes this one 16:49:01 most of them are... they're not person on person fights, most are shootings.... mostly just shootings 16:49:16 most of what you did, take bullet trajectories and place them? essentially, yes 16:49:35 taking raw data and drawing lines or putting figures in places they could've been but not like this case where it was an ongoing fluid situation like this one? some were multiple gunshots, sequence of events 16:50:07 but not physical between the two, just measuring trajectories? correct 16:50:19 what was the only time you testified in court, using the suit, involving physical fight to capture fluid situation? Greensburg 16:50:43 tell me about that one? an ex-police officer came up to vehicle and shot the person in vehicle, had to determine position of each of them... positioning when shot and their movements 16:51:11 involved distance between the two and a shooting? close approximation to each other.,... within open door of truck 16:51:30 not as in this case where you're trying to describe ongoing struggle like this one? one I'm currently working on now that is the same as that 16:51:50 for the moment, things where your testimony has been accepted for court purposes in front of jury in criminal case, sounds like this is the first time? ummm.... the suit I've used has been accepted in court in other cases 16:52:20 all the variables we just mentioned, using suit, inserting figures in court in criminal case in front of jury? with this close contact, yes 16:52:39 I think you said, only company in country using wireless motion capture for reconstruction? correct. 16:52:59 no issue if your peers are doing the same thing? correct. limited number that the company makes the suit 16:53:21 use the software, don't know the interworking, algorithms? correct 16:53:34 if the program were not working properly, unless shut down completely or giving you crazy results, wouldn't know that? I can verify if its working correctly... calibrate it 16:54:02 got raw data from station, did mapping on scene and put two people in suits? correct. out there at the scene, you told them what do to do? according to, yes 16:54:25 who were those people? two males. how big? relative size to martin and Zimmerman 16:54:38 how tall? Zimmerman was 5'8.... martin was 5'11 or 6 ft... not really that important for the person wearing the suit to be the exact size for the person doing the movement 16:55:15 did you measure these people? 5'11. how do you know... I'm 6 ft., approximately the same size... eyeball estimate? that's all that was necessary. how much did they weigh? not relevant. do you know or not? similar stature to the people I was representing. 16:55:55 how long were arms and legs? average size. did not measure them? I didn't measure their arms 16:56:09 got into poses.... suits give off pulses of energy that are documented by cameras? no that's not the way mine works... tell me how? 16 accelerometers, move your iPhone and it recognizes it.... those signals transfer to my laptop, apply to figure represented on laptop 16:56:58 they meaning what? the antennas that come in... applied to characters 16:57:11 pulses given off by accelerometers? go to two transmitters, send signal to laptop 16:57:29 each accelerometer has its own code? yes. antennas differentiate among each? yes 16:57:46 have green light to see if functioning properly.... 16:58:01 the version of this animation, final version now? yes 16:58:10 how many prior versions have there been? 2 prior versions, adjusted for more accuracy according to the witnesses 16:58:30 you adjusted based on witnesses, haven't actually read or listened to the actual testimony from witnesses? police reports... court room testimony? no 16:58:51 you changed them based upon what Zimmerman's attorneys told you people said in court? yes 16:59:03 that actually apparently was different enough from original you changed it twice? just to be more accurate, yes 16:59:20 the... understand that most of what you do to reconstruct crime scene, things mapped and known and static in their positioning.... and that is reconstructing crime scene, but adding figures and animation what are you doing? also reconstructing crime scene..... my gathering of data and put into context, sometimes when a jury receives coronary report, bullet trajectory angle, don't know how its relevant or how it applies to the scene... I take all different aspects and put into context 17:00:46 which pieces of evidence... which testimony did you incorporate into this animation? Jeremy wineberg. did he testify in court?..... 17:01:18 what actual court room testimony was incorporated? Jennifer lauer, john good, and Sonja mora.... 17:01:38 you show in this animation an initial contact by two figures, whose testimony did you use to depict that encounter? part of it is from the discovery that you gave us 17:02:05 whose testimony did you use? omara: trial or pretrial? TESTIMONY PRESENTED AT TRIAL....omara: all of Zimmerman's statements are in trial. 17:02:33 IT HAS TO BE TRIAL TESTIMONY OR EVIDENCE.... WHICH DID YOU USE IN YOUR ANIMATION? for initial contact it was Jennifer lauer's statement 17:02:59 she saw that occur? she didn't see it occur, she heard it occur 17:03:08 you are depicting it visually? correct. she didn't testify she could depict visually? just pin pointed the initial contact, in the T to the left of her condo 17:03:34 ever say it must have started there? PLEASE SHUT OFF YOUR PHONE..... IT WAS ON VIBRATE AND ITS NOT NOW 17:04:02 your indication is that she testified it must've started there? I have a question.... so for evidence which the judge was asking, police reports too? no, evidence or testimony I mean something in this court room during trial, outside of court is not evidence for now 17:04:50 omara: have to identify what's in trial.... DONT WANT YOU TO INFER.... IT WOULD BE ANYTHING HEARD BY THE JURY IN THIS COURTROOM BY WAY OF TESTIMONY OR EVIDENCE INTRODUCED... I was not allowed to watch the trial 17:05:31 if I were to ask you if this animation accurately show what's been testified, I don't know? I'm not sure what the proceedings, what went on in court... according to evidence I've received 17:06:00 not the discovery matters, not what a lawyer told you... ask you does this animation accurately show what has been testified to in this court room, you don't know? yes.... if it's not in my consultations with attorneys it would've changed, it's been adjusted to testimony in court 17:06:38 none of which you have heard or observed yourself? correct. none of which evidence you have seen yourself? none of the evidence in court, yes 17:06:55 part of this animation shows the initial encounter where the figures walk up... victim was left handed? I believe so 17:07:13 don't show anyone jumping out of bush? no evidence for that. nothing? ok 17:07:24 nobody emerging out of darkness, people just walk up to each other and stand face to face? for seconds, yes 17:07:41 animation also, do show and plot various items? correct. that's sort of in a 40 ft. area of that slope ground? correct 17:08:07 animation I saw, takes white arrow from encounter and zooms to a place 40 ft. away where we see the two figures bound up together? correct. reason for that is, teleported? direction of martin and Zimmerman consisted with witness police reports and trail of evidence going there 17:08:54 trail of evidence is just a trail, doesn't have a direction.... place where things are found doesn't have a direction until you bring it what others said? correct... reason for arrow is the one witnessed event to the next one... didn't add anything 17:09:33 the animation can't show it because you have no idea how it happened right? correct 17:09:43 get to where figures re-emerge, john good? correct. how tall is he? 6 ft. know this how? given that info from attorneys. not from anything in court but from attorneys? yes who got it from good 17:10:15 where was he standing? sliding door and the right side slides over, about a ft. out from the door... where did you get that from? good. his in court testimony? consultation with attorneys 17:10:41 where on patio he's standing, pick a spot? straight out from door, one foot. don't know which side? I didn't pick it that's where he was sitting or standing 17:11:04 in court? through consultation. before court? I'm not sure... during the trial, not sure when 17:11:19 he told you exactly where on patio? yes. how big by how big? two pillars on corner, 7.5 ft. from one side to another... tell you one ft. from one side to the other? 1 ft. from the door 17:11:54 start with something else with animation, true or not...... the animation contains artificial light? correct. properties to show things even though dark outside? correct 17:12:24 intentionally no effort to document lighting? yes 17:12:39 most important thing is seeing detail even though that's not detail that night? correct, plenty of people can testify to the lighting... accurate of that night? no 17:13:08 in your decision about where to place the people.... where to instruct those wearing the suits... done before court testimony? probably within the month before.... prior to trial proceedings? correct 17:13:38 told them based on your best estimates? based on police reports and interviews. how many interviews did you read? lauers, goods, a couple hand written reports (3) 17:14:06 like witness statements? yes. that's it? yes 17:14:14 based on those you told these people where to go and what to do? based on that and the 911 call 17:14:33 911 call by lauer? yes. she saw none of this? correct 17:14:42 and john good from whose perspective this is shown was not on phone? correct. show lauers phone call and figures doing points to that? right... pin point gun shot, but to any of the rest of it... where the figures were at during any point of the 911 call? only figure other than Zimmerman and martin is good.... WERE YOU FINISHED WITH ANSWER? no... FINISH... good specified when he came in during the 911 call on the video, when he came in how long out there and when he went back in 17:16:06 what video did good say he came in through the 911 call? based on consultation and the placement of the video 17:16:20 telling this court that john good stated exactly where he was during portions of jenna lauer's call? how long he was outside 17:16:37 matched specific audio to the actions of good and figures on ground? correct. what in court testimony or evidence you were provided that tells you john good saw two figures doing x when jenna lauer was saying y? no in court testimony. no out of court testimony either? consultation with attorneys on how long he was out there and when he came out 17:17:21 integrating visual perspective of one witness who has no idea what jenna lauer is doing? not just based on her call, but he can base it on when the gun shot went off 17:17:49 I understand when the gun shot went off, telling court prior to the gun shot that john good visual witness and lauer audio witness, match up with good is seeing? if you take 911 call from gunshot and good says he was in condo at particular time before gun shot, point when he went in... particular time of how long he was out there, back track from the gun shot and determine from those when he came out and went back in.... 17:18:57 those were not exact, they were estimations? it's an estimation on his part.... nothing more than estimation on your part? based on witness that was there who said how long he was out there and how long after the gun shot went off 17:19:36 that animation is specific, play a portion of that recording in conjunction with video or simulated video.. all based on nothing more than estimations? by the person witnessing it 17:20:09 none of that could be said to be exact or accurate to point to say for certain that's what he was seeing at the time jenna was saying a word? not specific to exact word... your animation makes it very specific, does it? yes 17:20:40 nothing in that animation that tells me the call is generally going on, that animation looks like they're going on at the same time? correct, scenario according to witness and evidence 17:21:08 which witness and evidence that came out in court? consultation with attorneys 17:21:22 no way good can say at time lauer said this I was doing this? I don't think that's what he based that..... he can't say exactly according to what she was saying 17:21:47 he was gone from visual view while lauer is still on phone... no one has clocked however many seconds? correct 17:22:06 nonetheless, animation purports to showing? yes. animation reported to be more accurate than we know the evidence can be? the purpose of him involved in animation isn't so much whether he was outside for 10 seconds vs. 7 seconds, its putting him into location and showing what he saw at that time.... but you don't know at that time because you don't know what was going on with that call? his is based on when the gun shot went off... estimation upon estimation upon estimation...... agree? only to the point that the witness.... 17:23:31 this was created but you're not pretending its accurate depiction of what went on, just estimation? according to witness that was involved 17:23:54 whom you've never heard testify? correct 17:24:37 were still treated to a view of two figures on ground? correct 17:24:46 what witness testimony are you relying on for those figures since good is no longer there? based on di maio's positioning 17:25:05 didn't hear him testify? consultation with dr... phone call last saturday? yes. after you had been deposed? correct 17:25:28 had conversation because you were asked to call him? I wasn't asked to call him... I asked about the doctor who was standing by.... not your idea after you had made another animation until you were set up with speaking with this doctor? 17:26:00 my idea from start we needed physical evidence of when shot went off 17:26:15 based on physical evidence? based on testimony, consultation from di maio's phone call. not testimony, phone call? correct 17:26:34 also told me yesterday that the one think you know for sure is the entry of the bullet wound was directly 90 degrees straight on? correct 17:26:53 position 3, tell me they're parallel to one another? horizontal to each other.... not just horizontal but parallel? yes. stacked on top like Lego logs? no there's space. space based on what? based on talking to, my conversation with di maio and inquiry into the scene to fit the characters together 17:27:49 how big is the space? between clothing or bodies... start with clothing? it varies, in my 3rd position I'm not quite sure, haven't measured... from the ground is 13-15 inches. approximately? not the purpose of final position is to know who's on top of bottom 17:28:42 purpose is to resemble the defense theory? not to resemble defense theory. some other theory? di maio's. based on 20 minute phone call? doesn't take long. 17:29:09 told you they were x inches away and so far apart? bent over Zimmerman. told you exact distances? the distance varies according to our conversation 2 inches in one spot and 4 inches from another 17:29:43 that's the distance between clothing and the shot? correct. have I asked about that space? that would depend on positioning 17:30:03 varies on estimations? yes but in this particular positioning.... purpose of positioning wasn't to get specific to measure with camera the distance between them, otherwise I would've put a camera there... just to show whose on top and bottom 17:30:42 not to be accurate as it happened but to show positions? correct 17:30:51 do you know whether that animation accurately depicts how they were that night? according to di maio that's the position and the findings 17:31:12 parallel and unknown? not completely parallel 17:31:24 so if I were to ask you, are you basing this on phone conversation or in court testimony you would say phone call? yes 17:31:56 said earlier, sometimes bullet trajectories you use metal rod? create a rod in the computer. in this case? showing bullet trajectory 17:32:17 doesn't show bullet, trajectory, the firearm or anything? not the purpose 17:32:26 but it doesn't show any of that? no 17:32:30 you were asked to leave the gun out, weren't you? no. ever told me you were? I don't believe I was told..... 17:34:36 last Wednesday 2nd deposition in the case? yes. show you here pg. 27 line 4....... 17:34:56 see that question answer? correct... it wasn't, not state I was told to leave it out it says in consultation with the attorney 17:35:16 your answer was I didn't make it on my own, just consultation with the attorneys... my input and their input 17:35:33 not the purpose of this video.... I did not put it in 17:35:43 video omits that? correct because that's not the purpose of the video..... 17:36:06 conditions in which you filmed those in the suit? recorded 17:36:14 in the day time rolling around? recorded yes 17:36:22 when you recorded them, obviously.... were these folks moving in rapid pace like fighting or getting up assuming pose? Object! while previous animations we had movement, in response to concerns we eliminated that, they're individual shots.. not relevant any more 17:37:20 first part of animation contains movement....omara: absolutely, but the part where they're moving from that point down. CLARIFY 17:37:40 reproducing and filming motion capture suits in action.... first interaction, position of bodies... 17:38:36 measured the areas from the drain boxes and sprinkler boxes to get correct position... who told you the distance? placement of them, position based on shell casing... position of his cell phone and where it was in relation to goods house 17:39:20 plug into animation? best to record on the scene to plug in elements... once created in computer adjust so its most accurate 17:40:09 didn't measure the shell casing? lay out little markers 17:40:21 took figures and put them in exact locations with shell casings, 6 ft. from porch... specific place? correct. did that based on what evidence? from goods testimony and consultation with attorneys 17:41:11 placed figures where they were in 3rd position based on your belief and knowledge and belief as to projection of shell casing not in the video? correct, relative to the position where Zimmerman was found 17:41:43 you mean martin? yes. that's position 4? correct, but 3 is relative 17:41:56 put the figures in certain position relative to shell case, no one testified about being close to shell casing, estimation on your part? correct it's just in proximity to shell casing, on the right of Zimmerman 17:42:32 on the right but 2 or 3 or 4 ft. from right, no idea how far? can't be that far from where martin ended up... proximity of evidence marker 6 has to be pretty close proximity to third position 17:43:06 I understand, getting at how high gun is off ground affects how far that casing goes? a lot of variables, not unremarkable 17:43:28 none of which you have direct evidence? just that a shell casing was found... no idea where it came from? we know approximately where it came from 17:43:51 animation shows figures in specific spot, based on animation of shell casing? based on last position and previous position and shell casing location 17:44:13 last position 4th is what happened after the defendant claimed he shot martin and martin fell off him and jumped on his back and moved his body? correct 17:44:33 no idea exactly how far that happened, just know where the body was found? close proximity to the final position 17:44:50 I understand, all happened in 40 ft. area? not giving me specifics 17:45:02 what does your animation give me those specifics? it's to one side of the shell casing, the cell phone, their previous position 17:45:26 based on series of estimations... INTERRUPT YOU, I SAW ANIMATION ONE BRIEF MOMENT, REMEMBER GENERALLY WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, BUT POSITIONS AND STUFF, HELPFUL IF YOU HAD ANIMATION UP AND HAD HIM EXPLAIN POSITIONS.... CAN WE DO THAT, IM REALLY TRYING TO FOLLOW TESTIMONY, WITHOUT LOOKING AT EACH FIGURE OR POSITION, HELPFUL IN CONJUNCTION WITH TESTIMONY 17:48:54 third position illustration? yes. yellow circles are items of evidence? correct 17:49:11 place you have these items in yellow circles is estimation? their positioned in between items of evidence 17:49:38 telling me they should be in that location as opposed to a few inches over... couldn't tell me because you're not trying to? correct.... positioning relative to each other is purpose 17:50:08 couldn't tell me what angle the persons head should be? right it wasn't still 17:50:26 still estimation? what part.... the actual positions of figures? placement according to dr. di maio. he said they looked exactly like that? their positioning. he described that degree of tilt to you? within 2 inches 17:51:01 how many inches did he say martins head was off the ground? that wasn't relevant. again an approximation? approximation of his head, yes 17:51:48 as far as these white things depicted, the sprinkler boxes? and drain boxes 17:52:07 hard metal plastic covers whatever their made of? correct 17:52:31 you also reviewed at least one statement from Zimmerman? supplied to me, not sure which one... use any to create this animation? any of animation or what part.. any part? some of the initial portion at the T intersection. that's it? yes all the rest are based on other witnesses.... 17:53:22 which statement from defendant? video walk through. only one you used? yes. 17:53:31 some reason you didn't use the others? because I had other witnesses that placed or positioned them throughout the animation 17:53:52 only used it as it relates to the beginning of this video? yes. in conjunction with lauer's testimony about that is where initial conflict took place 17:54:15 reason why you only used video as opposed to other statements? I had other witnesses that laid out scene from then on 17:54:38 talk to me about.....any types of validation done with this method for animation? 17:55:13 either the several types of software or programs used, other than buying and assuming they're working right, validation studies on them? validation on the motion capture suit. only the suit? and the 3d software I use... if some inaccuracy in any of the measurements I haven't found any 17:56:04 accurate to one measurement? accurate as you want, thousands of an inch... separate them to here? what was relevant to what I needed... measuring porch to shell casing, nothing in here required thousands of inch of accuracy 17:56:49 directed those wearing the suits, telling them to go at it with simulated fight or simply pose this way? just move according to what the witnesses wrote in police reports... what position there in, ground and pounding that type of movement and how they would naturally interact with ground and slope 17:57:40 directing a movie, go here and do this... they weren't just doing it on their own? correct based on location of evidence on scene, the type of surface they were on, what was written in police report in terms of what they were doing at that location 17:58:13 first part of that tape.... have them attempt to simulate speed of that or make that motion and you adjusted speed? swaying and reaction isn't sped up, that's actual movement 17:58:40 whether that's accurate as opposed to another estimation? it was just a movement portraying that occurrence and how somebody doing that motion 17:59:05 tell this court for certain it's an accurate depiction of motion, you'd tell me no, right? someone swinging and striking in the face.... there's other ways of doing it... other ways reconstructionist animate on computer, move arm and advance... estimating how it moves... advantage is you put the suit on and that's how the person will move 18:00:06 that's how that person that day moved with the suit on them? correct... can't tell me that's how they did it that night? just portraying one person coming up and striking another person in that matter with respect to their heights 18:00:37 understand the conclusion or depiction, this is not necessarily your opinion, but what you have attempted to create based on what you've been told my lawyers? no... it's my reconstruction based on discovery, putting the scene together, being out there with motion suits, and fine tuning it with consultation with attorneys... wasn't.... something created based on evidence and testimony and written reports not solely based on what an attorney told me to do 18:01:44 all the actual in court testimony would've been funneled through lawyers? correct 18:01:57 all action out there is estimated based upon your interpretation of what you were given in discovery? a reconstruction, yes based on evidence from discovery 18:02:20 example is the shell casing, know where it landed but not how it got there? and also their previous positioning and the shell casing REDIRECT 18:03:09 motion capture suits, next generation than those that exist before? correct. more accurate? more accurate, less clean up time, data is cleaner than other motion suits... you can also take into more environments 18:03:47 wireless? correct. 18:03:50 do you have to be in direct line of sight with computer antenna? not direct.. I could record someone from the other wall 18:04:11 new generation, the motion capture suits are accepted in your industry? yes... it's the most accurate way to capture movements 18:04:30 not much different than older motion capture suits? yes, restricted by fact they have to be recorded with camera, disadvantage is you can't see data on the arm... can see data on all accelerometers 18:05:04 hooked in to software to recreate movement in context of body? yes it captures it all 18:05:16 put 4 on a Frisbee and fly Frisbee and they would kick back information? yes. also been used, recordings of jumping out of plane and sky diving 18:05:45 in the concept of the beginning parts and modifications, ever waited until after trial is over to create your animation? it sounds senseless in the question.... animations normally done in anticipation of trial? yes. with the discovery? yes. 18:06:22 when you have that information available, go back and modify based on new information if given to you... go back and fit that in? yes 18:06:58 have you done that in the generation 3 of video you created based upon consultation with me and saying such things as? Objection! Leading! SUSTAINED. modified as we discussed? yes, whole purpose is to get as accurate as possible 18:07:32 testimonies in trial that led to modifications? yes 18:07:40 still with judge, changes in those stills based upon actual trial testimony as opposed to deposition or statement testimony? yes. take out one text and place with another? correct 18:08:11 were they're changes made to the stills based on testimony? more of a defining it better. from who? consultation with you and west. what was discussed in that? what came out in court and testimony 18:08:44 make those modifications to the stills? yes. 18:08:52 as to the... ever waited until middle of trial to begin creation of animation? no, begin as soon as I can... 18:09:10 in the information you were forwarded in this case, info from Zimmerman's various statements forwarded? yes. incorporate into your animation? yes, what his video testimony was and verify there's no conflicting or nothing that conflicts with what I used in creating the scene 18:09:57 other statements available, interview with law enforcement available? correct 18:10:09 what significance did you tend to Zimmerman's statements in assisting you creating any portion? initial conflict 18:10:28 was that specific to Zimmerman saying he was struck? yes 18:10:36 in a location approximate to location he was struck? backed up by lauer's positioning 18:10:53 in addition to lauers to place initial location? Jeremy wineberg's police report 18:11:12 other witnesses like jane surdyka who was in apartment behind the t? yes. utilized all of that? yes 18:11:29 any specific evidence found at scene to assist you in determining that was the initial altercation? yes... his flashlight key chain. 18:11:50 how did that assist you? it gives you direction... initial conflict that took place at t intersection, flashlight which goes down to the direction 18:12:20 mantei suggested this is just an estimation, look at that animation it's an estimation to initial location? correct. in conflict with any evidence in the discovery? no its not 18:12:49 have you recreate animation of a shell casing discharge and the way it spins, would you be able to create animation that accomplishes that? yes. how many spins the casing made to the ground? yes... in the computer... but do that with any gun it'll vary 18:13:39 inherent estimation variable? correct, certain scenarios you can create but not infinite... those in conflict with evidence and witness testimony those obviously can't be done that way... consistent with testimony witnesses and the scene 18:14:28 example in modifications, change... decision made not to show movement of bodies from initial to body of rest? yes. why? basically because from witness testimony we know which direction they moved in, not defined how they got from one position to the position by goods house... rather than create something, use arrow to show direction they moved in 18:15:28 decision by you as creator to avoid animation that wasn't documented by witness? yes 18:15:44 why did you use the stills.... where the information comes from to place them there? initial position came from john good.... second position came from john good 18:16:27 initial was at the T intersection? define as something else.... T intersection event, what's first event? first visual that john good had, labeled initial position 18:17:12 the first position you are speaking of..... 18:17:43 this is the t intersection event? yes 18:17:50 (animation playing) frailties in the animation, no witness to this? correct. estimation based on Zimmerman's testimony? right, no evidence or witnesses to dispute 18:18:27 that information right there, where does that come from... from Zimmerman's video walk through and Jeremy's police report., and surdyka? yes. 18:19:06 arrow instead of having figures move without witnesses? yes 18:19:17 this is what we know to be john goods sliding door? yes. based upon additional communication, his position modified? correct. how it was and why it was modified? initially had him come out from middle of sliding door, but after his refinement of his position I placed him on the left sliding door one foot out from middle... based on consultation from his specific recall? Objection! Leading! SUSTAINED 18:20:16 it was based on consultation with you and west on the feedback of good and placement from the scene.... did good look at animation and ask for modifications? yes... modifications changed here? yes 18:20:56 this is where the tape comes in? correct. 18:21:02 why the timing of the call began... was there a point that existed in lauers call and goods testimony as presented to you that was intersection that allowed you to relate the two? yes, the gun shot 18:21:39 do we have a timeline of lauers call... 45 seconds, also have a timeline of goods testimony with the lining up the gunshot in his testimony yes.... line up and give timeline for his goods actions.....? matching up that one event 18:22:35 what information did you have from good where he was when he heard the gunshot and how many seconds before that? he was on his way up to make 911 call, time we had if you go to gun shot and back up on goods timeline... gave estimate on from when he went into condo to the time the gunshot went off 18:23:18 calibrate your animation to jenna lauers phone call.... use goods estimation on how long it took him to leave the area.... Objection! SUSTAINED... IN REVIEWING MY NOTES, GOOD ALSO CALLED 911 AND WAS ON PHONE AND CONNECTED AT OR ABOUT TIME OF GUN SHOT... WAS THAT USED? WAS THAT USED IN YOUR COMPARISON WITH LAUER? no gun shot on his call. NOT BUT HIS TESTIMONY WAS HE HEARD THE GUN SHOT WHILE DIALING 911 AND I THOUGHT HE SAID HE WAS WAITING FOR THAT CALL TO CONNECT, WOULD KNOW WHEN THAT CALL CONNECTED... USE THAT AS BASIS FOR TIMELINE AND TESTIMONY OF GOOD? still waiting for it to connect. DID YOU USE THAT, CONSIDER AT ALL HIS KNOWN TIME... HEARD THE GUN SHOT WHILE DIALING, WAITING FOR CALL TO CONNECT, USE HIS 911 CONNECTION IN DOING COMPARISON? I used his estimation from how long it took him to how long it took him to make his call 18:25:42 if you were to have the time of the phone call and estimate from there the time it might take to connect would that help calibrate animation even more refined? yes. able to accomplish tonight? I wouldn't be able to re-render and re-do the animation but I can do some markings 18:26:25 if there was a few second difference, require moving audio track and animation would stay the same? yes. that's the only relation? 18:27:00 it would affect goods time that he went into the apartment 18:27:14 use of his estimation after leaving the view of the scene to 911 call is close to accurate? I DONT WANT TO INTERJECT, BUT ILL DO THAT WHEN YOU'RE DOING YOUR ARGUMENT.... ANY OBJECTION FROM THE STATE? objection for state asking questions, none whatsoever 18:28:05 ONLY TIMES HE GAVE WAS 7:15 PM WATCHING TV WITH WIFE, HEARD NOISE... OTHER TIMES HE GIVES ON CROSS WAS ENTIRE TIME HE WAS WATCHING WAS 8-10 SECONDS, DOESN'T SAY WHERE IN THAT TIME... BUT DO KNOW HE WAS DIALING AND WAITING FOR IT TO CONNECT WHEN HE HEARD THE GUN SHOT, DONT KNOW HOW LONG IN THE HOUSE BEFORE GUN SHOT, DONT KNOW WHAT 8-10 SECONDS WERE... PROBLEM IM HAVING IS THE USE OF THE LAUER 911 CALL IN CONJUNCTION WITH GOODS TESTIMONY, I DONT UNDERSTAND THAT TIMELINE 18:29:18 my understanding of testimony was that he left the area of the view of the scene, turned around grabbed his phone... WHAT TIME DID HE GO OUT THERE? RECORD IS CORRECT, THESE ARE JUST MY NOTES... BETWEEN 7:05-7:15... FIRST FAINT NOISE, COULDN'T HEAR WORDS, THEN HEARD IT AGAIN LOUDER, COULDN'T HEAR WORDS DIDN'T KNOW IF MORE THAN 1 PERSON, LOOK OUT SLIDING DOOR, CRACKED BLINDS, LIGHT ON PORCH, ONLY SEE SOMETHING OUT THERE, OPENED BLINDS AND DOOR, STEPPED OUT, VERTICAL ON GROUND, WHATS GOING ON.... NO OTHER TIME OTHER THAN WHEN HE HEARD GUN SHOT WAS WHEN HE WAS TRYING TO CONNECT, ENTIRE TIME WAS 8-10 SECONDS... BEGIN AT THE CRACK OF THE BLINDS OR STEPPING ONTO THE PORCH... LIKE TO KNOW IN THIS ANIMATION WHERE LAUERS CALL FITS INTO HIS TESTIMONY 18:31:16 call connect at 19:17:15..... we know lauer's call started at 19:16:11 and its 45 seconds into the call or at 7:16:56 that the gunshot goes off... DIFFERENT WITH TIMELINE YOU HAVE HERE IN CONNECTION WITH WHAT YOU HAVE HERE. 18:32:11 took good 15-20 seconds to get call, place it and connect it... don't have that testimony but lauers testimony that it took about 20 seconds... HE WAS WAITING FOR IT TO CONNECT.... AS I RECALL, DIALED AND WAS WAITING.... WHERES THE 8-10 HE VIEWED THIS... mantei: and the 30 second gap between the connection 18:33:15 DOESN'T HAVE TO BE EXACT, BUT WHEN TRYING TO OVERLAY CALL WITH ANIMATION HAS TO BE CLOSER TO EXACT THAN NOT CLOSER.... may be able to fix that by calling good.... HAVING THE HEARING NOW, NOT GOING TO HAVE THIS HEARING GO ON FOR DAYS AND DAYS.... I SHOULD NOT HAVE COMMENTED AND I COULD JUST RULE ON IT AFTER YOU FINISH.... NOT MAKING COMMENTS TO CALL GOOD INTO HEARING.... TRANSCRIPT AS TO IT... 18:34:24 omara: if court is accurate that goods phone call was connected at 7:17:15 and evidence from lauer the decision to make call and connection is 20-25 seconds... back it out, you are within seconds of hearing the gun shot on lauer's call... STOP YOU THERE, NOT AN ARGUMENT... FINISH WITH SHOEMAKER 18:35:17 did you utilize lauer's call and good's testimony as to when in relation he heard the gun shot? yes. that how you backed out the time that gunshot and went in reverse? correct 18:35:55 recall a time lag to calibrate back to lauer phone call? time lag between.................. 18:36:14 I'm not sure the exact number of seconds... let the judge know then what you used in determining when to start lauer tape to video? in backing it out.... going back inside is based on consultation with you and from his feedback on the video. 18:36:55 does the necessity of being absolutely accurately.... IM SORRY WHOSE FEEDBACK ON THE VIDEO? mr goods. WHEN DID THAT HAPPEN? in consultation with omara. WHAT DATE? no. AFTER TRIAL STARTED? yes... HE WAS UNDER SEQUESTRATION.... GOOD IS NOT AN EXPERT, WITNESS UNDER SEQUESTRATION... used to authenticate as it was his view... I fixed his problems with it... mantei: none of which was disclosed to the state until this point. 18:38:28 what information did you use to identify this as initial position of the two? his comment about..... this position looking at now? consultation with you from testimony 18:38:56 did you change this from true animation to still? yes just to eliminate or mitigate any random movements... just to show position according to good 18:39:29 done to make more accurate? yes. to avoid any other inaccuracies? yes 18:39:42 what was this change from first position to second? also based on consultation with you from his testimony 18:39:56 no animation at this point to avoid concerns? correct 18:40:16 how the determination was made to use third position? consultation with di maio and proximity to the prior position just seconds before... and the items of evidence around.... also include final resting place of martin? eventually 18:40:48 is the one were about to see related to third position? correct, marker 6.... one of the things that comes into play on the position... slope there, so its interaction on the slope 18:41:14 better identified by the posters? yes 18:41:24 does your program have laws in it like gravity? it does, but in this case those physical properties were provided by the suit 18:41:54 decision not to have animation? correct... just to show position 18:42:05 this is the position..... 18:42:15 this is the position that was modified based on conversation with di maio? yes. to what extent? leaning over Zimmerman to verify position.... leaning over you got from di maio based on his viewing of clothing? yes. and what he discussed was anticipated testimony? yes 18:42:59 and what is the after shot position what info for that? from mora's report of what she saw after the shot... any other information used as well? consistent with Zimmerman's video testimony 18:43:51 green circle, number 6 what is that? the location of martin. based on what? based on the marker from the total station data 18:44:14 all of these data points are from their total station? correct. you added the slope? yes 18:44:31 why does it stop at this location? mora's view... from that view point, the video uses 50 mm lens which is what a person perceives when they're looking at something 18:44:58 goes black until call is completed? yes 18:45:09 concern raised about lightning conditions... in other experience, times when you have to accomplish lighting or weather to make animation worthwhile? yes 18:45:32 tell us about it? focus on whether eye witness could really see what they saw, or weather on something... if your main focus for video, but problem with that is.... here in court room there's ambient light, hard to get accurate depiction of lighting conditions... vary on projector or printer you use... focus not on reconstructing the lighting but the detail of what was going on 18:46:29 animation created with artificiality to be viewed? correct 18:46:40 lighter than animation than it would be that night? correct 18:46:49 proper weather available to you that night? added rain. based on what? historic weather I received 18:47:07 any wind added? no wind.. it was 7 mph going NE.... would wind add or subtract to animation in this nature? no in this case 18:47:32 asked whether the software calibrates itself... how would you know it's working accurately, further insight what happens when it's not working properly? verify easily by measuring object you know size of.. 18:48:05 done that in your animations generally? yes. done in this one? yes. how? measure size of object, grab that object and chose tool and it'll give you the height and width 18:48:31 how you created the avatars are martin and Zimmerman? figures already created, didn't waste time, but adjusted certain things to match the figures and the clothing they were wearing 18:49:01 in your motion capture suit at 6'2 make it smaller to be martin at 5'11? correct. done for this? correct... even though they may not be the right size in recording you specify exact size it'll come in to the software.. make Martin 5'11? yes. and his shoes? and his hood 18:49:51 height after those additions? approximately around 6'2 18:50:05 in the still you used concerning moment of shot, would that view you had of it... gun in his right hand been visible? no. flash of gun visible from that angle? no. create another animation from ground level to show gun? correct if that was the purpose of what I was to create.... in this that wasn't the purpose... others can testify to that... just to show who was on top and who was on bottom 18:51:15 purpose limited to that? that's the main thing.... with di maio's input the person that was shot had to be the person on top... person doing shooting was on bottom 18:51:54 moment? YES 18:52:08 nothing further RECROSS 18:52:19 as far as representation.... second and third position... positions of hips change? correct 18:52:33 as far as I know that wasn't based on at least you didn't tell me it was based on witness statement or testimony? based on common sense...... 18:52:55 back up... common sense is if you kept martins figure... no way firearm would be accessible? in second position, correct 18:53:21 had to move to third position for him to access firearm? correct. didn't do that based on testimony, did that to be able to put those figures in position? in position relative to each other when di maio mentioned martin was shot..... and also accessibility 18:54:00 did di maio testify to gun? that's common sense. did he testify that? I didn't hear his testimony... asking me about something I had no knowledge about... 18:54:32 if the gun had to be accessible if we assume the figures were positioned as you placed them? correct so the gun is accessible 18:54:55 if evidence was martin figure was up at arm pits, no way accessible? not only the gun, but also the position of martin when shot. impossible... couldn't create animation to fit that scenario? with him straddling shoulders in position 3, no. wouldn't occur 18:55:35 position 3... in order to depict their angles at 90 degrees, straight in..? yes also in coroner's report.... he mentioned 90 degrees front to back but conversation with di maio he mentioned slightly from left to right 18:56:19 notes with conversation to di maio? just one. only note you took? yes. just that about the 90 degree angle? I already knew about 90 degree angle.. 18:56:43 just opened up folder and looked at something, what was that? just left to right. any other notes? just that 18:56:57 position in position 3, bodies had to be distanced apart from each other? correct. account for not just clothing differential? correct. account for length of arms involved? but you don't know what position. exactly 18:57:29 and the length of gun involved? a lot of variables I didn't portray 18:57:41 main thing accounted for are Zimmerman and martins position.... on top of each other 18:57:52 none of those variables are accounted for in that 3rd position? variables for bullet trajectory.. length of arms, distance, no accounted for, just show position of bodies? consistent with di maio's consultation 18:58:28 not accounted for in this animation? the variables you mentioned are not impossible 18:58:44 way of telling me they are not depicted in this animation? in this animation, but not expounded to point you are talking about 18:59:10 I can tell from this animation the length of distance between the gun, ground, body of martin? if you use photogrammetry, know the measurements 18:59:36 not what else I have to do... can I tell from this? figures in this are to scale... looking at scene, wonder about size of individuals involved... to scale... nothing's changed in relation to video 19:00:03 in their height? correct. and that's it? and their appearance to photos I received 19:00:16 no measurements of other parts of body? I had photos... can I tell that spacing from this animation or do I have to go into the data you have? can tell from the video..... assume we can't? not the purpose... you're looking for something that's not in the video, not the purpose. it's not there? the purpose isn't to examine bullet trajectory... to show relative position from one person to another where he had to be consistent with di maio's testimony.... 19:01:27 may have been another position? variable about 2 inches.... 19:01:39 MAY HE BE EXCUSED? yes. ANY OTHER WITNESS FROM DEFENSE? no. FROM THE STATE? no. LETS HAVE ARGUMENT 19:02:17 omara: daubert initial or applicability to the case... seems we've gone back and forth. YES WE HAVE... STATE SAID NO AND THEN YES, I DONT KNOW WHERE STATE STANDS... 19:02:49 mantei: daubert analysis and a pierce factor analysis... both apply to testimony and animation, asking for both 19:03:07 omara: under frye and daubert... generally accepted in community, not countered from the state.... admitted in courts a lot, by this very witness... never disqualified as expert upon attempt to have it in... I didn't present enormous amount of industry wide..... in his industry he stays up to date... involved since 95, past 14 years focused on this area and presented many times... never been excluded.... generally accepted, suggest it has been and is 19:04:35 this inquiry and say where it assist here today... will it help jury in consideration.... as to that I think the court needs to convinced its accurate, not perfect... based on when it was created.... most recent based on trial testimony.... up to date information available like trial testimony.... can't have trial testimony available to him... taken away frailties of the animation, no longer an animation but initial strike by martin... came solely from Zimmerman's testimony 19:06:05 WHERES THE TESTIMONY THAT MARTIN IS LEFT HANDED? injuries on the right side.....that's where it's from... never said he was right handed... hit him with left hand. WHO TESTIFIED TO THAT? Zimmerman. TESTIFIED HE WAS PUNCHED, DIDN'T SAY WHAT HAND... NOBODY TESTIFIED IT CAME FROM LEFT HANDED PUNCH AND SYBRINA SAID MARTIN WAS RIGHT HANDED...NO TESTIMONY TO SHOW IT WAS LEFT HANDED 19:07:09 rao testified and used her graphic identification and the injury came across the nose.... rao testified the punch came in this way... she said it went up..... punch came in from left to right because it hit him right here, inner right side of Zimmerman's face caused by knuckle.. no evidence to support anything else... fulton said he was right handed but that means it might be the hand you want to use first, but I don't know... hit Zimmerman on right side, that's the basis for the left strike.. 19:08:32 NOBODY COULD EVER HIT SOMEONE WITH RIGHT HAND AND CAUSE INJURY ON LEFT SIDE? 19:08:52 if he came at me with his right hand.... could be... only his testimony they were basically standing in front of each other... Zimmerman turned to him, reached down and got hit.... could Zimmerman turn all the way down this way.... yeah possibility.... more likely event was left handed throw.................. 19:10:01 that part of animation and then we took out some of the concerning parts of animation... after that it's just still photos based upon testimony... modified based upon john good saying in his testimony that it happened in certain relation to 911 call... main reason is we know we have reverse timing. 19:10:47 TALK ABOUT LAUER FOR A SECOND... SHE DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING.. SHOEMAKER TESTIFYING THAT THE TESTIMONY AT THAT T IS BASED UPON HER TESTIMONY... SHE NEVER SAID SHE SAW ANYTHING... HEARING AND SEEING.... BASED UPON HER TESTIMONY... IF WE ONLY KNOW WHAT SHE HEARD AND NOT WHAT SHE SAW, HOW DO YOU GET THAT IN? 19:11:35 lauer testified that she believed the altercation she heard, back forth and back conversation occurred outside to the left near the T.... SHE TESTIFIED THE BLINDS WERE DOWN, HUSBAND AND HER WERE HOME... WATCHING TV, ON LOVE SEAT FACING GLASS DOOR... OPEN... OBSTRUCTED BY BLINDS, HEARD VOICES, COULDN'T TELL WORDS... COMING FROM LEFT, LOUD TALKING SAME VOLUME TONE, MORE FLUSTERED THAN CONFRONTATIONAL... HEARD SCUFFLING LIKE SNEAKERS ON PAVEMENT AND GRASS... GRUNTING NOISE, AT FIRST SOUNDED LIKE PEOPLE STANDING UP AND THEN ROLLING ON GRASS, CALLED 911, 30 SECONDS TO CONNECT... DIDN'T SAY SHE SAW ANYTHING, COULD TELL VOICES WERE FROM LEFT AND IT GOT CLOSER AND LOUDER..... 19:13:24 never said she saw anything at all.. based on what she said she heard it come from.... I talk to her about the three parts of the conversation, red car blue car red car.... in my conversation with her at that point... the initial conversation beginning at T intersection.... THAT ANIMATION POSITION IS BASED ON HER TESTIMONY.. of what she heard.... CAN I SEE THAT POSITION AGAIN.... 19:15:07 in any case, she didn't see anything... in that sense the placement is an estimate on voice... in her cross she was more specific it happened in area of T intersection.... frailty of animation based upon non visual testimony 19:15:43 is it accurate.... limited to goods specific recollection 3 different positions... vertical and parallel.. on top of pathway and further down.... then he left, kept in that position, no evidence to support changes.... 19:16:32 the positioning was changed slightly and only to more like a mounting position because of di maio's anticipated testimony of how the shot went in 19:16:57 could it be like this? yes... might be like this but that as the bodies go up, can pulls straight down.... more like this.... at least di maio's testimony lessened the angle 19:17:29 that's it for the animation as to its accuracy... suggest with all the information in this case, non are direct witnesses except good... all have vantage points to offer, attempt by defense to present that as to what happened... helped the jury in how the defense says the case happened...... understanding graphically of how situation unfolded..... 19:18:31 IN PIERCE, THE STATE OR DEFENSE... THE STATE INTENDED TO INTRODUCE AND COURT RULED DEMONSTRATIVE ONLY... ANALYSIS OF THE COURT DID, DIDN'T GO BACK TO JURY, USED TO ASSIST EXPERT IN TESTIMONY 19:19:11 didn't find exclusion for evidence... state entered timeline... this court already allowed a presentation by the state in putting together various facts in a graphic way that assists the trial fact that helps their case... that's what an animation is, no reason it shouldn't be admitted into evidence... don't know that it was the ruling to suggest information can't be entered into evidence 19:20:11 criteria of piece, qualified as expert.... certainly applied to evidence in trial... not strictly limited... be consistent with evidence, can't go into matter not presented into evidence.... does it need to be perfect frame by frame rendition... needs to be accurate and fairly depict circumstances... frailties... light. explain to the jury, sure... not fatal frailty of evidence... what could've been seen from witness 19:21:37 under that context we've met frye, now daubert.... if otherwise accepted in community, court act like gatekeeper without further foundation to its acceptance and relevance we approve 19:22:05 mantei: this animation is enigma.... court cases... start with daubert line of cases 19:22:35 burdens on defense that the standards were satisfied 19:22:50 reference a 2013 decision.... second page in head note 3... daubert factors... number of them, not exhaustive or all inclusive... ones designated are 1 if the theory can be tested.... potential rate of error.... general acceptance....whether method is proper for case.... relationship to techniques of the method.... 19:24:14 he has never testified in criminal court in exactly the same thing he is trying to here... first time ever with these motion capture suits in conjunction with other things he is attempting to do... no one else with same method and equipment.... witness said I've never testified under circumstances like these before... nor do I believe that anybody else... he's kind of right 19:25:10 as it relates to this... refer to next page of opinion... quote additional cases... give you quote from case, nothing in daubert or rules to include from expert... what's going on here... gap between data of 911 call and animation... gap between testimony 19:26:06 WHAT WOULD BE DIFFERENCE IF SHOEMAKER CAME OFF STAND AND DID DRAWING OF WHAT HE CONSIDERED TO BE CRIME SCENE, COMPUTER IS ASSISTING THE DRAWING 19:26:33 this witness couldn't draw a correlation between 911 calls and the animation. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT COMPUTER PROGRAM AND SOFTWARE... NOT NECESSARILY FALLS WITHIN DAUBERT TEST... COULD MAKE THOSE DRAWINGS... ISSUE OF RELATING 911 CALL TO ANIMATION IS DIFFERENT ARGUMENT, WHAT WOULD PREVENT HAVING DEFENSE TESTIFY TO CRIME SCENE AND DRAW ON EASEL BOARD AT SAME TIME AS PLAYING TO 911 CALL 19:27:40 wouldn't have to worry about whether the drawing is purported to be accurate... this animation is substitutive evidence, not just demonstrative 19:28:07 IF COURT ALLOWED AS DEMONSTRATIVE, SAME ARGUMENT? same from different point of view.. .much higher for submitting as actual exhibit, still objecting for some of the same reason 19:28:31 OBJECTING FOR DAUBERT IF DEMONSTRATIVE? probably not.. only applies if it's going to be given to the jury.... testified to as demonstrative, witness that would do that has already testified and done it... he testified clearly on opinions to body without referencing that... other witnesses didn't need it 19:29:25 if counsel wanted to use something like this in closing argument, but as demonstrative.... is it necessary for witness to explain opinion, only ones who would need it already testified 19:29:56 his own testimony is only function told my lawyers... nothing required for witness testimony to be explained by this.... not the purpose of demonstrative exhibit... demonstrative aid meaning what, as closing argument aid... that's different... as expert using it I do have concerns with that, some daubert related.... GO AHEAD 19:30:56 no testimony offered or presented so far as would be the defenses burden for error, maintenance of standards... use for the movies.. this is a murder trial, not Casablanca.... not iron man... it's one thing to say I'm going to strap suits and create fiction... than to create fiction and say its reality 19:31:55 nothing submitted as it relates to satisfying that... further ill continue onto the court's opinion.... under head not 8... begin quoting another case...... reliability of experts method must be for specific facts at issue not general theories.................. still accurately depicts how the object behaves 19:33:15 beginning of his video.. evidence in testimony is martin is right handed, witness think he's left handed.... idea you assume based upon location on injury and body, struck by certain thing.. invalid... it is not hard for a right handed person to punch someone on the left side of their nose.... to sit here and say a punch with left hand... expert opinion without evidence is what they're talking about without validation 19:34:26 NOT A METHOD ISSUE, FACT ISSUE... INPUTTING FACTS INTO THE COMPUTER. and creating a result from those facts... COMPUTER WILL DO WHAT YOU TELL IT DO .... 19:34:56 if your method is to make assumptions not warranted by evidence. THATS THE COMPUTER......... large problem here as well 19:35:17 page 8... peer review, no testimony... error rate... no testimony, nothing involved in this case 19:35:35 page 13, reliability and relevance... talking about particular expert, that expert reiterates..... expert testimony should not........ that is again really what this is... attempt to have an expert in graphic design come in here and advance arguments presented by defense.... or from 20 minute phone call.... testimony today is not what witness expected it to be 19:36:50 experts reiterate arguments, positions, space... those are arguments no eye witness testimony... arguments advanced by council.... question for lay people on this jury, not product of expert testimony 19:37:37 move to third case... DA opinion from Louisiana... cases that discuss factors we have here.... page 5 of the copy demonstration videos.... talking about experts who went out and conducted filmed experiment and tried to match it closely.... further down the line, court concludes it will lead and confuse the jury.... 19:39:08 idea you don't have to be exact is correct... contemporaneous movie made, nothing advanced as demonstrative aid... that's not really the standard if what you got is not accurate enough.... not enough to say I'm in the vicinity, in proximity.. they are figures in this case, their hips and length of space between them... intentional assumptions and placed in animation.. done with purpose... not based on testimony... arguments as evidence 19:40:18 next case is salvatore case... page 5 of that opinion... talking about attempted video accident reconstruction, witness themselves.... note 7.... no engineer in engineering, not qualified 19:41:07 heard this witness has testified as accident reconstructions, actual reconstructions within crime scene are two very different things... when this witness has testified before, analyze bullet trajectories... not I put people on positions based on other witnesses 19:41:56 down to bottom, higher threshold for admissibility to recreate accident... expert opinion referenced in videos are not shoemakers.. only dr. di maio who didn't need it, reference it... testified without it 19:42:33 demonstrative evidence.... courts generally require proponent to establish similar conditions... does not appear to recreate accident..... this is being purported to be a crime scene or events taking place.. higher standard applies 19:43:17 lighting... start with the more obvious depiction of visuals from another witness who described general theory 19:43:42 that's not substantial similarity with actual conditions... idea that we have no idea how we get from the T doesn't explain that this is substantial similar condition... says I don't know 19:44:16 even as it relates to di maios testimony, his opinion was at the moment of gunshot he believed defendants statement was consistent with the evidence, not that it is how it happened or only way it could happen... just consistent 19:44:54 shoemaker is taking di maio's statement to him about the statement defendant he didn't use in connection to position 3 at all... only used defendants testimony to the first punch... that's his testimony 19:45:25 not the standard for admissibility 19:45:32 further and I think as it relates to daubert, if evidence admitted as substantive or demonstrative... court should fashion significant admonishment to jury along the lines of this is not a pretended to be depiction of events.. just scenario... not just how it happened, nor should they be confused by any indication 19:46:33 just stills by shoemaker showing location of physical evidence without figures.... no problem... add figures and depict things that are unknown.... hips in certain position because of his common sense without evidence. THATS WHERE, OMARA THE PURPOSE OF THE INTRODUCTION OF THIS ANIMATION... I DONT SEE WHERE ITS ASSISTING AN EXPERT IN TESTIFYING. omara: animation itself, just as state took distillation in a format... that's what this is, substantive evidence and puts together in a way that helps jury... Zimmerman, rao testimony in context rather than the timeline... YOUR ANIMATION IS MORE THAN A TIMELINE..... ITS DEPICTING POSITIONS BASED UPON.... john good's testimony.... in effect, compare to one of the witnesses mounting me, was that how martin mounted, no but it's an example... moras prance around court room...NOT TAKING THAT BACK INTO JURY ROOM TO PLAY OVER AND OVER AGAIN AS TO A RECREATION.... do have states compound exhibit..... taking distilled down... DID NOT INTERJECT ANIMATION FIGURES INTO THAT TIMELINE AS TO WHAT WAS HAPPENING WITH TWO INDIVIDUALS IN THOSE CALLS 19:50:03 ANIMATIONS DEPICTING MORE THAN THAT... BASED ON SHOEMAKERS COMMON SENSE, BASED ON ASSUMPTION THAT HE HIT ZIMMERMAN WITH LEFT HAND, BASED ON PHONE CALL WITH DI MAIO THAT WAS NO HIS TESTIMONY IN COURT.... DI MAIO TESTIFIED THAT MARTINS POSITION COULD'VE BEEN AT DIFFERENT ANGLES.... SO I NEED YOU TO RESPOND TO THAT 19:50:56 could've been pulled him back and he said the shirt wouldn't line up... RIONDA ASKED HIM GIVEN FACT THAT MARTINS HOODY WAS WET AND HAD A FULL CAN OF IN HIS POCKET MAY DETERMINE POSITION OF HIS BODY... his response said it had to be pulled away 2-4 inches.... could've been backing away and grabbed him and shot him.. he said it would pull to one side and holes wouldn't match up any more...only one scenario.... to answer your question, I would suggest a minimum demonstrative tool for me to show evidence.... that's a given that I could use in demonstrative evidence in this argument, substantive evidence is a distillation of known facts..... he can contest its left hand shot, doesn't mean... they could've brought in an animation..... her testimony was her presentation... 19:53:24 THAT DOESN'T GO BACK TO JURY ROOM TO PLAY OVER AND OVER AGAIN.. THATS WHAT I GRAPPLE WITH... WHATEVER WITNESSED TESTIFIED TO AND INSTRUCTION TO BELIEVABILITY AND THEY DISCUSS THAT, BUT AN ANIMATION THAT GOES BACK THAT THEY PLAY OVER AND OVER AGAIN.... GIVES WEIGHT TO SOMETHING THIS COURT IS NOT SURE COMPORTS WITH EVIDENCE PRESENTED IN TRIAL 19:54:16 proper distillation of evidence.... CASE LAW TO PROVIDE ME? no... rely on pierce.... cite back to courts presented by state, once determined its similar to evidence presented it is admissible 19:54:53 BOTH SIDES AGREEING PIERCE IS ONLY CASE IN FLORIDA AS IT RELATES TO COMPUTER ANIMATION. mantei: I gave another, pierce is only criminal 19:55:21 WHEN I LOOK AT PIERCE CASE... DEMONSTRATIVE CASE FOR EXPERTS OPINION... RULED AS DEMONSTRATIVE ONLY, DID IN THAT CASE.... THEY CITED TO... WHEN RESULTS USEFUL ACCEPTED WHEN CONFUSING SHOULD BE REJECTED 19:56:17 THAT THE PRESENTATION BE RELEVANT, AND REFLECT ORAL TESTIMONY OFFERED.... 19:56:32 ANY OTHER CASES... ILL READ YOUR CASES... NO OTHER BY THE DEFENSE, I UNDERSTAND BOTH ARGUMENTS.... 19:56:56 mantei: shoemaker didn't go over that..... can't compare this to the timeline... the timeline actually testified to a witness... underlying data are likewise in evidence... none of underlying data that shoemaker relies on is in front of this jury other than 911 call 19:57:50 the map of crime scene isn't what he's testifying, it's the figures and their movement... as far as the pullback... di maios testimony could've been in a different position he said was absolutely possible 19:58:40 the pierce case makes pretty clear detective badcock would be equivalent of di maio, necessary for his interpretation... not shoemaker.. if there was any witness who could use this as demonstrative was di maio and he didn't need it 19:59:29 closing remark of that... court can't use discretion to decide and nevertheless admit the evidence... has to be accurate, not precise... but accurate.... calls made to him, police report, testimony from those who have not testified... built into animation, hasn't heard a word of court testimony... everything he's got has been filtered through arguments 20:00:35 LIGHTS AUTOMATICALLY GO OUT AT A CERTAIN TIME, IS THERE A WAY WE CAN GET THEM BACK ON..... 20:00:56 I'M GOING TO RESERVE RULING ON THIS, LET YOU KNOW WHEN WE RECONVENE... PROFFERING OF CONNOR TESTIMONY..... IF HE TESTIFIES TO WHAT WAS FOUND ON MARTINS PHONE I CAN JUST LOOK AT WHAT YOURE LOOKING WITHOUT HAVING TO PROFFER... THAT WHAT HES GOING TO BE CALLED FOR? TEXT MESSAGES, VIDEOS OR PICTURES OFF OF MARTINS PHONE. omara: correct. DONT NEED TO HEAR PROFFER TESTIMONY, JUST SEE THE PICTURES. west: need proffer. NO JUST A PROFFER OF PICTURES YOUR SEEKING 20:02:12 for him to say how he found the information. JUST WHAT HE FOUND ON THE PHONE, HOW HE FOUND IT IS NOT RELEVANT... TRYING TO INTRODUCE PHOTOS, EMAILS OR TEXTS THATS WHAT I NEED TO LOOK AT.... WHAT ARE YOU SEEKING TO INTRODUCE BY WAY OF EVIDENCE THROUGH CONNOR. I can outline it... WELL YOU HAVE IT IN YOUR HAND ID LIKE TO SEE IT... 20:03:05 several pieces of information obtained from his phone... issue is ongoing because of the discovery... report from state on June 4th... still trying to process that... information provided in discovery in late February, Connor able to do some of the extracting... two main issues.... several conversations by martin attempting to require firearm. AUDIO OR WRITTEN? text messages 20:04:10 IF ITS VERBAL VOICE THAT MAY NOT BE AUTHENTICATION ISSUE, IF TEXT MESSAGE IT IS AUTHENTICATION. I need Connor to talk about authentication 20:04:33 the fighting issue... martins text messages of being in fight, effects of being in fight, lost first, won second and third wasn't done with him yet... confirming he was in the fight and explaining he got more hits in the first round cause he had me on the ground and I couldn't do anything... Facebook post from martin's half-brother Demetrius asking trayvon when you gonna teach me how to fight 20:05:34 first text I was paraphrasing, levandria... in a hidden file in martins phone... password accessible only in addition to password required... second level of access 20:06:07 one came from hidden texts, one was hidden facebook post, and another from cellbrite extraction report from michael french... offer his testimony to explain his access to phone to show only martin could have created the texts or engaged.... 20:06:46 OK STATE? 20:06:51 MARK AS COMPOSITE NN FOR IDENTIFICATION............................ 20:07:31 west: also can authenticate another way if court wants me to proffer that as well. PLEASE. 20:09:01 DID YOU HAVE SOME OTHERS, CONNOR CV MARKED AS OO, WAS NN THE THREE SHEETS YOU WANT INTRODUCED FOR CONNOR. that's what relates to the fighting and then other exhibits that relate to the gun... I'd like to deal with fighting issue... that's the crux of this, let me assemble the other material on the gun... consists of pictures from his phone taken by that phone show a hand wrapped around a firearm, provide that... series of conversations that occur around Feb. 18th just before coming to Sanford where he has several conversations about acquiring firearm 20:10:26 MR GUY ADDRESS NN? west: I can provide him another copy, he has this information, we got it from him... 20:10:56 guy: right back where we started.... if they don't know each other, inadmissible... no idea who this person is, not reputation evidence.... furthermore in addition to authentication issue how do we know what they're talking about, verbal or slap fight... 20:11:48 it would do nothing to aid this jury, doesn't tell us about martin, not about what Zimmerman knew of martin... not evidence they knew each other... specific evidence is inadmissible.... 20:12:25 guy: its inadmissible as to who sent it, what it's about... no context to them, pulled out at certain times, no conversations surrounding them... misleading and shouldn't be allowed... provided court case to you 20:13:09 that's all I have regarding text.... 20:13:15 FURTHER ARGUMENT FOR TEXT? yes... I have substantial argument... proffer Connors testimony. AS LONG AS I DONT GO INTO LONG PROFFER ABOUT HIS QUALIFICATIONS AND BACKGROUND, KEEP IT TO JUST TO WHERE HE FOUND THIS FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE PROFFER, LIMIT TO THAT I WILL ALLOW 20:14:00 also and we can ask Connor to testify, his qualifications are important... I HAVE THAT IN A CV...HE GOT FROM A PLACE THAT WAS SECOND LEVEL ACCESS, WHAT THE COURT MEANS BY THAT I WILL HEAR THAT PROFFER... DONT NEED TO GO INTO QUALIFICATIONS.... 20:14:38 other issue to point out is that guys argument completely misses the point... not reputation evidence... directly relates to the physical abilities.... his knowledge of fighting, participated in fight, knew what it's like to be on the bottom... NOT GOING TO TESTIFY WHATS INTENDED BY THIS, JUST THAT HE FOUND IT... guys argument is misleading and to its admissibility of it legally. HEAR THE LIMITED PROFFER FROM CONNOR, NOT THE ARGUMENTS.... GET MR CONNOR IN HERE AND TAKE A STEP AT A TIME..... 20:16:40 relates to gun matters as well... THAT'LL BE PP 20:16:46 (sworn in) 20:17:44 west: another exhibit I'll ask him to speak with briefly as well.. photos that were found on the phone... ALRIGHT DEFENSE COMPOSITE QQ 20:18:43 west: evening. name? richard Connor... 20:18:59 prior to you taking the stand, we marked a copy of your CV... admitted into evidence? would I so move? PROFFER... save time for court to review it... ILL REVIEW AS COMPOSITE, MARKED AS EVIDENCE IT GOES BACK TO JURY, HAVEN'T MADE DETERMINATION IF HES GOING TO TESTIFY.... admitted for this proffer... THAN NOT MARKED AS DOUBLE N... MARKED AS 1 FOR THIS HEARING... I have another copy, suggesting that jury doesn't get for identification.... ILL HAVE TO REMARK UNLESS YOU HAVE ANOTHER ONE... I can retrieve that one and substitute another.... CLERK CAN MARK THAT AS 1 FOR THIS PROFFER 20:20:48 does your CV describe your background and training in computer forensics? yes 20:21:08 training in computer examiner and computer analysis, licensed attorney? yes 20:21:20 testified as expert? yes... 20:21:33 are some of those set out in CV? yes 20:21:42 are you certified by cellbrite? yes. I went to their training 20:21:55 familiar with most recent software program is for cell phone analysis? yes. licensed copy for private sector? yes 20:22:14 use that software to analyze martins phone? yes 20:22:25 at some point in the discovery process did you receive what's been known as bin file? several bin files... 20:22:43 one you received in late February, represented to be data dump? yes I believe Feb. 23rd 20:22:57 opportunity to use you cell brite software and offers available to analyze data? yes 20:23:20 able to ID texts, facebook messages that were hidden from phone? yes 20:23:32 describe what your process was so far as cell bright technology? when you load the data into cell brite physical software, runs scripts and analyzes that... contact list and text messages, emails, pictures, videos.... songs and music... analyzed data section of the report 20:24:23 did you.... when you began process, opportunity to look at report that FDLE had done? yes. 20:24:41 when you did own analysis, indicate there may be additional information? yes 20:24:54 what did you do then with the bin file and other resources to try to capture or identify information? report is only what cell bright reads... bin file is the physical image of phones data... all data and files and free space... loaded into software and examine any file that's from the phone whether or not cellbrite able to analyze it 20:25:49 something that struck you when analyzing bin file and report? yes. one of the first things I did with the report... for each section it lists how many items are there, loaded it into cell bright to see if they matches... off by about 600 pictures... I had 600 more than FDLE report did 20:26:34 additional information not part of the report? yes. what did you do to find them? figure out which were different and if located in same areas 20:26:56 comparing FDLE report with preliminary cellbrite? correct. did it include updated report to the previously provided? at some point there was a second report... late February early march... different than first one, contain the 600 photos? no 20:27:46 have additional data you were able to find? yes. when? first week of June 20:27:55 next time that report was updated? yes 20:28:02 talk about what you did then to identify data that was on the phone.... able to extract additional information by own application? talking in general or pictures..... 20:28:24 however you choose, once you realize more data than in the report, what did you do to try and find it? a couple things... keyword searches.... against bin files... look through report, list the databases on the phone to see what app they belonged to 20:29:06 able to identify additional photos? yes. photos include pictures of hand gun? yes. hand wrapped around grip? yes 20:29:26 able to determine if the pictures were taken by that phone? yes. were they? yes they were. 20:30:06 this is more than just pictures, generally describe what that exhibit consists of? there are several text message exchanges where martin was trying to purchase or sell hand gun... two separate pictures, hand gun on table or something and another where it's in somebody's hand 20:30:48 able to find text on the phone? yes. were some deleted? yes. able to recover deleted texts? marked as deleted but data still on the phone 20:31:16 another version still on phone intact 20:31:23 picture on phone and want to delete it, purposeful? Objection! Speculation! SUSTAINED 20:31:38 something by accident or as result of the phone... require the operator to do something? usually yes... explain? normally pictures will stay on device until deleted or removed.. text messages depends on the phone will often stay on device until deleted or removed... device goes bad and memory card goes bad... usually user initiated 20:32:31 determine as expert whether this was user accident or not? yes. were some deleted and scattered within others that weren't? correct 20:32:54 your opinion these deleted messages were act of person on the phone? Objection! Speculation! SUSTAINED. COULD BE DELETED BY ANYBODY 20:33:19 asking if deleted by action someone took? yes. deleted by someone on purpose? yes 20:33:45 were you able to determine if the phone had passcode? yes. did it? yes. what does that mean? cant access data unless you know the passcode... if you don't can you operate phone? emergency call but not anything else 20:34:22 passcode has to be re-entered? may be 10 minutes and increase each time you put in wrong passcode 20:34:43 put in right passcode, put phone down and is idled after several minutes have to reenter code? yes. any reason that's not the case? I believe it did have time-out period 20:35:16 didn't have a time-out, only enter passcode once and it would remain open forever? until manually locked or restarted... defeat purpose of passcode? yes 20:35:38 that set of texts that relate to purchasing firearm? 20:35:51 identifiers on these texts who sent them and whether or not to trayvon or by trayvon? state which folder they are in, whether incoming or outgoing, date and time, status of message if read or sent... content of message and the status of message 20:36:35 indicated on extraction reports? yes 20:36:40 conversation between martins phone and fulton about revolver? yes... clustered in date? yes. when? between February 18th and 22nd 2012... how many separate collections? several, 1, 2, 3, 4... at least 4... 20:37:39 with different people? yes. identify who they are from the phone? yes... qua fulton, two others involved in addition to martin- spoonhead zack and jay, another set of conversations with another person named ron, person named dario and another about a gun with diamond... that's it... and conversation with fruit 20:38:45 all between February 18th and 22nd 2012? yes 20:38:54 were there some texts on the phone where martin was talking about coming to Sanford? yes. when he was coming to Sanford based on those? Feb. 20-21st 20:39:15 he was killed on Feb. 26th? correct 20:39:26 marked defendants QQ for proffer...... based upon information you retrieved? yes... appears to be of martin, resided on the cell phone. self-taken picture? yes. 20:40:02 taken with that same phone you analyzed? not sure... no meta data that identifies if photo was taken with camera on that phone 20:40:29 within picture file is data about the picture.... make and model of camera, date and time, gps coordinates... meta date 20:40:48 able from that data to learn more about the circumstances and device it was taken? where it exists yes... appears to be martin based on other photos you've seen? yes 20:41:26 were you also able to extract a series of text messages and other postings that relate to martin being in a fight? yes. how able to recover data that related to that? there was data on the phone, not parced or analyzed by cell bright software... when I went and manually looked at database, contained text messages... looked at database associated.... created by android app, super android spc I think.... designed to hide text messages 20:42:39 texts that were subject to his application were not put into main database, placed into another one only accessible to super android application, not parced by cell bright 20:43:12 how did that get your attention? there were a couple things.. don't remember exact order, running key word searches getting hits what looked like text messages not in parced text messages... the spc database was listed in databases, but no parced data in report....got to look at it and it contained texts 20:44:17 something you were piecing together more on phone than what was provided? yes... keep in mind, originally got data certain things I was asked to look at.... this was one of them 20:44:45 something else going on, hidden app... familiar with existence of those? yes I knew those apps existed 20:44:59 what did you do to find that app on this phone? probably describe what I mean by hidden, hidden by user of the phone unless you know the app and the code... have to pull up app put in passcode and view those text messages... hidden from user unless you know how to get them.... not hidden once I get them.... access and view database I can see the data in full text 20:45:57 passcode necessary to unlock the phone and a second to enter in this application? correct. 20:46:13 in order to get access to texts, need to know both passcodes? Objection! Leading! SUSTAINED... leeway to stay on track? ill rephrase 20:46:37 how many passcodes would it take to get access if someone handed the phone? at least 2. 20:47:16 maybe get lucky finding the app 20:47:24 have to figure out the first passcode and then another hidden app that had text messages and the passcode for that application? yes. able to send and receive texts? yes able to see texts hidden by that application and respond 20:48:02 gotten through those levels they could respond to the messages? yes, have access to the users would have 20:48:21 looking at context in regular texting and hiding files, consider whether someone else was using this phone to send and delete messages? that's always something we look for an keep in back of our mind, something I took into consideration 20:48:57 texts relating to gun and fighting, contained within larger conversation with same person? yes 20:49:11 appear to indicate relationship between that person and martin? yes 20:49:22 I'm losing track of my thinking here.... but were you able to collect the various texts from whatever source related to firearms and assemble them in exhibit before you? yes that's what I did 20:49:55 marked as NN..... 20:50:16 familiar with exhibit? yes. what is it? composite of data relating to fights 20:50:26 did all of that come from martins phone? yes. extract in some fashion or another? yes 20:50:36 mentioned earlier there was database accessible to hidden app as opposed through cell bright? accessing by user or by me... user has to go through special app and special password... cellbrite doesn't parce or analyze, but it's there and I can analyze and view it 20:51:15 looking at first page of NN, the header at the top has identifier as SPC log sorted by person......? I created this spread sheet comes off the phone.... a database in this case... consists of several tables, log table.... log of text messages, several other tables... contact or name table have the names of the persons he was texting.... in this is presented to me in cell brite software in a table.. use that for spread sheet, what I did.... 20:52:39 table in database, log table and excel extension of the file 20:52:53 longer conversation with lavandria, extract conversation about fight? yes... other messages going back and forth, extracting these specifically because they related to a fight... show number of levandria? yes. this from martins phone? yes. which of the two sent and which received? yes 20:53:37 able to identify date and time these messages were sent? yes 20:53:56 what is the first line in your exhibit? wyd? which is what you doing 20:54:29 who sent that? levandria. did martin responded? tired and sore. 20:54:39 response? me too but what happened to you. 20:54:55 when levandria said that what did martin say? fight. y?! cuz man that nigga snitched on me. she said? they y u always fightin u got suspended... he said? nah we ducked after school 20:55:42 response? I lost first round :( but won second and third. 20:55:55 and then repeat that with a different smile face? I lost first, but won the second and third. oh so it was three rounds? at least you won, but you need a stop fighting bay for real 20:56:39 did he respond? yes. what did he say? nah I'm not done with fool gonna have to see me again. what did she say? nah bay you aint gonna be satisfied until you get suspended... didn't breed enough for me, only nose 20:57:26 objection! SUSTAIN. seen typos before in phone analysis? the word breed does not make sense and is not intended... bleed... 20:57:52 ask to be stricken! west: this is a proffer unless the court hasn't ruled... RULED ON OBJECTION TO SPECULATION, WHATS WRITTEN THERE IS WRITTEN THERE... WHAT HE BELIEVES MAY MAKE SENSE, BUT MAYBE NOT THE AUTHOR OF IT 20:58:27 in your training and experience, occasion to try to make sense out of text messages or computer messages that weren't accurate from spelling? Objection! Relevance! OVERRULED.... yes 20:59:02 in context of this text sequence as you try to sort data, does the word breed as opposed to bleed make sense? put in context with the rest of the message, not enough and only nose... I think talking about bleeding from nose. Objection! Speculation! SUSTAINED 20:59:55 were you able to find another conversation around that time that referenced that fight? yes. to whom? michael suave french. do you know that person from information on the phone? yes 21:00:31 what is the conversation martin and french had? martin said yeah cause he got more hits, had me on ground and I couldn't do nothing... he responded dang bro 21:01:07 also find reference to fighting by relative? yes. who? demetrius martin... where was that located or posted? on phone in facebook database... FB.DB... inside database there are different tables... in mailbox thread table in the database of the phone... what did the message say? from demetrius, when you gonna teach me how to fight 21:02:15 other information his relationship with martin? some kind of brother, half-brother... sharing some father... what makes you think that? another message from demetrius asking trayvon if dad had a facebook page 21:02:54 based upon context they were talking about common parent? yes 21:03:16 other references to fighting or questions... other discussions in the context of your review of text messages where they discussed fighting? yes.. didn't extract those because you didn't find related to event? correct or because I could not put in date time or who sent them 21:03:56 I would move the marked exhibits into evidence. HAVE TO TAKE THEM OUT OF WHERE THEY'VE BEEN MARKED IN THE CASE.... NN AS 2, PP AS 3, AND QQ AS 4 TO THIS PROFFER 21:04:39 in summary Connor, identifying the difference places on the phone where you found information, overall scope reflected in reports..... 21:05:03 some information in report that you were able to verify in bin file? yes. additional info you were able to extract, not contained in any FDLE report prior to June 4th? correct. information in this file that you were able to extract from applications that were hidden? Object! Leading! Asked and Answered! JURYS NOT HERE, ITS FINE 21:05:55 had to download software and review what was otherwise not visible? no it was not parced or analyzed by cell bright, manually identify it wasn't on the phone.. access to data.... 21:06:26 some of that report is reflected in pages before you? correct. as well as information extracted from it? correct... and from bin file? yes. picture of martin, profile picture and picture of hand gun with the hand? yes 21:06:59 were the pictures of the hand gun with the hand taken by his phone? yes they were CROSS 21:07:28 mantei: when did you notify defense council about additional information? soon after I found it... late februaryish? or early march 21:07:53 aware of who's name the phone was in? the mother's maybe.... 21:08:04 not trayvon martins? his name was not on bill or account 21:08:12 this was a phone on family account, one of several? correct. 21:08:20 can you tell me... referenced this discussion over a gun.... buy or sell? no the different conversations I identified.. in each of them or most of them martin was looking to purchase.. in one there was a discussion about someone else's gun and in last one someone was trying to buy one from martin. a 22? several different calibers. obviously none he had on him? that's what I've heard 21:09:18 as far as this discussions about fighting... in any of them is...... in any of discussions, who was operating keypad? I was not there when messages were not there, however when you view 8000 or 9000 texts on a phone, get a flavor or cadence for the people.... I think I can get a pretty good idea whether it's the same person or not 21:10:16 long way you would like to think so but can't tell me for sure? all appear to be by the same person 21:10:31 profile picture... 3 separate dates...? no that's the data from the phone, on their 3 times... all created on 11-15 2011? probably yes 21:10:52 same picture just repeated? correct 21:11:00 profile picture nothing to do with hands and guns, just torso and face shot? correct 21:11:13 not posted in connection with either frights or guns? posted in terms of text messages correct 21:11:28 deletion can be accomplished by anyone who knew the phone and codes? yes. not there to tell me who did any of that? I was not there when.... 21:11:55 when were they accomplished, in mass or little by little? I can't tell that 21:12:05 hypothetical, if a person parent or sibling had discovered stuff in phone and deleted it, couldn't tell me if done all at once or deleted as he went along? I can give you my opinion 21:12:41 there's nothing in the data that tells when a text was deleted, but certain ones are and certain ones aren't... look for patterns. when it was done you can't tell me? correct. and by whom, I know you have a suspicion? I wasn't there when it was deleted 21:13:16 material in the phone, any reason to suspect Zimmerman knew about it? I don't know... no communications to anyone called Zimmerman? no REDIRECT 21:13:42 mass deletion of texts, were texts deleted related to certain subjects? and people.... texts from certain people were deleted... 21:14:01 texts about drugs and drug use? yes. about the guns? yes 21:14:13 anything that would indicate to you someone other than martin got a hold of this phone and deleted messages at once? no. 21:14:29 images of porn on phone that were not deleted? Object! Beyond Scope SUSTAINED 21:14:47 I submit if some family member got a hold of phone they wouldn't have left porn on it... mantei: doesn't have to do with scope of proffer.. 21:15:17 explain that? pictures of the gun were hidden also on the phone by a separate application, created a folder in a program file with french language... renamed extension... jpg.... also changed extension from .jpg to .dpm.... this app moved them and hid them and was password protected, not deleted off the phone..... whoever using phone would have to have the code and get to the items 21:16:43 separate hidden applications? yes. there were 2 hidden apps? yes. 21:16:54 texts in one and pictures of gun in another? yes 21:17:03 casual user wouldn't see those pictures unless they knew how to access? exactly 21:17:17 not appear to be a picture? correct, just browsing content.. they'd be bin files not picture files 21:17:33 MAY HE BE EXCUSED? yes. THANK YOU, YOU'RE EXCUSED 21:17:51 TESTIMONIES BEEN PROFFERED, I'LL HEAR ARGUMENTS 21:18:00 west: additional evidence to proffer..... Rachel jeantel was also deposed over two days.... while she had denied martin talked with her about fighting in deposition in April she acknowledged conversation with martin that he told her he was in a fight and told her he knew how to fight and was in one that he won... only renew acquaintance with him after a number of years.... conversation of fights took place in weeks prior to martin traveling to Sanford 21:19:27 closes loop on authentication. PROFER FOR PURPOSE OF CONNORS TESTIMONY OR ANOTHER ISSUED IN FRONT OF JURY.... court already raised question of authentication. IS IT FOR PURPOSES OF THIS HEARING OR THE TRIAL? no for this 21:22:11 DEFENDANTS EXHIBIT #5 FOR PURPOSES OF THIS HEARING... #5 is transcript? YES... I HAVE OTHER EXHIBITS HERE, NOT MARKED BY LISA... READY FOR ARGUMENT 21:22:54 west: before I forget, Zimmerman has 10:00 curfew? EXTENDED FOR 30 MINUTES AFTER COURT IS CONCLUDED 21:23:14 argument part of this... asking Connor be allowed to testify for the fighting and the gun and discussions of the gun... I'm not ready tonight to make argument why gun I DONT HAVE THE GUN, THREE PICTURES OF THE PROFILE OF MARTIN.. exhibit marked with discussion of gun. RIGHT BUT I DONT HAVE THE PICTURES OF THE GUN... ONLY PARTS OF THIS EXHIBIT, NO GUN... does the court have exhibit referencing the gun? 21:24:37 EXHIBIT #3 IS EXTRACTION REPORT.... OH YES HERE IS IT, WELL LETS SEE IF PICTURES ARE ATTACHED... HERE THEY ARE 21:25:06 I don't want to address that tonight, hour is late... not saying Connor can testify to the gun and texts... not directly related to facts of the case, more aggressive.. supporting violent tendency... WHAT EVIDENCE CODE ARE YOU SEEKING? most squarely admissible under, well no.. different depending on what parts of exhibit... picture of martin is predicate to martin on his phone... shows his physique... gun pictures and discussion of buying gun is not directly related to the fighting issue... that central core... two legal grounds 90.803... exception to the hearsay prohibition against hearsay....relates to physical condition 21:27:00 in primary text with levandria, martin asked how he's doing and he's tired and sore... fight he was in and he won.. WHAT EVIDENCE CODE? 90.803. text messages regarding fighting 90.803... and also under legal authority chambers vs. Mississippi... not the firearm pictures yet, not connected yet with evidence before the jury 21:27:57 concentrate on fighting and its admissible under several theories, not as reputation theory but under 90.803... reflecting physical condition.... at the time martin was in the fight and explains how he won the fight... losing first round because opponent was on top of him much like testimony he rendered Zimmerman in this case. SEEKING UNDER 90.803, SUB 3? yes.. OK GO AHEAD 21:29:02 talks about having been involved in orchestrated fight... 3 rounds.... talks about how he won second and third and won the fight... also able to hit in the nose and make them bleed, not satisfied with amount of blood... not done yet with this guy... cautioned he should quit doing this 21:29:55 corroborated by conversation with michael french about this event.... we know those are connected in time and content... helping toward authentication that those were his words he communicated with people regularly 21:30:30 conversations with them on other subjects 21:30:40 also a facebook post by martins younger brother demetrius, martin has several children.... one is 2-3 years younger is demetrius martin 21:31:08 we have more loop being closed... demetrius asked trayvon when he was going to teach him how to fight... though he knew how to fight enough to ask for his training 21:31:31 jeantel deposition, told her he had been in a fight... had won the fight, know that from jeantel who knows his voice and personally and testified it was martin who told her about a fight he won 21:31:57 strong circumstantial evidence if not clear evidence... his words being sent to his friends about a fight he was proud he won, draw blood from man's noise and prevail despite difficult first round 21:32:27 connected don'ts on authenticating this.... relevant because physical abilities is relevant... jury instruction says that... this jury decide his physical capabilities and knowledge.. experience in fights having been put in position of vulnerability... in that fight, orchestrated 3 round fight.... when he lost the first round and he couldn't get up there was other rounds...... 21:33:40 been in fight, knew how to fight... knew what Zimmerman would experience when he was on top of him because similar to past 21:33:55 relevant because state took efforts to make that relevant for Zimmerman... physician's assistant folgate.... when Zimmerman spoke with her about his exercise regimen... worked out aerobically with MMA... big deal of that... experience as MMA based upon medical errors from Altamonte physician... relevant in states case, likewise in our case... jury makes that decision 21:34:59 because I think this information shows existence of martins mental state after this event occurred.... tired and sore admissible under 90.803 at time of event... not suggesting that statement was him talking about Feb. 2012, but his thinking and emotional condition at this time 21:35:47 clearly compelling evidence in support of Zimmerman's self-defense claim... testimony is martin sucker punched him... able to get him onto ground where he was mounted... know from testimony, mounting is straddling around hips, vulnerable position... limited acts one can do unless skilled to get out from under it.... know good said he saw martin mounted MMA style... know from physical evidence frankly especially testimony corroborates that... shot was fired from ground up... corroborates and is consistent with what good observed when he went out to investigate... compelling evidence and highly relevant and admissible under 90.803 21:37:32 also relevant because not to admit it would violate articles and 5th 6th amendments... confront witnesses and due process 21:38:07 this theory, constitutional principle of preservation is discussed in chambers vs. miss..... what's to be taken from that decision, states hearsay rules can't be mechanistically applied to deny an accused right to mount the defense... any rule of exclusion would be a mechanistic application of that rule.... prohibits especially under circumstances where the evidence is reliable.... his phone and words in context to other individual conversations... skill in fighting, able to injure person, not done with him yet... consistent with Feb. 26th when Zimmerman screaming for help but martin not done with him yet 21:39:53 indeed closed the loop with jeantels deposition..... talking with her about winning a fight and knowing how to fight 21:40:12 not something that isn't authenticated and isn't reliable... not just someone else typing this out, can't be the case now that you've heard context of these text messages... highly probable value of residence...default should be Zimmerman to present defense... urge court to allow Connor to testify 21:41:04 guy: he's made my point, orchestrated fight, how many rounds... someone's mounted another person... not in here... why this evidence shouldn't be before jury.... told a story that is not in these messages on this phone... don't know what type of fight he's talking about 21:41:46 don't know if fight is code for something else 21:41:53 we don't know anything about if there was a fight... who is opponent was, Andre the giant or a little girl... that's why this shouldn't be admitted 21:42:14 doesn't even address authenticity issue... we don't know who typed messages, don't know how they're connected.... levandria and french were days apart.... jeantel was weeks later 21:42:50 authenticity issue of mental state... no indication of when these fights took place..... west: mantei did the cross and now guy is doing argument... guy: it's my issue, but Connor was mantei's witness... OKAY GO AHEAD 21:43:31 so again we've got authenticity issue, no definitiveness to when these occurred or what was meant by these words, are they code.... danger is that its orchestrated fight, mounting... none of that in here 21:44:11 any probative value is outweighed by effect of jury imagining what's meant and may have been from martin and may have been about a fight... court wants me to address about photo about firearm? ADDRESS AT LATER TIME... 21:44:48 photo appears to be martin.... offered for... best photo for jury to consider if the one taken on medical examiners photo... don't know if this photo was right after a workout and was pumped up 21:45:25 I see no probative value to the photo... already in evidence... moment...... 21:45:40 they relied on chambers vs. miss... don't think purpose of that is to irradiate evidence code to allow in items subject to speculation... ask court to continue to grant states motion and deny this motion 21:46:11 ANY FURTHER ARGUMENT? 21:46:18 west: content of messages.. they are what they are... jury see them and give whatever weight based on what they mean... authentication, this issue is a mess on the discovery of this issue... rionda stood before court and said we gave defense everything... that wasn't true.... we finally got the report from brenton on June 4th... still haven't had chance to go through it... there is ongoing discovery issue... guy stood there silently when rionda said we gave them everything... we know that's just not true 21:47:45 can't get through this issue with time table..., no authentication issue, does the court think there is one is from states misconduct... COMING FROM SAME PHONE.... we did not have ability to... we were misled, given...... GO AHEAD... given a report at the same time as bin file, report was misleading, not the same information state had at this time... HE FOUND 600 ADDITIONAL PHOTOS THE STATE DID NOT KNOW ABOUT.. that's not true... testimony before this court.... SIDE ISSUE, MY POINT BEING IF YOU HAD 5 YEARS TO LOOK AT BIN FILE, STILL COMING FROM SAME PHONE, CORRECT? yes, data set is the data set. 21:49:22 INFORMATION YOU ARE SEEKING NOW, I DO HAVE AUTHENTICATION ISSUE... 90.901.A MOST COMMON METHOD FOR ELECTRONIC RECORD IS TESTIMONY OF THE PERSON WHO CREATED IT.... FOOTNOTE #3 GRIFFIN VS STATE.... ELECTRONIC DOCUMENT, TEXT, FACEBOOK... DIRECT TESTIMONY OF THE AUTHOR THAT IDENTIFY THE AUTHOR... EMAIL MESSAGES MARKED, SENDER CELL PHONE AND USER NAME AND PROFILE PICTURE... COULD BE GENERATED BY THIRD PARTY, NOT EQUATED OTHERS........2011 CASE, EVIDENCE OF ELECTRONIC MEDIA THAT BARES AUTHORS NAME IS NOT SUFFICIENT ENOUGH.... 21:52:01 MY POINT BEING THAT WHAT HAS BEEN PRESENTED, EXHIBIT 2, AND EXHIBIT 3... HAS NOTHING IDENTIFYING MR. MARTIN... DOESN'T SAY HEY THIS IS TRAYVON... GOING ON TO LEVANDRIA, COMING BACK IN FROM LEVANDRIA... ANYONE COULD HAVE SENT THESE MESSAGES... PEOPLE HAVE CHILDREN THAT PICK UP PHONE AND PLAY WITH THEM... NO IDENTIFYING MARKS THESE ARE CREATED OR SENT BY MARTIN... CONCERN ABOUT THAT 21:53:10 had double level of security... ANY SEVEN YEAR OLD CAN FIGURE OUT A PASSCODE... fdle couldn't do it for almost a year....ANOTHER PERSON MAY KNOW THAT PERSON... FDLE DIDN'T KNOW THE PASSWORD... 21:53:50 all of it came off his phone, thousands of pictures and texts... no indication someone else was using his phone..... Manuel vs. state.... suggest when the state didn't give us the information timely... WHAT ON THESE TEXTS SAY THEY ARE CREATED BY MARTIN... would've had time to find the witnesses on the other end.... caught them doing it, get on June 4th.... judge.... we asked for time, asked to delay case few days... what could we have done to further the issue under circumstances state is proprietor... not fair Zimmerman can't put on defense... now it's our fault to deny Zimmerman this right violates the Florida and US constitution 21:56:01 guy: I would offer him the opportunity to apologize to me for accusing me of standing by while rionda stated... NOT DOING THIS.... 21:56:14 COURT IN RECESS, SEE YOU AT 8 IN THE MORNING 21:56:26 COURT IS IN RECESS... SEE YOU AT 8 IN THE MORNING... DONNELLEY WHO MAY HAVE VIOLATED SEQUESTRATION... SECOND TIME THAT I'VE HEARD A VIOLATION BY WITNESSES, DONT WANT TO TAKE THAT UP AT 9 AND HAVE JURY WAIT... RECESS UNTIL 8.... omara: not able to prepare and get my witnesses together. west: can't keep up with this pace.... weekends a tonight.... (judge walking out as west continues to talk) COURT IN RECESS UNTIL 8 AM ================================== George Zimmerman's defense attorneys are flying through their case, and could finish as early as today. They plan to drive home their view that Zimmerman acted in self-defense when he shot and killed 17 year-old Trayvon Martin. On Monday, Zimmerman's lawyers called a string of witnesses who all identified the screams heard during a 9-1-1 call as those of Zimmerman. They also called Trayvon Martin's father Tracy to the stand to respond to testimony from the lead detective that Martin initially said the voice screaming was not Trayvon's. Martin said he never said it wasn't his son, just that he couldn't tell. After repeatedly listening to it, he says he became certain that was the last words of his son before he was killed.
Sports: women’s football, women’s basketball, women’s volleyball and hockey (Angers/Belfast)
Atlantique
ZIMMERMAN TRIAL POOL 070913 P9
INT BROLL GEORGE ZIMMERMAN TRAYVON MARTIN TRIAL / SWITCHED POOL FEED / NOTE - THERE IS A RECORDING GAP BETWEEN 19:50:00 AND 19:55:45 - SEE P10 FOR PATCH OF THIS GAP NOTE: Do not use any pictures of the Trayvon Martin gunshot wound shown during this morning's court testimony.It was from his autopsy and was inadvertently broadcast. Under FL law autopsy photos are exempt from public record We cannot show the picture when it was displayed or when it was in the hands of the witness KATIE HUBER LOG **NOTE: JUDGE'S COMMENTS IN CAPS **NAMES OF WITNESSES IN RED **VISUAL DESCRIPTIONS IN (PARENTHESES) **GOOD STATEMENTS/VIDEO BOLD 8:31:06 PLEASE BE SEATED. GOOD MORNING.... (defense team is not present) 8:31:37 ON THE RECORD.... STATE VS. ZIMMERMAN 8:31:56 omara: issue of the animation, deposition last night that focused the inquiry, state still has issues... not so much admissibility but applicability to the facts 8:32:19 mantei: supplemented original issue.... daubert issue and early concerns.... part 3 of the witnesses deposition... now done from states perspective, move from witness creating exhibit that represented physical evidence and police reports and witness statements... changes from animation taken to fit to theory who has yet to testify to it... now a daubert issue, simple representation and physical items to create an essentially animated picture or theory that di maio discussed with witness Saturday after shoemaker was deposed twice but before di maio's deposition 8:34:04 because of what came out in that deposition, expand hearing to include daubert hearing... daubert-Frye-pierce hearing, all issues need to be flushed out... filed supplemental motion accordingly... witness had other still-pictures and a computer diagram, haven't gotten those physical things from the witness..... apologize for telling the court we want what was said we didn't want yesterday, but given yesterday I believe it is 8:36:53 (judge nelson reading the motion) 8:39:10 DEFENSE RESPONSE? 8:39:17 omara: factual response first, concern evidence by the state addressed one fact issue that is undisputed... dr. shiping bao and our medical examiner expert... gunshot entered at 90 degree angle, closet to a straight through shot... no dispute as to that fact... the state's concern, attended to making of the animations.... well aware of deposed and given copies of.... added to that fact, the potential of the distance from gun to body.. only distance he would give was 0.4 to 4 ft. other witness says 2-4 inches 8:41:09 states concern with that, fine with not using that still... not part of the animation, use in closing as demonstrative... withdrawn to make sure that was clear 8:41:34 underlying fact the state suggests concern with the positioning of the bodies when the shot was fired... gun and body at 90 degrees, not know and depicted in animation as probable positioning is what I guess is in issue... body and gun together........ only eye witness testimony when he saw it... left a few seconds before..... state can argue to the jury something different.... it happened, based upon evidence and shiping bao's testimony, animation that has bodies in that position, suggest what they want... don't believe and never seen evidence admissibility having some argument that it may have happened differently 8:43:30 I don't understand why that makes it a Frye or daubert admissibility concern.... it is specifically in line with facts of evidence and how things happened.... if we were to go through a daubert piece Frye standing...... not certain, I know they talked but didn't come up with anything different to john good's testimony 8:44:35 saying now it's just based upon what we talked about... no its based on 90 degree angle.. 8:44:54 what you'll see is it is more than animation, series of stills... response to states concerns in the past... took out animation and placed with a still.... movement of the arms.... SORRY TO INTERRUPT, JUST START WITH HEARING AND GIVE ARGUMENT AFTER THAT... DEFENSE HAS BURDEN, CALL FIRST WITNESS 8:46:37 (sworn in) 8:46:48 name? daniel shoemaker... address? California. name of company? contrast forensic... type of business? crime scene accident reconstruction.... I take reports and photos from the scene.... I take all of that and put into context for the recreation 8:47:40 how you got into this business? information graphics for fortune 500 companies. when that began? 26 years ago. who'd you work for? viewcom systems in Ohio... did corporate presentations for tire companies in Akron 8:48:25 the days before PowerPoint? days before desktop computers.... a lot of art graphic work, poster presentation? we had a sophisticated computer and it did slides. how long with them? 5 years. position? senior artist 8:49:01 you would take on a project, create the tools? work with the client on modifications... any formal education in this area? bachelor in fine arts. 8:49:38 advertising and marketing, corporate identity 8:49:48 graphic presentation to audience? yes, the best way... various ideas and procedures. 8:50:00 for 5 years? yes. and then? to California, same thing for a lot of companies in bay area 8:50:15 contract basis? worked for company, senior artist. which company? dolphin multimedia. same job description? similar job as in Ohio... being in bay area, more access to up to date software, more up to date technology 8:50:55 any difference in first five years to now? main difference is doing a lot of information graphics for governmental proposals.... information graphics for governmental proposals and information graphics of crime scene recreation for attorneys. how long in Cali? 13 years. 8:51:50 name changed? contrast design to contrast forensic. owner/sole proprietor... 8:52:07 type of work you focused on? initially started out by working with attorneys on designing their information, court room presentations were a bit below that..... gone from information graphics to attorneys like that to drawing crime scenes... progressed quite a lot to the point with the equipment I'm using now 8:52:59 what type of software or hardware was available to you when you started? mostly drawing out a scene.... scale and accurate, mostly 2-D.... from there it's gone to 3-D to the point where the reconstruction and the software got more sophisticated.... start with you going out to scene with tape roller and get a measurement? yeah 8:54:06 software I use, I have two kinds for using my total station data.......... aras 360.... 8:54:34 start with foundation point, total station.... bring us back to an idea when you walk onto a scene and what do you create? progressed from tape measure to robotic laser, set up on tripod and measure crime scene... series of points and 3-D space 8:55:25 used now by law enforcement? yes and road crews 8:55:38 set up that laser here, bounce off points in court room and have a data configuration of the entire outline of the court room? two types... type I have is point by point... I lay out 2-500 points in a scene... I walk around with a pocket computer and prism, everywhere I go hit the computer point where I am... laser follows me around... creates a point cloud of the whole scene..... 8:56:50 how does that compare to total station software? how does what compare........ total station gathers data and then export to aras 360....... 8:57:28 once you get that information, what you do to see if information is there? look at the data and examine it, another piece of software that I have... visual statement, between those two... 8:58:10 within context of aras 360, gathering environment digitally... motion capture suit for gathering....wireless, accelerometers... capture movement accurately and bring into the scene.... accuracy of the scene 8:59:16 give court examples for the motion capture suits... in other cases? use a few ways, I use it.... a month ago I had to go to impound lot, death in a vehicle... get into vehicle and it still sees the movement.... typical one has balls on the suit with high speed cameras following it, but the cameras won't follow behind the wall or into the vehicle..... my suit is I can take it, accelerometers to measure my movement 9:00:51 perfect for court because it gives you a running log of all the movements..... somebody hits something and cause damage.... do the same action from the accelerometers see how much force I used 9:01:24 what software exists behind those suits to interpret that and make it relevant to presentation? software that came with suit, engineers that developed it... not only used it for motion capture but also biometrics for physical therapy, monitor movement from day to day 9:02:07 put on those suits if I had range of motion problem and the suits will measure progress? yes, printout of all the movements 9:02:26 software the interprets the movement of the suits, criteria that can be put in to determine force, speed and effect of objects moving through space? yes, could do that in the reconstruction 9:02:56 how this suit gives data for recreation? put on the suit, still considered crime scene... didn't want to disrupt it... t vac suit to protect the scene, somebody opened the door tried to pull the person out.... he reached for a gun and shot him.... shot the person coming into the car? yes 9:03:49 very good use of the suit, had an attorney pull me out and record it in real time 9:04:06 what you were able to recreate? in the truck? yes..... 9:04:27 I had accurate measurements of the truck, recreated the truck, my movements fit well within the truck, exports motion file.... bring into 3D program... map their movements onto figure that matches the person involved... map onto the person's skeleton 9:05:11 how do you get size of person to be accurate? from police reports and coroners reports 9:05:23 does the software recreate body in proper proportion? doesn't do any simulation, I just have a figure that I size to the size that I need.... 9:05:50 can specify what height the person is... weight? weight is more the appearance from photos 9:06:05 helpful and do you have another sample of the car one? I have another sample 9:06:22 happened in a sams club parking lot........... 9:09:33 since it's just the court, approach the bench and you could see off the computer screen? FINE YOU MAY BRING IT UP HERE... COUNCIL APPROACH 9:10:15 this is a sample of a motion filed from the scene... how is the scene recreated for the background of event? in software. where did information come from? security camera, placed vehicles where they were in the video, better representation than the security camera 9:11:04 about to see the animations, how does the movement get placed into environment? import from motion capture software. 9:11:28 how does it get placed in right location? move figures around based on scene. come up with alternatives based on witnesses and evidence? yes, can't change movement, just the location of figures 9:12:28 graphic information from witnesses and evidence? yes 9:12:37 say that the movement of the person, how do you decide the speed? timed from security camera..... nothing further as far as that... OKAY THANK YOU 9:13:06 chance to look at that animation, anything different in the software you used in that representation than one in zimmerman case? zimmerman case was more total station data, data that was provided from DA's office 9:13:43 are there any course work or training programs you go through to enhance your abilities for this work? both in aras 360, classes through that and trained through that. only required to go through 1, but I've gone to 3 total station 9:14:24 software that law enforcement uses? total station is the piece of equipment 9:14:38 total station information available from law enforcement in this case? correct 9:14:52 who does the training for that? software companies train 9:15:03 most recent time you took training? training in those courses, a couple years... on my CV 9:15:22 aras 360 software, continually update my skills... webinar every Friday that I watch. any significant changes in program or still the same? still the same, maybe an update every 6 months 9:16:00 training and certification on using the software and using it with total station. 9:16:20 have current version of software? yes. up to date with that software? yes 9:16:34 creating computer graphic animations? luxology modo... whats that 3D software? creating 3d scenes, used for animation movies. 9:17:17 allow you to present environment or frame work? yes and create the scene 9:17:42 start putting in elements? yes. how are they accurate? measurements from total station data.... 9:17:59 bounce off points and import into program? yes..... also one part is I have a helicopter, didn't use in this case... just a drone, take photo of scene I have the data points from total station and it'll lay it on or drape it onto those points, accurate out door reconstruction of the scene 9:18:46 bird's eye view, more accurate data points? yes 9:19:02 opportunity to create animations and testify as expert? yes. what period of time you did that? ongoing for last 13 years... criminal and civil cases 9:19:30 first time you created animation in court case? 2009 9:19:46 tell the court, have you ever gotten to point where animations were utilized in court? yes. experience you had in civil and criminal settings with your testimony? I used motion capture suits for animation but to verify a person's position, did one a few months ago... in a vehicle, shot through window, show a couple more times... which were done in the car... verify his position when 3 shots were fired 9:20:48 explain how... name for motion suit? initial motion capture suit. IMCS 9:21:20 matched vehicle used and recorded movement getting out... in the figure that matched the victim, put in the rod to match bullet trajectory... looked at positions getting out of car to see which positions the trajectory should be 9:21:55 talk in context....? calibrate at beginning of recording. for accuracy? yes. 9:22:24 doing movement, but computer gathering data on 16 points that are moving? yes. computer may not know it's a body, just 16 points? in real time on computer, there's a mannequin 9:22:59 not the exact video of the driver moving his arms, but rather you decided how the body moves, how do you address that frailty? look at certain things you know from the discovery, bullet trajectory, opening of the door, physical characteristics of the truck... look at scenarios to find which one matches the scene and evidence and discovery you have 9:23:48 do an animation at the point you created is specific? Objection! 9:24:02 consideration based on evidence know to you at the time? yes. modify animation to match witnesses or other things you've heard? yes, whatever's more accurate 9:24:23 put on the suit, software allows you to change configuration of body for height? yes. how do you look at body size to accomplish that on the program? most done through photos from reports 9:25:06 take measurements of those photos, ratio comparisons and put on the mannequin? yes measurements from reports.... any measurements you can take. 9:25:35 also look at photographs? yes 9:25:52 I come in after the fact, have to rely on police photos taken from the scene.... don't have certain measurements, but you may have one measurement of an item in a photograph... 9:26:22 how does that assist you with measurements? one known object with measurement you can figure out other items 9:26:50 I can tell how far from the wall you are.......................... lay down a plane in the software if you know one measurement apply to the grid and extrapolate the evidence 9:27:26 don't know the algorithms or math behind it, has been certified to work? yes 9:27:42 this type software, does that have application in entertainment industry? yes. suit I have was used in avatar, iron man, x-man... used in creating characters... also used in madden football... record suits and apply the figures 9:28:27 iron man is placed on top of him in the movie? in the computer the 3D program 9:28:42 talking about your experience in testifying... how many times in court your animations were presented? need CV? yes. moment? YES 9:29:19 come back to your CV.... experience in testifying for the animations. use of suits and presentation in court? most work since I acquired the suit in 2008.... probably 20. 9:30:00 types of cases you worked on and what courts? also on my CV, list of the counties 9:31:35 type cases and court rooms you presented? 59 criminal trials, 21 civil trials... declaration or testified in 20 of those.... 9:32:15 trying to figure out shooting incidents, worked with department of justice and police officer related shootings, stabbings, it varies quite a bit. 9:32:36 in each of the 59 cases, take on data and graphic presentation? yes 9:32:49 are we now talking about spectrum of murder cases, know the charges or just the information? sometimes told more detail and give creation from the evidence 9:33:17 what percentage for defense and prosecution? 100% on the defense, has to do with defensive police officers and police officer involved shootings 9:33:43 if the department of Justice with a civil case against them or a shooting occurred, work with them on that and presentation of their material 9:34:13 presented testimony in court in any of the criminal cases? presented personally or... after being qualified, you personally? probably all 59 9:34:48 qualified as expert various counties.... 16 counties here... all in California? yes 9:35:20 are these counties in which the courts authorized you as an expert? all the courts where my information was presented, all qualified, never denied 9:36:00 (listing counties) 9:36:47 have you ever testified in Florida before? no. outside of California? no. how long have you had motion suits? since 2008 9:37:04 in those counties, which counties were you... did you testify in those counties or was the information you created presented? both... my information was through either as expert testimony or a declaration... sometimes my material can be testified to by another witness... 9:38:01 I just speak to the accuracy of the creation... 9:38:09 have you testified in court concerning accuracy and methods used to create? yes. 9:38:24 what counties and types of cases you've testified to? I don't have a listing ..... what cases have you testified to in court, what types of cases? all the ones I've testified in court have been criminal trials 9:39:06 what you testified to and the animations? plasa county, shooting reconstruction, position of shooter and victim, the order of shots.... testify? yes. expert in this area? yes. 9:39:58 another case? contracusta county, determine position of the person from the 3 shots... determine there was only 1 through window and the other 2 were outside vehicle. expert? yes. 9:40:34 one more from another case? a couple down in Marino valley, two of them actually... one was inside house, threatening suicide, police officers responded and they were waiting at corner of garage waiting for him to come out and another officer was looking out to the street and the other office was looking at doorway, determine who shot... which officer and the position of person in house.... in my reconstruction, person in house was on floor in kitchen... two counts of murder to police officer... in house the entire time. police said person came out with gun, fired 3 shots, partner turned around and shot the partner in elbow... which shots came first and position of door....... second series, position of the door... no way someone came through door when shots went off, tight space outside the door he would've been hit, had to be in the.... 9:43:08 accepted in the court? yes. give evidence to the jury in that case? yes 9:43:24 other cases where you've been attempted to qualify as expert? no. in all 59 then, by affidavit, declaration, give your testimony to what you created? declaration or testimony was 20 cases, never been disqualified 9:43:59 experience on civil side similar? mostly info designed for attorneys to present to jury 9:44:13 any civil that went to jury? not in civil trials 9:44:35 zimmerman case? first became involved toward end of April... initial conversation in august, but my first meeting with attorneys was end of April 9:44:58 in 2012? yes. went through medical condition that took you out of sorts for several months? yes. all resolved? well se 9:45:14 back to work, talked in April this year? yes. what information did you gather and review, what tasks given on behalf of this case? to do a reconstruction of the scene with the information we had and creation of an animated timeline... 9:45:50 inside your qualifications? yes. not a lot of opportunity to have live audio of the occurrence, different in this case 9:46:23 unique because we had audio evidence, real time available for your recreation? yes, helps with the timeline 9:46:39 similar to security camera makes its more accurate? yes. video surveillance not in this case? no 9:46:59 what information did you gather to assist you in the work? discovery from DA office, photos, reports, audio from 911 calls, questioning at PD of witnesses... depositions? yes. photos from scene and total station data 9:47:48 any information you needed to create animation that you did not have available? use of motion capture suit at the scene, not available to me... made two visits to the scene 9:48:16 came back to utilize motion capture suits? yes. when that was done? second week in may 9:48:40 explain what you do then, who did it, how you assure accuracy? good where I can interact with suits at the scene, 9:49:26 7 points that were labeled windows and they were not in position to be windows.... laser bounced off and was different than what it was? yes... laser pointed up to 2nd story window, went through tree and picked up branches... 6 points on one side and another point that are in the wrong location, not to use it 9:50:20 address that or fix it? I didn't manipulate the data, just didn't use them 9:50:41 any other measuring of the scene now that you're on scene? matter port scanner.... sets up on tripod, has a little computer and cameras.... one that takes photos and another one takes infrared for distance 9:51:19 iPad interface, twirl in 360 and scan around scanner, walk it through the scene... captures intricate parts of the scene as well as textramap of the photos 9:51:49 helpful to get the slope and positioning of buildings and sidewalk. more accurate that total station then? yes it added to the total station data, verified the scanner with the total station data so it all matched 9:52:31 did matter port allow for better graphic representation of the sloping? yes. total station had not done that? didn't measure very many points.... mainly measured the drains and sprinkler fix... didn't do measuring of slope 9:53:08 matter for even more accurate rendition of sloping of ground? yes 9:53:25 SHOEMAKER STANDING FOR AN HOUR NOW.... I THOUGHT IT WAS GOING TO BE SHORT, WOULD YOU LIKE TO TAKE A SEAT SIR? how much longer.... omara: drag him back down here in a moment, so I'll move it along 9:53:58 go to scene to start working on project? correct.... motion capture suit, who did them and frailty of others using it? a couple volunteers from your law office that put the suits on, timing for scenario where they were on the ground, used audio on the 911 call to time it with shot of the gun 9:54:46 also john good's statements and deposition testimony? yes. used for the positioning.... information from Ms. mora, saw zimmerman on top of martin after shot? yes. assist in your creation? yes 9:55:18 also have Lauer 911 audio, has a shot and matter of time before shot? yes. 9:55:36 what other information? Ms. Lauer's police report. she first heard altercation at the T? yes. and Jeremy's? yes 9:55:58 created poster graphics, stills of the scene based upon that testimony as well? yes. recently removed Jeremy's statements since he didn't testify? yes 9:56:24 modifying animation and the posters to come in mind with actual trial testimony? yes. as disclosed to you by me? yes to get most accurate representation of it 9:56:47 able to create animation based on info available to you? yes 9:56:57 sources of that information, seen discovery- witness, depositions, autopsy, reports.... also diagrams made by witnesses and other information in discovery? correct. 9:57:36 a lot of information from defense? yes. extraneous to recreation but to see if it was relevant? yes 9:58:03 conversations with me and others on my behalf for the creation? yes 9:58:13 sources of information? everything you mentioned. anything else? my going to the scene and scanning the scene during motion capture 9:58:41 anything you would have liked to have had in creating the posters that was not available to you? I believe I had everything I needed to create the scene 9:59:06 present the animation.................... 10:00:33 BRING UP TO THE BENCH AND I'LL LOOK AT IT UP HERE.... 10:01:40 (video playing on shoemaker's laptop, audio of 911 call.... no visual of the video) 10:02:47 there are posters that he created.... mantei: new ones? omara: some are new.... 10:03:22 advise the court what this is and how created? from 3d image of how it was created, to explain location of markers...... where'd you get the markings and put at that location? straight from total station data, also have a flat 2D illustration of the scene. incorporated as well? yes 10:04:15 basically the same thing, different view. 10:04:33 to show the slope.... 10:05:28 this is just to show photographs from discovery of what was at those markers 10:05:42 different parts of different items, where located and top left hand corner... imported and picture we gave you? yes. 10:06:12 IN THE MIDDLE? from the point of view from good. to the left is good head? his ear... taken with 50 mm lens in the software, closely resembles what a person will see 10:06:42 line going above the case, distance measurement? edge of porch to marker number a 10:06:58 what it looks like? 49.5 mm., rounded to 50 10:07:10 perspective one would see as humans looking at it? yes that's how they would appear 10:08:06 john goods to the left? yes 10:08:15 states what john good testified in trial regarding what he saw and the peoples descriptions? yes. yes 10:08:34 that is Ms. Mora's testimony in trial to what she saw from her column? yes. 10:08:52 what she would see from her location? yes 10:08:57 in these photos I didn't try to reconstruct the lighting, more important to see detail.....frailty of the posters, lighting was nothing for this evening? jury would have a hard time seeing detail 10:10:07 moment? YES 10:10:34 PROBLEM THEY'RE HAVING IS WITH THE APPLE COMPUTER, CHECK IT OUT OVER LUNCH... get his presentation on a PC. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? just briefly: have been doing this graphic information in court for 13 years? yes. has never been disqualified in court? correct. 10:11:20 awareness of industry and others who did this? only one in US with wireless motion capture suit.... older style ones available? reconstruction are using, but very rare to find one with motion capture suit, whether the balls or the wireless 10:12:21 used in video games and videos? yes 10:12:25 software you utilize, tell the court where that fits in to industry 10:12:56 how long? luxology around probably 4 years.... I believe 4.... started as version 201, now up to 701 10:13:16 ever attend seminars or conventions where others interact? yes.... 10:13:32 users group that gets together, presentations there. how often? just presented once 10:13:44 made up of people who use software on ongoing basis? yes.... 10:13:59 aras 360 gets together every Friday.... keep up on that part of the industry? yes 10:14:11 is this software accepted whether accident recreations or others? yes, highway patrol uses it... 3 basic software... visual statement, aras 360... another software called crime time or something like that.... Sanford police uses on there's 10:14:57 is the software you use the most up to date software for this work? yes,... industry standard for accident and crime scene reconstruction 10:15:18 use this type of software to do the work? mostly used in police departments 10:15:34 80% of aras 360 are police departments, others are accident or crime scene reconstructionist like myself.... user group meetings interaction? yes, get an answer at the end of the week 10:16:07 accident reconstructionist, type of software used in this industry? yes, mines cutting edge 10:16:24 more advanced, only one who uses new style of motion suits for your work? correct. are used in entertainment industry? correct and medical rehabilitation 10:16:50 limited based on expense? yes. nothing further CROSS 10:17:00 mantei: 5 minute break and the witness sit in stand? 10:17:10 COURT IN RECESS FOR 5 MINUTES ============================================ 10:24:29 PLEASE BE SEATED. IS SHOEMAKER HERE? he is. HOW MUCH LONGER IS THIS GOING TO TAKE.... JURY IN BACK SINCE 9, I STAYED LATE TO GET THIS ACCOMPLISHED....mantei: 45 minutes. NO. DO IT LATER... SHOEMAKER REMAIN OUTSIDE, CONTINUE HEARING AFTER COURT.... READY WITH NEXT WITNESS? READY TO BRING JURY IN? omara: approach VERY BRIEF (sidebar) 10:26:55 (zimmerman walking in, tan suit, white shirt, gray tie) 10:27:16 (omara talking to zimmerman) 10:30:53 (sidebar) 10:34:21 MR ZIMMERMAN, PLEASE STAND.... INFORMED BY COUNCIL THAT TESTIMONY OF DR. DI MAIO IS CARVED DOWN... DID YOU HAVE DISCUSSIONS WITH OMARA ABOUT DR DI MAIOS TESTIMONY? yes. AGREE WITH HIS REPRESENTATION NOT TO ASK CERTAIN AREAS, YOU AGREE WITH THAT? yes. HAS ANYBODY THREATENED YOU TO DO THAT? no. READY FOR JURY? west: not yet. HOW CLOSE ARE WE? need the physical evidence in the court. PLEASE OPEN LOCKER DOOR AND GET OUT WHAT YOU NEED...... 10:37:48 NOW READY FOR JURY? LET'S BRING THE JURY IN.... 10:39:59 PLEASE BE SEATED, WELCOME BACK... I APOLOGIZE FOR KEEPING YOU BACK THERE... QUESTIONS: DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE CASE? NO HANDS RAISED. READ OR LISTEN TO REPORTS ABOUT THE HOUSE? NO HANDS RAISED. USE ELECTRONIC DEVICE FOR RESEARCH? NO HANDS RAISED. READ OR CREATE SOCIAL MEDIA? NO HANDS RAISED. 10:40:53 west: call Vincent Di Maio 10:41:27 (sworn in) 10:41:54 west: good morning.... name? Dr. Vincent Di Maio 10:42:13 profession? physician, employed in private practice of forensic pathology.... degree? yes back in 1965 in NY 10:42:39 educational background? graduated med school 1965, 1 yr. internship in pathology, did a 3 year residency, 1 year fellowship in forensic pathology, specialty board exams 10:43:39 board certification? yes... it means you've successfully completed training in specialty... taken written and practical exam and certified and recognized as specialist 10:44:07 mentioned anatomical, pathology...? pathology is branch of medicine with death from disease..... examine tissue removed from someone.... mole, breast tissue... tells your physician the disease, and tells you the diagnosis... wont contact them, physician has contact 10:45:10 clinical pathologist is concerned with tests done... blood test, urine test... 10:45:23 forensic pathologist is concerned with application to medical science and the law... function as medical examiner, determine cause of death and manner of death... individuals thought to have died of violence, accidents suicides or homicides..... exact course of death is not known... autopsy..... based on circumstances, the findings and tests done make determination on cause and manner 10:46:25 professional positions following training? having trouble hearing you..... 10:47:09 following training you've outlined, idea of the professional position you held? after training, went into army for 2 years... armed forces institute in pathology.... chief of medical legal section, then wound ballistic section... moved to Dallas, TX medical examiner there summer 1972- Feb. 1981.... became chief medical examiner for Bexar county Texas.... san Antonio...... from march 1981-until I retired Dec. 2006. 10:48:40 for 16 of the years I was there, I was in charge of crime lab... retired and went into complete private practice, doing since then... also the editor of the American journal of forensic pathology.... chairmen of Texas crime labs....... 10:49:30 director of crime lab for 16 years, role? police had crime lab, county took over when I came..... basic documentation, established DNA Lab.... usually things, drug ID, DNA, trace evidence 10:50:11 work include knowing how to package evidence that may have biological or DNA evidence? yes. but you teach the forensic pathologists, they know that even if not in the lab.... technique to packaging... 10:50:50 certain requirements when packing biological samples, wet fluids? yes, dry out material... package each in paper... if you don't let it dry and put in plastic, the bacteria love that... multiply... mold... stinks and everything deteriorates 10:51:35 well known for a while? yeah I'd say... 30 years that I know of 10:51:45 back you've done with group that monitors labs? Texas forensic science commission... yeah what does that involve? government agency.... problem with labs reported and investigated and issued a report... want tests to be done proper.... labs reporting themselves 10:52:50 in addition to professional positions, also had academic appointments? University of Texas system.. assistant professor, associate professor and full professors before I retired. what subject? pathology 10:53:21 have you in addition to your day to day work as medical examiner and work at the University as professor, published any books or articles? 88 articles and 13 book chapters and then I've published 4 books.... first was gunshot wounds, wrote myself... published in English, French and Spanish... forensic pathology with my father, he's deceased now... third book was handbook of forensic pathology wrote with a colleague, 4th book is excited delirium syndrome... I'm the junior author of that book, wife is senior author.... 10:54:51 your work in gun shots.... first book you wrote, updated over time? 2 editions published and the 3rd edition is going to the publishers in another week or two.... 10:55:17 describe for jury the purpose of focus of that book? book starts out instructing about fire arms, wounds, riffles, hand guns, how to do an autopsy, collect evidence and what you can do with analysis 10:55:51 gunshot wounds, how a pathologist could learn things like the distance from the shot? right, contact, near, loose, distant... range, nature of wound 10:56:20 work you've been doing your entire career? yes, very strong interest in gunshot wounds 10:56:35 written 13 chapters, in others books? correct. how does that work? solicit me to write the chapter 10:56:55 are some of those books more comprehensive look than what you wrote? I don't think so... depends, chapters aren't always about gunshot wounds 10:57:23 how many of those chapters that you recall involve gunshot wounds? I think about 7 10:57:36 authored or participated in 88 peer review article? it's a scientific article submitted to journal... when the journal receives it, sends to others to see if it should be published and editor decides to publish. peers mean other pathologists? yes. published becomes available to other researches to use or educate themselves? it is.... central on computer with articles listed, review articles on the computer... essentially a library. 10:59:14 how many articles involved gunshot wounds? 35 or 37 10:59:28 over entire span of your career? these events, these writings were developed over time you worked? yes, over 40 years 10:59:52 worked in baxer county as medical examiner, perform autopsies? yes, about 9,000 and then I reviewed autopsies that were done under my jurisdiction another 28,000..... 11:00:43 called by prosecutor, typically? yes 11:00:50 as medical examiner testified in court to the autopsies I did 11:01:08 staff that helped? 4 full time, 1 part time physicians... approved for program to train fellows.... 38 or 39 approved to train 11:01:42 how many autopsies would be done in the year? 1500 autopsies and another 1500 we would just do external exams 11:02:04 last autopsy I did was in October and retired in December 11:02:14 takes week or a month to complete an autopsy 11:02:23 since 1981 when you began work in baxer county, private consultant? yes. mostly civil, a few criminal cases.... outside baxer I could testify for the defense 11:02:58 don't do many private criminal cases such as now 11:03:09 working as consultant since 2007? right 11:03:26 private practice as consultant since then? yes 11:03:33 majority of work in connection with civil cases? yes. include gunshot injuries? yes.... alleged suicides, accidental discharge 11:04:05 mentioned you were in the military? yes that's when I started my firearm research... study mechanism of firearms and review gunshot wounds 11:04:43 when I was in charge of the wound section I had another study in Vietnam, photos of those injured or killed by different weapons, attempt to study those.... 50,000 slides of this 11:05:16 mentioned microphotography... what a picture of bullet leaving gun looks like? micro flash... only this flash is very quick, take photos of things moving through air, freeze them when the flash goes off 11:05:56 take moment the mechanics of what happens when bullet fired from gun? firepit hits the cartridge case...................... gun powder burns, converted to gas... gradual pressure to build up... bullet at front, fixed in.... push out of bullet into barrel, gripped by riffling, takes a while.... during this time some gas will get around the bullet... gas in front, the bullet, and then bulk of case... barrel filled with air, as bullet goes down, pushes the gas in front and behind... first thing you get is a little cloud of gas, not big, pretty soon after that get the bulk of the gas... in that, the bullet and unburned or burning grains of powder 11:08:13 can the gas that comes out first, combined with air in barrel? will to certain degree, mostly the larger cloud of gas... column of gas and air pushed straight ahead.... hold gun against clothing, this column of gas and air tears hole and then the bullet gets to clothing and the soot gets to the clothing.... that material after hole is made comes back to the other side.. 11:09:21 hole made by gas first, followed by bullet and then followed by soot? right...... blank cartridges are not dangerous, you can kill yourself with it.... the gas form will tear through skin and muscle in your lung... you don't need bullet to kill you with contact wounds 11:10:17 written articles about head trauma? yes... one peer reviewed article, one chapter 11:10:35 blunt force trauma to the head? right 11:10:42 served as editor of peer reviewed scientific journals? yes 11:10:55 does that work include whether or not to accept submission for publication? yes I have final say 11:11:20 work you've done specifically..... expertise in firearms and injuries, have you done work for united states government? yes about 2 years ago.... US attorney's office during hurricane Katrina, police officers shot and wounded a number and killed 1.... done 1 or two other cases 11:12:10 for the marines? war crimes... testified for marine corp 11:12:20 British government? the bloody Sunday massacre.... and another case going in 2 months in Britain with a concussion head injury 11:12:52 united nations? yes. 11:13:07 jurisdictions you've testified as expert? in most states of the union, state courts, federal courts... Canada, Columbia.... by video.... south Africa, Israel 11:13:44 I don't believe we've touched upon.... state and federal? yes 11:13:56 professional awards? yes, from my medical school master teacher award, outstanding service awards...... 11:14:32 professional background and all detailed in CV? yes they are 11:15:04 defendants MM? yes. your CV? yes it is 11:15:24 offer as exhibit... ANY OBJECTIONS? rionda: we object! May we approach? YES YOU MAY (sidebar) 11:18:11 COME IN AS DEFENSE EXHIBIT 23.... 11:18:42 turn to work in this case, describe the materials that you have received for review and if you have notes reflecting that, happy to do so..... 11:19:14 material I reviewed were scene photos, zimmerman photos, autopsy report, medical records, witness statement and transcribed conversation by good, 911 calls, reenactment tape, firearm, examiner reports, and deposition of dr. rao 11:20:14 talk with you about...... opportunity to review the video recording of zimmerman reenacting the events surrounding the shooting? yes., access to witness statements? yes. reviewed all witness statements? I haven't 11:20:54 more about determining whether evidence is consistent with his accounts of what he said happened.... witness statements are all around, vary greatly... easiest way to hear is examine physical evidence and compare to defendants statements and see if consistent.... say bullet came in front, and it came from the back inconsistent 11:21:46 look at what zimmerman said and the forensic evidence which includes the pictures from autopsy, include looking at report from firearm expert who analyzed clothing? correct. two most important are the autopsy report and the reports by the firearms examiner.... secondary, scene photos... looking at autopsy and detailed report by firearms examiner.. 11:22:49 reach opinion as to the distance? yes 11:22:57 opinion from end of barrel to clothing? yes 11:23:03 what affect if any the clothing had on appearance on the skin? yes 11:23:16 well talk about those details in a moment, also talk with you about is your opinion of how long martin may have been alive, how long martin may have been conscious.....? they are different opinions because you can be alive and unconscious.... 11:23:57 the injury zimmerman sustained, reflected in photos from Sanford PD, review them? yes 11:24:12 talk with you a little about the injuries that you observed through photos sustained by martin from gunshot wound 11:24:34 general frame work for today.... talk about gunshot itself and the mechanics involved in that...... 11:25:08 evidence in this case, describe for jury what you saw when you looked at photos from the clothing and the wound to his skin, the gun shot or tattooing referenced in autopsy report, put it all together? photos show contact discharge of weapon against clothing, agree 100% with firearms examiner, at time of discharge, against clothing, tore clothing, soot all around, know the muzzle was in contact with clothing.... firearms examiner said it 11:26:29 look at the wound in the chest, different picture.... circular punched out wound, lay in area of powder tattooing 2x2.... marks on skin due to powder that comes out of the muzzle of gun... not powder burns, means whole bunch of things 11:27:14 when bullet comes out, mark and reaction, reddish..... marks are called powder tattoo marks... stippling. indicates that grain of powder hit skin and person was alive at the time, don't get that in dead people... distribution 2x2... certain density in the tattoo marks, not against the skin.... more than an inch away. based on concentration and the size of pattern, muzzle of gun was 2-4 inches away from the skin.... the barrel of gun was against the clothing but clothing had to be 2-4 inches away from body. 11:28:52 states 96... photo taken at medical examiner's office, showing entrance wound.... ? if you look, you'll see the hole from the bullet, punched out entrance, all around the entrance you see these little marks like ant bites..... powder tattoo marks.... redding brown the person was alive.... this indicates he was alive at time he was shot... muzzle was not in contact but had to be back... first time you see powder tattoo marks is when muzzle of 1/2 inch away, less.. you won't see.... area of tattoo gets bigger and bigger... increases in range, density will decrease.... this is very heavy density.... decreases until tattoo marks disappear..... 11:31:17 opinion to distance based on training and research? yeah, a lot of research....firearm examiners use heavy white paper and fire the gun, hole, and marks around it.... based on size and pattern give opinion from the range..... problem was it doesn't really reflect what happens on the skin..... did experiments, living animals... yes its valid.... to determine size of pattern by shooting against white paper is valid to at least 18 inches..... hand guns to rifles and shot guns and how it extends, how different types....... denser pattern, actually go out further bull powder because its stated in the report 11:33:11 exhibit is now on the screen, this is the 2 inch by inch tattooing pattern? yes sir 11:33:33 helps you to be precise with distance from 1/2 inch to 18 inches? less than 1/2 inch a hole with dense soot, no powder tattoo marks..... 11:34:11 how does pattern get broader? like a hose, the cone shape, farther you get away the bigger the spray pattern 11:34:34 water droplets just fall off, same with powder.. loses velocity and falls away 11:34:50 would the clothing, not disputed in this case.... clothing in between muzzle and skin, what affect if any would clothing have on the appearance of wounded skin? in this case none, clothing wasn't between powder and skin at time of discharge 11:35:38 hole there produced by gas and bullet.... if you had gun 6 inches away from clothing, clothing will filter out powder to a degree... in this case, clothing didn't filter that, you had a hole there and muzzle against the body.... everything coming out of muzzle was going into the hole 11:36:35 if pressed in his chest, what would you see differently? hole like that, surrounded by a halo of black soot and maybe on the skin, a grain or two of powder, but not powder tattooing... disperses the shoot, not the powder.... powder would be inside the body 11:37:11 medical examiner standpoint, hard call for you? no... this is basic 101 11:37:52 trajectory, photos of examine? no... x ray 11:38:06 reference the x ray if you wish, you know the path of the bullet through the right ventricle into lower right lung? right.... bullet hole in left chest, goes through the fifth intercostal space, space between 5th and 6th rib, went through there, hit sac surrounding heart, went through right ventricle and into the right lung.... you can see the led core of the bullet, see the jacket fragments.... bullet went front to back, left to his right because it went into the right lung, but it started on the left side 11:39:34 based on your review, must've been a slight left to right trajectory? yes. there's some, I can't quantitate it. not radical... bullet was go from his left to his right.... martins left to martins right? correct 11:40:09 standard way of describing wounds, talk left to right, deceased's view point 11:40:36 not precisely straight on? does not appear so 11:40:49 mechanics of that shot, putting together the defect on the clothing... result of contact on the muzzle, distance between clothing was 2-4 inches, not a contact.... you're understanding of Zimmerman's statement because of video, work essentially was to determine whether medical evidence was consistent with what he said happened? that's correct 11:41:39 aware zimmerman said martin was straddling him and leaning over him? yes. and zimmerman had gun in right hand? yes... describe what you know of that sequence of events? the medical evidence is consistent with his opinion/statement. reason it is, simplest thing is his gun was in his right hand.... shoot someone with right hand, natural to twist your hand, go from deceased left to right.... nature of defect in clothing and the tattoo.... lean over someone, clothing falls away from the chest... if lying on your back and someone shoots you, clothing against your chest... so the fact we know clothing was 2-4 inches away is consistent with someone leaning over the person doing the shooting and clothing is 2-4 inches away from person firing 11:43:38 clothing was wet, described as being damped.... the responding officers found an unopened can of a beverage in the front pouch of this sweatshirt.... find those facts consistent with what you saw? tend to reinforce.... clothing falls away from the body is gravity, have wet clothing, its heavier... pulling the shirt down, tends to pull away from body 11:45:03 wound itself by gap, tattooing and the face of the contact of the clothing, consistent with Zimmerman's account that martin was over him leaning 11:45:41 talk about martin's mechanics.... effect of him receiving that shot, how long he survived and how long he may have been conscious... what if anything he could do voluntarily at time of consciousness? #1 is the ability to move.... that is determined by amount of oxygen in your brain, you have a reserve of 10-15 seconds.... if right now I grabbed your heart and ripped it out, you could stand there and talk to me or walk over to me 10-15 seconds, brain controlling you.... that's minimum, assumes no blood is going to brain.... if more blood going to brain could be longer.... depends on blood pressure and how severe your wound 11:47:32 answer getting complicated, some get shot and immediately collapse and some get shot and don't know they got shot... 11:48:02 cardiac, in this case you have a through and through hole of right ventricle and at least one if not two into right lung.... losing blood, every time the heart contracts it pumps blood out the two holes in ventricle and at least one hole in the blood...... engage in struggle, heart rate increases... martin was healthy young man, if he's in struggle heart going/ beating more than 100 times a minute.... 11:49:08 every time heart beats, out comes the blood... say he's only beating 100, slow... loses a tablespoon of blood every time heart beats.... that's not much, 15 CCs, heart beating 100... losing 1500 CCs in a minute... quarter of blood supply.... second minute, lose another 1500.... lost more than 50% of blood supply.... 11:50:16 he's not pumping sufficient blood to anywhere, reached point where he's going to die.... assuming these conditions and all probability, nothings 100%... he's going to be dead within 1-3 minutes after being shot in this case.... heart effectively pumping blood, still get electrical activity, but not pumping.... how long as he conscious, significantly shorter than time necessary to die wouldn't have sufficient blood to brain 11:51:23 best you can give in estimates 11:51:33 in training and experience, familiar with incidents where individuals received similar or more serious and could still talk, move, voluntary actions for 10-15 seconds? yes, 12 gauge shot gun at point black range... heart was shredded, rain 65 ft. before he collapse 11:52:33 being shot in heart itself, quickly losing blood? nothing else than that..... not same as being shot in head? right. swat team immediately immobilize someone is to shoot in head 11:53:18 15 seconds capable of movement? potential for 10-15 seconds. moving arms from outstretch to underneath? Objection! SUSTAINED 11:53:49 could that include moving arms from outstretch to underneath in those 10-15 seconds? yes 11:54:10 lose consciousness, lose ability for voluntary movement? oh yeah... not feeling pain? correct 11:54:38 talk about the injury to martin's knuckle, remember in the photos an abrasion on left hand 4th finger? 1/4 by 1/8 scrap. agree its abrasion type? it appears to be 11:55:08 consistent with coming in contact with hard surface or impacting another surface? impacting another surface. concrete qualify? yes 11:55:35 would you expect to see bruising on knuckles if punching were going on? depends on what part of body you punch, softer portion you may not see it... may have been bruising that we didn't know about, doesn't make a difference.... too variable 11:56:29 take blood pressure to get bruising? yes. once blood pressure goes, then you don't have bruising.... can't bruise a dead body 11:56:52 in this instance, martin lost blood pressure very quickly? yes 11:57:02 dr. bao looking for bruising, better course would be to take a look internally? right 11:57:17 that was not done in this case? correct 11:57:31 move to the injuries that zimmerman sustained........ provided photos from the scene of his bloody nose? yes.... and photo taken of the back of his head showing streaming blood? yes 11:58:00 also provided photos taken later that night by Sanford PD? yes 11:58:15 talk about head trauma, mechanism of blood force injury to head? yes. what happens when hit in head by fist or concrete? well, ok.... what happened is the head wound...... say the heads fixed, made to move or is moving and stops suddenly, brain will shift... brain like gelatin, move back and forth inside cranium... as it moves, 3 possibilities, bruising by impacting the inside or you get bleeding, intracranial hemorrhage sufficient it could kill you, other type is brain cell injury..... connected through fibers which activates.... when brain moves back and forth from impact the axons will be stretched, within limited motion the way we are walking around and such.... no big deal.... if movement is violent, stretches the axons, causes injury to the wall if the movement is mild, the injury is prepared by axon... gradual increase in force like running into something and head goes forward and hits panel, so great it will injure axons and they won't be able to prepare and they die..... lot of brain cells and a lot of connections, can lose a good number and still be alright... at some point you'll have impairment and die 12:02:11 impacts like concrete, worry about intracranial bleeding and the axonal injury.... more bleeding than axon injury... always dangerous... if you hit your head here on the floor, carpet it absorbs.... if your head hits concrete, dangerous... but to kill somebody sure if you banged them hard enough.... didn't impact brain significant, still have stunning effect..... football players with concussions is just axon injury... could get mild concussion.... fall and hit your head, don't lose consciousness, appear stunned..... 12:03:45 stunning goes to concussion to injury..... stunned from the impact... better than concussion 12:04:07 progression depending on how hard the impact? yes and how many times, how much force is used.... if you get head hit against concrete with sufficient force to tear the scalp, you're going to be stunned..... not that common... hair cropped or bald removes the cushion... lacerations there's some trauma 12:05:08 talking about lacerations to the scalp, zimmerman had 2 lacerations to the back of his head, states 76..... identified as the photo taken of zimmerman that night, Jonathan manalo... evidence bleeding to head? yes two sites on the head 12:06:24 later saw pictures where blood was wiped away? right 12:06:42 take a look at 74.... what do you see in this picture? bruise on left side, not a good photograph 12:07:56 do you see in this photo what looks like 2 separate areas of swelling? yes... injury here and here, represent lacerations since it looks like clouded blood.... valley, impact site is swollen and then this is swollen here... this is not swollen, two separate impacts two different lacerations with area in between not swollen.... bleeding under the scalp 12:09:19 lump they get after hitting head is blood as opposed to another fluid? yes its blood.... 12:09:36 talk about curvature of the head, why its two separate impacts? real simple, unyielding surface, circular area hits it.... flatten on contact, you can see if it was one impact it would be swollen between the two 12:10:22 commented earlier, not easy to get laceration from flat object? yeah because it takes a force... everyone bangs their head, you don't get laceration 12:10:47 mechanism where laceration occurred? one is if direct impact, crush the skin and as you crush it and push inside the impact, get a tail... if you hit it at an angle so you slide, the surface holds it, and the rest of it pulls against that... so you tear, laceration is nothing but a tear.... 12:11:45 exhibit 57.... anything here that shows what you're talking about? see the swelling here and a little valley here, swollen here and swollen here... laceration here and a blood clot over the lacerations..... one of them is almost an inch and the other is 1/5 of an inch 12:12:33 laceration significant? in this case.... marker of force, real bad laceration rarely rarely.... people bled to death.... not this type of laceration.... indicates you had severe force, not just a bump 12:13:11 possible to have head struck on something hard enough to ring the bell, stun you and not leave mark? oh sure, see that in abused children.... not a mark on their head, but skull fracture 12:13:50 the presence of the injury on the outside, doesn't mean there wasn't additional impact or the impact was minor? you can get severe head trauma without any marks, or you can get marks and have head trauma.... more commonly you have trauma, but can get it without mark 12:14:30 amount of force necessary to cause those injuries, enough to cause stunning effect? oh yes. don't need to have a laceration or big bruise to..... get stunned.... medically referred to ultra-mild concussion... experience that when you hit your head 12:15:19 if you sustained a stunning blow like this and continued to receive additional blows to the head, would the additional blows continue to cause stunning effect? yeah. 12:15:46 short period of time, get multiple other concussions, people have died..... recognized syndrome 12:16:06 could be accumulative just that night into multiple stunning effects leading to concussion? oh yeah..... I'm using stunning because it's just a mild concussion.... not incapacitated, not knocked out.... hit head hard is stunning 12:16:55 there has been some discussion in testimony about punctate abrasions.... punctate in this photo? right here.... reddish markings, indicates impact with a flat surface that was not smooth 12:17:46 would concrete from every day sidewalk have that surface? yes 12:17:58 consistent with his head impacting a sidewalk? yes 12:18:17 punctate abrasion is around the temple? right, it's not smooth.... area here and here and here and here 12:18:36 noticeable lump higher up? right over here.... consequence of impact? yes.... a knot... hematoma 12:18:58 associated with the impact that caused punctate abrasions? yes sir 12:19:08 could that then be caused by 1 or more impacts with the sidewalk? yes sir. 12:19:22 let me show you states 70, a view of the right side of Zimmerman's head, see anything here that would suggest impact with a fist or sidewalk? start to see punctate and adhesion over here 12:19:55 another photo of same side, 71.... ? injury here, reddish areas 12:20:15 other side of the head, 73.... approach the witness? oh I can see its not problem 12:20:38 in this photo with blunt force trauma? marks here too, assume a print photo would show better, some punctate marks here. approach witness briefly? YES YOU MAY. 12:21:20 right here, you see an arch of punctate of abrasion, pile here and another arch.... hematoma anywhere? suggested, but not as distinct as other side 12:21:58 this area above the ear? swollen in that area, hard to say definitely 12:22:14 consistent with swelling as blunt force trauma? yes 12:22:25 this general area here? right 12:22:53 have seen exhibit 79... first photo taken at scene? yes. what signs of trauma do you see? have to look at original, this appears bruised... look at outline... swelling and abrasion there.... 12:23:39 if you look at this, see the congestion in nose and the abrasion, outline here is smooth and here it bulges out and comes back... compare to another photo, this is consistent with possible fracture.... next photo a few hours later, this swelling is not as prominent... that's what ENS thought he had a fractured nose 12:24:42 injury consistent with being punched in nose? yes sir. 12:24:53 exhibit 48.... take several hours later..... point out what you were referring too? swelling appears to be gone, it can't be gone if just blood... suggestive of fact he had displaced fracture here, when examined by ENS they just pushed it back in either consciously or not... held there by muscle 12:25:47 if displaced or not or even fractured, does trauma consistently show being struck in the face? right and of course another blow here 12:26:15 states 72.... part of forehead you were talking about? right.... vaguely see this line here, and another... when you look at the prints they're redding markings..... those are redding areas, not consistent with concrete, more like a punch than concrete 12:27:16 skin is intact, injury underneath skin.... something that doesn't wash out? oh no it doesn't wash out... underneath the skin 12:27:36 would it likely be a different impact than the one that caused injury? yes too far down, not the same thing 12:27:52 more to the right, see evidence there of some sort? right. mark like this and then mark here.... photograph myself.... 12:28:29 separate red mark on forehead? this and this are same impact.... I think you have 6 ID injuries, 2 lacerations on back, impacts on temple, that's 4, nose is 5 and the forehead is 6..... 12:29:12 may there also have been impacts that for one reason or another, land but didn't manifest in injury? Objection! Speculation! SUSTAINED 12:29:34 in a fight situation where someone may be resisting attack, expect them as being pushed to concrete to resist by trying to sit up? I would assume so 12:29:59 possible there may be other impacts, not as pronounced, some ability to resist? Objection! Speculation! OVERRULED 12:30:19 the head wasn't clean in some photos, definite evidence of 6... doesn't mean only 6, but the 6 I can say. moment? YES YOU MAY 12:30:53 (sidebar) 12:31:51 LADIES AND GENTLEMAN, RECESS FOR LUNCH. NO DISCUSSIONS. NO REPORTS. NO ELECTRONIC DEVICE. NO SOCIAL MEDIA. NOTEPADS FACE DOWN... RECESS UNTIL 1:30 12:32:53 FREE TO TAKE LUNCH BREAK, BE BACK AT 1:30, DONT DISCUSS TESTIMONY 12:33:08 COURT IN RECESS UNTIL 1:30 ======================================== 13:30:00 PLEASE BE SEATED, BACK ON RECORD. DR. DI MAIO OUTSIDE? 13:30:58 HAVE THE JURY COME IN..... 13:31:48 omara: approach for a moment? YES (sidebar) 13:32:31 WELCOME BACK... QUESTIONS: DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE CASE? NO HANDS RAISED. READ OR LISTEN TO ANY REPORTS ABOUT THE CASE? NO HANDS RAISED. USE ELECTRONIC DEVICE FOR RESEARCH? NO HANDS RAISED. READ OR CREATE SOCIAL MEDIA? NO HANDS RAISED CROSS 13:33:24 rionda: afternoon.... 13:33:38 not saying or testifying as to who started? correct. whether who attacked who, can't say? correct 13:33:59 in fact you can't testify as to who threw first punch? correct. whether there was a first punch? correct 13:34:18 you can't say whether it was martin defending or Zimmerman defending himself? when it first started, correct 13:34:34 only focusing on time of actual shot? that's correct 13:34:42 not stating that everything Zimmerman said in the reenactment is the gospel truth? correct. just the nature of gunshot wound is consistent with his accounts 13:35:10 gave 5 statements prior to that one? mentioned that to me before. in your depo? yes 13:35:22 why only the reenactment and not the other statements? I know what the reenactment says, holding to that account being presented here 13:36:05 correct in stating the 1st statement is most accurate? 1st is usually more accurate when giving weeks or months later... get that in depositions 13:36:27 mentioned prior experience in san Antonio, go to Alamo and go down to water? about 2 levels down 13:36:48 mentioned when you worked there for 15-20 years? 25 years 13:36:58 important for you to make sure you understood all facts? depends on the case, sometimes you want all the information, personal 13:37:20 bring you a case, want to know what all witnesses said, not just one... make sure consistent? in most cases yes sir 13:37:37 in this case, focused on defendant's statement and good's statement? focused on defendants... all that I'm concentrating on.... went to see if his statement was consistent with what I found... the rest I can't say. weren't provided statements from other witnesses? have to disregard them in regards to gunshot wound; only Zimmerman was there 13:38:31 another person was there? a couple witnesses.... well the other person there is not here? right 13:38:50 aware the deceased/ victim was on phone with lady? yes. didn't review her statement? no 13:39:09 worked with medical examiner, find all info before opinion? depends on the case... often info from witnesses goes toward manner of death and not cause of death 13:39:35 suggesting all witness testimony should be disregarded? not for the jury, in my purposes not important in my opinion 13:40:08 not saying that should be disregarded? not what I'm doing, for the jury 13:40:26 west asked you hypotheticals; in order to give opinion.... has to be based on accurate and truth? no, just supposed this and this happened. speculating? just giving presentation and asking what it is 13:41:06 agree that at least 1 statement you relied on, the reenactment, Zimmerman has self-interest? yes 13:41:27 argue he has bias in not telling the truth? one could argue that but I think that's your argument 13:41:41 if his statement doesn't match evidence, it's not the truth? that's correct sir 13:41:53 I guess in your review, aware that only person armed was Zimmerman? yes 13:42:04 aware that he wasn't armed with firearm, but also armed with a flashlight? yes, photo of flashlight in scene photos 13:42:23 this right here? yes. could this do damage to someone? I thought it was one of those old steel heavy things, not a really dangerous weapon... hit hard like that? may cause bruising, not of significance 13:43:11 not provided with statement of surdyka who described Zimmerman on top of martin before the shooting? not provided that statement 13:43:29 not provided statement of bahador were you? no sir 13:43:38 provided john good statement? yes. aware he gave additional sworn statement, didn't hear this at all? no sir, I don't think so (smacked hands) 13:44:00 aware that he also stated he didn't hear anything hitting concrete at all? no sir (smacked the desk) 13:44:31 mention that... shooting animals, animals were alive? yes.... animals kept in federally approved area; vet present at time and the animals have to be anesthetized. how many times were they shot? I'd have to read the paper, determine if testing firearm was valid. found it was? yes. 13:45:27 testified all over the world? a couple places. criminal matters for government and state? yes 13:45:43 testified....... in your years? 6 going on 7 now 13:46:06 said over 50 times or so? no I don't think I said a number of times I testified... most are civil cases 13:46:26 drew Peterson case? criminal... testified for defense? yes. how much are you paid today? same thing I charge everybody $400 an hour. how much charged so far? up to yesterday $2400, not a complicated case forensically.... 13:47:11 mention that..... notes, to refresh your memory? if you get a whole bunch of papers, easier to put the facts down 13:47:41 prepared a 5 or 6 page notes you provided to me and west? uh yeah 5 pages, double spaced/double sided... closer to 10 or 8 13:48:09 weren't there, viewed autopsy report? yes. opinion comes from Dr. Bao's medical report? yes 13:48:25 shot to the heart? yes. no dispute about that? correct 13:48:35 did I understand you correctly that if you pulled my heart out I could sit and walk and talk for how long? 10-15 seconds 13:48:56 I could just keep talking and talking and talking without a heart? that's right.... it's between 10-15 seconds, dependent on oxygen supply to the head... that's why SWAT will shoot in the head 13:49:25 even though my heart is gone id still feel pain or not? oh you'd still feel pain 13:49:38 believe it was 10-15 seconds....? I said I can't said, minimum amount of time was between 10-15 seconds. maximum was 3 minutes? in all medical probability no cardiac function after 1-3 minutes 13:50:16 not here to testify as to while this was going on who was yelling for help? no sir... not testifying to that 13:50:29 can't testify as to the statements George said he pulled gun from holster and shot? right I can just say the injuries are consistent with how he shot him, but not how he got the gun 13:50:56 how he claims he got the gun while someone was straddling him, can't say that happened that way? can't tell that by scientific method.... but Zimmerman said it happened that way, means its true right? can't testify to that 13:51:27 physically impossible to do what he said happened? I would say it 13:51:37 not here to say that and how he took the holster? right, outside my ability to make conclusion on that 13:51:49 just to say how close it was to skin and clothes? right 13:51:59 is it not true that one possibility is martin was over Zimmerman and he was like this.....? he'd be someway over him, not sure of the angle 13:52:24 this angle? I can't tell you... if you put your hand out, since it rotates.... still get the path, consistent with him being over 13:52:44 also consistent he was standing up? problem with that is the shirt would be pulled down.... if you shot through the shirt in that area, when the shirt is let go and put back in position, defect in shirt would be over here if pulled this way.... moved it to where it over lined the gun shot to get away from the chest 13:53:38 saying martin had to physically be on top like this? saying that physical evidence is consistent with martin being over Zimmerman 13:53:56 not also consistent with martin pulling away from Zimmerman on the ground, same angle, and Zimmerman shooting at that time? yes 13:54:40 the other question I had.... possibilities, blunt trauma to Zimmerman's head, concrete as possibility or maybe a tree branch for any of those bruises? if you hit someone with a tree branch 13:55:10 if you bump in it? where in face or back of head... either one? well you would expect abrasions.... he had contusion up there... abrasion is scrap. did he have any? yes. small on right side of nose and impact abrasions on temples and in the back 13:55:55 struggling with you, I push you and you hit the tree, caused that way? well you'd have to have a tree branch there and I didn't see any 13:56:20 if you just bumped a head.... wood gives, police used to carry wooden batons, less dangerous than metal... hit someone hard enough on back of head you get a laceration 13:56:50 any gardening at all? no my wife does 13:56:56 I do gardening and I get a bald head, bruise from tree branch? yeah an abrasion, abrasions back here 13:57:15 not aware that there were trees out there.... defendant says struggle near trees? I thought you meant trees on ground 13:57:40 possibility then correct for some of the abrasions? you could have one from the tree 13:57:54 could be from rolling on concrete as they both struggle or fight? yeah... impact with concrete 13:58:15 curious what you mentioned about martin, described injury to left hand..... what did Dr. Bao call it...? he called it so I have to go to with it. you saw the photo though? not sure if I did or not 13:58:51 assuming that's an abrasion, may be additional injuries under knuckles? no. can't disagree with it as an abrasion, but if you punch someone will you get bruises on knuckles, yes or no... if they suspected something they should've cut into hand and saw underneath 13:59:36 if persons alive, just wait a day or so and see if you have hemorrhaging.... but you said sometimes you won't see it? yes....... if it's not there it's not important 14:00:05 can hit someone and not leave bruising on knuckles? correct. Zimmerman could've hit him and not had bruising on knuckles? correct 14:00:26 shown photos of Zimmerman's head, opinions to what they were? yes.... someone familiar with his head, doctor from the past would know what's existing and what's not? may or may not.... you don't really remember a patients shape of head, especially if seeing multiple patients 14:01:04 that would be the best person to see George alive the next day, what he had and didn't have? in theory, if done correctly, yes..... emergency room records and doctor records are lousy in describing injuries 14:01:36 fire rescue do an honorable job? yes, not incompetent, treat them.... not document injuries 14:02:03 fire rescue are interested in injuries? in treating a person.... mention two lacerations, don't say where they are 14:02:22 folgate measured for you? yeah, but didn't say which one was on which side.... 14:02:52 talking about same photograph? the one with blood... clouded 14:03:07 agree with treatment it didn't need stitches? I agree, but outside my area of expertise... its treatment 14:03:47 you did review fire rescue report? yes 14:03:56 patient has GCS 15? glascoe index thing. what does it mean? that he's perfectly fine 14:04:19 people that dealt with him right after his interaction? correct 14:04:28 did I understand correctly you're saying difference between photo at scene..... 14:04:57 blood on front taken by police, something wrong with nose? yes... if you look at the photo take 4 hours later that deviation is not there 14:05:29 your opinion is you believe fire rescue did it without noticing they did it? its consistent with a fracture, since no one.... ENS thought there was a fraction, if it's now replaced that would account for differences... agree his nose is perfect? not swollen to right side as deviated in first photo 14:06:18 possible not fractured at all? the swelling would still be there and it's not 14:06:57 one is smaller than this and ones about like that? correct. that he'd die from those? no, indicative of hard impact 14:07:15 or just tree limb or rolling around? indicative of hard impact. 14:07:26 don't know if someone hitting him or rolling around? hard impact, that's all 14:07:45 aware that he was offered medical care and he declined? yes sir 14:07:57 also I believe folgate and fire rescue didn't notice other injuries to top of head, missed it? no.... the bleeding continued after ENS, or didn't notice it because they didn't consider it significant 14:08:31 went the next day to facility and folgate treated him and she didn't note all the injuries? medical personnel don't describe injuries properly 14:09:06 other thing I want to ask is... the photo taken at the scene, got blood there.... put my hand over that, expect my hand to have what? blood 14:09:54 agree that photograph I just showed you, bleeding like that... blood will go down if standing? depends how profusely... laying on my back, blood will go inward? partial, some will go in and out 14:10:32 more difficult to swallow or say anything? depends on how profusely 14:10:43 blood will go into my mouth eventually? yes. harder to swallow or talk? yeah unless you start swallowing it 14:10:59 you did not view the video taken of Zimmerman when brought to police and could walk fine? I've seen it.... kept playing it on TV all the time... seemed to be walking fine? correct 14:11:28 recording you saw of his interview was after that? yes. but that evening, he was walking and talking fine? yes 14:11:52 agree there's no witness to the actual shooting except defendant and deceased? correct 14:12:09 regarding gunshot wound, it was up to 4 inches as max and 2 as minimum? right... 2 inches accounting for sweatshirt and hoody? no. the hole creates barrier? right.... between the skin and muzzle 14:12:45 ever worn one of those hoodies? not that type 14:12:52 seen others wear them? yes sir.... wear them big? yes. hang down? yes. something in it, wouldn't it hang down? Objection! OVERRULED. yes sir 14:13:22 make it a little tighter? yes 14:13:49 asked about DNA, head of lab in Texas? yes. asked about DNA and possible packaging or improper packaging? yes 14:14:07 surprised that same object or evidence..... plastic would cause mold and degrade DNA? no I said you're supposed to dry the blood, package separately so that one piece doesn't contaminate the other... don't put in plastic bag, plastic is air tight... wrap in paper, the paper breathes 14:15:03 put the clothing in a bag....? always get mold into it, but if it dries... that's why you dry to get mold. assuming you don't? you'll get mold.... DNA gone? yeah you can lose some.... surprised if DNA was found in area that was mispackaged? no 14:15:49 said you reviewed firearms report? yes. 14:15:56 agreed with that in the sense that the findings and range, stippling, soot, gun powder? right 14:16:31 safe to assume that your opinion is that somehow after George was punched, injury to his nose... you believe it may have fractured and displaced and someone put it back? sure he could've. would've been painful? yes. 14:17:09 anybody could've done it? yes. and nobody could've done it and it wasn't as bad as it thinks? well if just swelling wouldn't go down in 4 hours... deviated because it was fractured 14:17:44 when we bleed, its profuse? scalp bleeding is always profuse... more than other areas? yes. why? no idea, that's how its designed 14:18:14 so the bottom line, possibilities about how the gunshot wound occurred? to a degree, consistent with his account 14:18:33 not saying his account, just when he already had gun out and pointing it at martin? yes. at that point, don't know if martin was backing away or going toward? consistent with Zimmerman's account 14:19:10 also consistent with martin pulling back? I told you that too, yes sir 14:19:31 not here to testify about holster or how it works? no. nor about firearm either 14:20:08 sweatshirt with hoody.... still going to grab if big? yes sir.... 14:20:38 testified about your expertise is once body is dead, just trauma? trauma is pathology, will testify to that... don't testify to treatment at all 14:21:06 aware that out there at the complex, also sprinkler boxes? I didn't see any of those 14:21:43 moment? YES.... 14:21:52 know whether Zimmerman is right or left handed? right handed 14:22:10 thank you very much REDIRECT 14:22:38 notes you prepared, a summary of measurements that martin was 5'11 and weigh 158 lb.? right. BMI was 22 which would be normal range for a person his size? correct 14:23:07 indicated that the location of gun shot? Objection Leading! SUSTAINED 14:23:18 where the gunshot wound was on martin? yes 14:23:25 do you need your notes to form your opinions once you have facts before you? no 14:23:35 do notes include several pages of photos that were most pertinent in assessing trauma? yes, 4 pages are just photos... shown those here? yes sir 14:23:56 the scope of your work was to consider the statement made to police about how the shooting took place at moment shot was fired and for you to consider forensic evidence to determine whether or not Zimmerman's statement is consistent with physical evidence? Objection! Leading and Compound. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION? yes. yes 14:24:54 I have to interpret objective evidence, not basing opinions on witnesses... they're wrong all the time... 14:25:08 review witness statements that contradicted physical evidence? all the time... someone stood over man and shot him and two architects and a secretary saw that, bullet from gun didn't match... half a dozen of those cases 14:25:51 bahador and didn't claim to see the individuals at time shot fired? no. surdyka said she was looking at individuals some distance away and believes she was looking at the fired shot, described Zimmerman on top of martin? Objection! Mischaracterization! REPHRASE 14:26:52 surdyka said she was looking out window and believes she was looking at individuals when shot was fired... at that time, Zimmerman was on top and martin was faced down... is that possible given forensic evidence you know? no sir, not possible.. he was shot in the front 14:27:35 would her statement do you good? no sir... example of how an eye witness gets it wrong? yes sir 14:27:53 did consider john goods statement.... ? Objection! Leading SUSTAINED 14:28:07 john good testified he saw Zimmerman on his back on the ground and saw martin straddling him on his knees, striking Zimmerman in an MMA style and then went back inside, some seconds later shots were fired.... position he saw consistent with forensic evidence? yes sir 14:28:54 that statement is separate and apart from Zimmerman? right, but wouldn't use that to give my opinion, use the evidence in conjunction with Zimmerman's statement 14:29:27 you pointed out in your direct evidence, there were two lacerations on the back of Zimmerman's head.... testified you believed those two to be from separate impact? yes sir. could see valley in between? yes 14:29:52 two blows that created lacerations? yes, so separate you couldn't get the two from one impact 14:30:22 are the two lacerations on the back of his head, consistent with two separate impacts? yes 14:30:38 is it... trying to figure out how to ask about tree branches, any big branches on ground to use as club? only trunks on ground and I didn't see anything 14:31:14 to receive lacerations from tree trunk, what would have had to happen? upright sitting and go back violently against the trunk on two occasions... still blunt trauma to back of head, twice 14:31:42 or it could have been on the sidewalk? right Objection! OVERRULED 14:31:58 is that scenario more plausible? cement is more plausible especially from the side of the head 14:32:18 commented of course, different role professionals play in dealing with people injured? right. 14:32:35 their objective is to treat someone, mine is to document injuries and interpret the injuries... their job is different than my job 14:33:07 opportunity to review the physician assistant notes that folgate took next day? yes. notice that she documented what would be black eyes? yes. 14:33:27 consistent with showing up later from blow to nose? secondary blackened of the eye, shows up later... punch eyes directly it would be more immediate 14:33:56 not surprising to you that the blow to the nose from the photos... might be associated black eyes the next day? wouldn't be surprising at all 14:34:17 issue whether his nose was actually deviated or just swelling, is that significant whether or not he was punched in the face? still punched in the face.... swelling is gone 4 hours later, nose displaced and put into position 14:34:55 possible his nose wasn't deviated.... does that matter if he was punched? obviously hit in the face and forehead 14:35:22 the GCS 15 scale, reference to paramedic note? area on the form where a 15 means they're walking, talking, breathing, heart rate, not really bad.... most people come into ER are 15... to go down you to get into trouble 14:36:00 not claiming that Zimmerman wasn't able to walk or talk that evening not withstanding his injuries? correct... more a stunning injury, not significant concussion 14:36:37 something that happens after the actual impact? Objection! Leading. REPHRASE 14:36:47 consequences of blow, those that develop over time? concussions show up immediately, problem is they can be subtle... that's why sporting events like having doctors there.... lay people won't pick up on concussions 14:37:24 feeling it when getting hit like that? oh yes. if you get punched in the nose, you know it. continue to hurt for a while? yes. what about getting head hit on concrete? could... especially if lacerations 14:37:59 able to know what was happening to them was life threatening? no because they're stunned... cant interpret 14:38:17 even looking at them outside, could say they're alright and then die a few hours later... that's why police should've taken Zimmerman to hospital, if he died in station family would've sued 14:38:54 even if no evidence of not walking or? you don't play around... jails always lose the lawsuits 14:39:14 if someone is in the process of being hit and having head struck on cement, stunning affect and the pain associate with it... in the moment, not knowing when it'll stop... say I can take 3 more of these? Objection! Leading! SUSTAINED 14:40:07 these circumstances.... overwhelming person on receiving end? Objection! Leading Argumentative! OVERRULED TO BOTH.... yes 14:40:31 some questions about the packaging of evidence, if wet and bio material... testimony that the wet outer shirt was sealed in bag while wet and placed in paper bag outside of that... good evidence handling? no sir.... when bag was open it smelled of mold? its decomposing... air dry and put in paper bags, not plastic 14:41:22 accepted forensic practice subjecting evidence to that type of packaging... in that condition for a month.... that would promote degradation or the integrity of DNA? oh yes 14:41:55 rionda mentioned if martin put hand over Zimmerman's nose at this point in time there may have been transfer of blood? yes. Objection! SUSTAINED 14:42:25 if martin put hand over Zimmerman in this condition, testimony there may have been transfer of blood? yes 14:42:40 I take it you would have no additional information if his nose was bleeding at some point during the incident? correct... impact to nose, eventually bleed can't tell if you'll bleed immediately... depends on position your head is in? yes 14:43:24 if you find something important but if you don't, absence doesn't make it important? right... general fact that's understood... especially if you don't know the statistical probability... how often do you find something, how often it occurs 14:44:09 do you agree environmental conditions affect physical evidence? oh yeah 14:44:24 about 3 hours from the event until martins body was transported, during that time... covered by blanket...body and hands were exposed to elements? right, do you wrap it tightly or wrap it loosely... plastic tends to rub and be stiff 14:45:07 also consider that there's been testimony, the weather varied from light drizzle to heavy rain... could affect DNA evidence collected? true. or how the hands were handled... or how they were washed prior to photo? that's why pathologist is supposed to be with the body, should never leave the body even if you have assistants helping you 14:46:06 why you may trust your assistants to follow protocol, you would verify? right... examine clothing on body before you take it off and then stand there to make sure they're doing it appropriately.... 14:46:53 marked as states 28..... Object! Beyond Scope of Cross! I DONT KNOW WHAT IT IS 14:47:14 states 28 offered in evidence, picture of martins chest on scene.... states 95 in evidence, photo at time of autopsy, before cleaning or washing? Same Objection! PLEASE APPROACH (sidebar) 14:49:50 states 28 was taken at the scene, any blood present in photo? yes blood around nipple. 14:50:06 look at states 95, taken at time of autopsy before body was clean, any blood? no... in the original photo, stream of blood and its missing in this photo. been cleaned? Objection! Speculation SUSTAINED, OVERRULED TO ARGUMENTATIVE RE-CROSS 14:51:08 photos shown to you....? gunshot wound, one at the scene 14:51:22 show the sweatshirt is up? yeah been pulled up 14:51:30 at the scene and transporting the body, sweatshirt down absorb the blood? sure 14:51:49 expect the blood in the sweatshirt? right 14:52:00 asked questions by west, agree he is not evidence? right. use his words to form opinion? no the reports and my report 14:52:37 agree there was absence of x rays or proof of broken nose? correct 14:52:48 agree there was absence or documentation of brain injury? oh yes 14:53:00 absence of anything being washed off the body? can't say it was washed or not... if that shirt was lying and they pulled it off, could wipe off blood... not supposed to do that.... take photo of wound intact before cleaned it 14:53:39 at the scene, remove clothing or stay on? the clothing should remain on body so the photo at scene is proper, but at medical examiner's office.... shouldn't have undressed body would be wiping it, techniques weren't correct. but you did rely on his findings? I had no other choice. document what occurred? right 14:54:44 absence of evidence anything was washed by rain? it would have to be, have to know how much was raining.. needed observation. pure speculation? yeah unless you were there 14:55:16 there was a baseness of vomiting, no vomit out there? no 14:55:26 agree that a jury who heard john good should rely on what he said on the witness stand? interesting, if he has a good statement at first and then not as good on the stand... depends 14:56:00 rely on his statement? disregarded witness........ supported or validated statements. witnesses are all over the place... but isn't what George said, in effect a witness? yes, but that's why you don't believe him.... check the tests and the autopsies 14:56:58 relied on one of his statements, gun was out and was 2-4 inches? right RE-RE-DIRECT 14:57:14 absence of evidence notion..... if good didn't testify that he heard George's head hitting cement like this, mean that Zimmerman's head didn't get hit? no 14:57:42 if good didn't hear martin hit Zimmerman in head, mean he wasn't hit in head? no 14:57:58 MAY HE BE EXCUSED? yes. yes. CALL NEXT WITNESS.... 14:58:24 omara: one moment...... 14:59:26 (sworn in) 14:59:43 rionda: approach? YES (sidebar) 15:00:23 name? norton bonaparte jr. occupation? city manager. employed? 1 yr. and a half. when this happened? yes 15:00:51 event of playing the 911 call to martin family.... decisions made for that point, not important now.. just event 15:01:23 decision was made to play tape for martin family? to play a number of tapes 15:01:34 police evidence tape? 911 and non-emergency number 15:01:47 focus attention on one even though several were played.. 15:01:54 who took care of process of playing the tapes? mayor's office, myself and mayor 15:02:09 was there any conversation with law enforcement as to how to accomplish? not witnesses, they were parents 15:02:24 conversation with law enforcement as to how to play the tapes to these people? no 15:02:43 you just... decide on your own? make them public, wanted to play to family first as courtesy 15:03:07 when decision to play the tapes for family, your decision or mayors decision on how to occur? decision to just play them 15:03:27 to play them separately? no there was not 15:03:42 it occurred then from other testimony, tape was played with entire family present? yes. you the one playing? I don't recall who was playing we used a computer 15:04:03 who was doing what with the tapes? disk, laptops so they could hear. who was doing what? I don't recall either myself or mayor. who was present? me, mayor, family, attorneys 15:04:32 law enforcement present? no. decision you and mayor made? I asked family and they said they would rather not have law enforcement present. discuss with chief lee? just informed him and other officers to not be in the same room 15:05:05 how many times the tape was played? which tape... the 911 tape? no I do not. always there? in the vicinity, not always in the room 15:05:23 either you or mayor in room at all times? I do not recall 15:05:32 how many times was the tape played while you were in the room? I don't recall. more than one? the tape with screams, yes... anyone in particular? I don't recall.. just wanted to hear it again 15:06:00 did you record or take notes to any responses they had from that one tape? no. record the even in any form or fashion? no we did not. recorded by audio or video? no. court reporter there to document? no it was not 15:06:27 was any consideration given to you or mayor to record it for law enforcement? releasing to media that evening, wanted family to have courtesy to hear it first 15:06:50 any consideration to concept to record it in case law enforcement needed it when half a dozen family members listened for the first time? that's a no 15:07:32 attorneys present, were martin family attorneys? correct. CROSS 15:07:55 rionda: bottom line was that it was the decent thing to play for family before release? our intent. that's why it occurred the way it did? that is correct 15:08:17 MAY HE BE EXCUSED? CALL NEXT WITNESS omara: approach? unique way to appear witness (sidebar) 15:10:31 TAKE A 15 MINUTE RECESS, NOTEPADS FACE DOWN ON CHAIR, FOLLOW DEPUTY OUT OF COURTROOM 15:11:03 PLEASE BE SEATED. COURT IN RECESS FOR 15 MINUTES =============================================================== 15:25:20 (Zimmerman talking with attorney assistant) 15:30:42 PLEASE BE SEATED... BACK ON RECORD... omara: have the witness ready on ipad, waiting for that to get ready.... my client is ok with representing this witness in this fashion. IS THAT CORRECT MR. ZIMMERMAN? yes your honor 15:37:25 (setting up the witness) omara: this will probably be my last witness and then begin proffer.... should be done tomorrow 15:39:17 PLEASE BE SEATED... defense calls eloise dillegard 15:39:29 (sworn in via FaceTime) 15:39:53 home sick, appreciate you spending time with us today. name? eloise dilligard. live at retreat at twin lakes? yes. how long? 2.5 years. moved out since then? yes 15:40:45 time you lived at retreat, knew George Zimmerman? I did. how long? ever since we moved in October 2009 15:41:06 friends? he was my neighbor, spoke on friendly basis... no problem with one another 15:41:15 knew of his involvement with watch program? yes 15:41:28 see him patrolling as part of the watch? no. knew him as friend or neighbor? friendly neighbor 15:41:41 focus attention on February 26th, the night martin was shot, remember? I do 15:41:55 tell the jury what first brought your attention to the event you came to find out was the shooting? I was coming from Wal-Mart, down Rinehart to go to Oregon and make left, police approached me from rear, he wanted to go around me.... coming up Oregon I noticed police were pulling into neighborhood... I looked down from mail station to left and saw crime scene tape.... I didn't want to go directly down, came around right hand side to go around back way, asked a couple guys.. they didn't know but another police was coming.... 15:43:10 weather like at that time? it was very rainy that night 15:43:19 at some point as you got closer to the crime scene, notice any familiar vehicle? yes. which? George's truck. describe? gray Honda ridgeline 15:43:49 where you noticed the truck? because of the way our street is, it was nearing the curb down by the crime scene which I believe was on retreat view circle 15:44:14 know the area as the T intersection? yes. 15:44:21 may not have known names then, a woman who lives on end section jenna lauer, know her? no 15:44:40 she was living in that first townhome just past at the intersection of the T, know what I'm talking about? yes 15:45:10 presume jennas was first in that row of houses, where was the truck parked in reference to that? truck would've been looking toward the east... slightly south of where her condo would be 15:45:36 walk out her front door, looking right at the truck? look to the right from her condo 15:45:52 that would put the truck on the curb to the right of that street from her condo? correct 15:46:07 retreat view circle, the one that circles around as perimeter? it does 15:46:16 is lauer on street that comes off of retreat view circle? her condo would be facing retreat view circle, yes 15:46:36 straight out her front door, into the clubhouse? no down the street to the west 15:46:52 saw it in the area of the crime scene? yes 15:47:00 may come back to map.... came up to the area describe what you saw? a few people standing on the sidewalk, people who were down by the yellow tape, I looked around to see if I saw George because I saw his truck, after I didn't see him I recognized a lady from HOA and asked her... she said Objection! Hearsay! SUSTAINED 15:48:12 omara: your honor.... did you know the person's name who you spoke to? I don't, she's from Pembroke pines 15:48:30 conversation with her about the events? I asked what was going on 15:48:39 at some point then, did you speak to any law enforcement officers? after I could not find George, I attempted to talk to some of other witnesses that were there and after I felt like well I'm not in harm's way, I was walking away and police came up and said you don't want to talk to me.... and I said I wasn't here when anything happened. 15:49:26 he said? we're trying to find someone who knows the people involved in shooting. further conversation? he was going to take a picture and bring to us. 15:49:55 did that officer identify to you by name? he did not... I'm usually pretty perceptive to look at name badge, but I don't remember 15:50:13 did he show you a picture or two of people involved? came back with an iPhone with two pictures.... 15:50:35 identify either by name or description the others who were present? young Caucasian man, either Jeremy or Jonathan.... and a couple there, married but I didn't get their names 15:51:01 present when the pictures were shown? they were. able to identify anyone in the two pictures? George Zimmerman my neighbor 15:51:20 seen those pictures here quite a bit in the court room, was that a picture where Zimmerman had a bloody nose? he did have a bloody nose, yes 15:51:41 describe the difference you saw between the picture that night and Zimmerman you knew before? nose was bloody and to me it looked disfigured, it was somewhat to the left or right, not the way I knew him.... 15:52:16 did it take you a minute or two to figure out that was the same person? his face still looked the same, only difference was disfigurement and the blood... advise police his name? yes. did anyone else identify the person as well? Objection! Hearsay! SUSTAINED 15:52:59 after identified George, shown a second picture? I was. identified that person? I didn't know his name, seen him in passing probably earlier that day, didn't know who he was. know now that was trayvon martin? yes 15:53:32 after you identified Zimmerman, who did you talk to about that event? that night..... if I can remember correctly, where his wife was.... I knew he was married and I didn't see her... looked to be heart, where's his wife 15:54:19 after that? nothing else I could do at that point, I was no longer in harm's way... went to my house, parked in my driveway, went up to George's house to see if Shellie was there, nobody came... shortly after Shellie pulled up.... perpendicular to the driveway and she asked me... Objection! Hearsay! SUSTAINED. omara: offered to be heard. NO SPEAKING RESPONSES. PLEASE APPROACH (Sidebar) 15:59:27 talking about conversation with Shellie Zimmerman? yes. brief. what did she do after that? once I completed my conversation she sped off to the crime scene 15:59:53 there with police... did you go back to the area that night at all? yes I did go back down there to make sure she was ok.... 16:00:13 present during, questioned by law enforcement, present during any other witnesses discussions? yes, the young man there alone and the other couple spoke to policeman about what they knew 16:00:46 were you there when those people gave statements to law enforcement? there for verbal, not written 16:01:00 be more precise... one might have been Jeremy and another Jonathan? that's what I think I remember, not sure 16:01:18 do you recall were there more than 3 that gave statements in your presence? in my presence, a couple and a gentleman by himself 16:01:43 did you give any verbal or written statements to police that night? no... he asked me my name and I gave it to him and my phone number 16:02:07 back to the time where you left the area and ran into Zimmerman and went back to look for her didn't find her and left? correct 16:02:28 give statements to law enforcement regarding what you heard? yes.... request that I called him, so I called.... he and another agent came to my house and interviewed me 16:02:53 gave statement about whatever information they gave you? correct 16:03:04 opportunity to listen to the lauer 911 tape? yes 16:03:25 tell me circumstances of the setting? first time I heard was when it was played on local news channel. by yourself or with others? I don't remember... how many times? besides that time, maybe 2 or 3 times 16:04:02 did you hear a voice screaming for help that you were able to recognize? heard the voice screaming in background and of the two I only heard George talk 16:04:26 who was screaming for help? based on fact I've only heard George's voice I would say that it was his... his who? George Zimmerman 16:04:44 when you say you heard him talk, how long you've known him? by that time 2.5 years. speak to you and speak to others in your presence? yes. ever hear him yell for his dog or laugh at a joke? never heard him yell at the dog, commands were like a regular voice... has a white male voice.... 16:05:36 states exhibit 1... can you identify the picture and walk us through a location you may have seen his truck...... 16:06:29 I'm going to move it a little bit to an area, can you describe what is barely on the screen on this point...? a blue line, a little bit of grass... 16:07:01 see the pool in the center of the photo? I can 16:07:26 (west and omara discussing the photo) 16:07:43 mirror images so ill move on.... 16:07:49 try and do it verbally.... familiar with complex? I am 16:07:58 gave us a drive through of how you entered into complex, which one? I came in the entrance that is in front of the elementary school 16:08:18 have the clubhouse in front of you and to the right? that is correct 16:08:30 from that point, coming in Oregon... took a back route to your complex, right on retreat view....? if you say back route, you're talking about Oregon that goes to.... 16:09:20 ok.. sorry about that, I think I confused my question a moment ago... first came in to subdivision and saw crime scene tape? correct. which way was crime scene from where you were driving in? to the left or east 16:10:00 normal way you would go to the left? no I would go to the right 16:10:10 start at the Oregon main entrance with clubhouse on the right, walk or drive us to the area where you did drive up to get better view of crime scene? if I were to drive in to the entrance, I would've made a left to the crime scene 16:10:52 where on that scene would you have scene George's truck? not even 3/10 of a mile down 16:11:08 have a present memory today as to where the truck was? parked on retreat view circle.... the T 16:11:31 could the truck have been parked not on retreat view but the second street in? yes.... not your first left, but second left on twin trees lane? right 16:11:55 that the street you turned down and saw his truck? it could've been, all I know is it was on one of those cubs 16:12:10 directly in front of, touch to right of lauer's townhome? yes 16:12:23 lauer's townhome... look out front door and to the right for his truck? correct. moment? YES YOU MAY 16:13:10 no further questions.... CROSS 16:13:40 I remember you 16:13:53 rionda: bottom line is that day you came into contact with police, suspect and victim, recognized one photo as George... now know the other was trayvon? correct 16:14:13 seen him earlier that day, just walking around? right 16:14:22 asked about the voice, saw on TV? right. no point of reference knew Zimmerman's voice but not martins? that's right 16:14:58 MAY SHE BE EXCUSED? yes. yes. 16:15:18 WHEN FINISHED WITH THAT, APPROACH FOR MOMENT? (sidebar) 16:21:04 MORE MATTERS WE NEED TO TAKE CARE OF TONIGHT, YOU CAN GO HOME AT THIS TIME.... ADMONITIONS: NO DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE CASE. NOT TO READ OR LISTEN TO THE CASE. NO ELECTRONIC DEVICE FOR RESEARCH. NO SOCIAL MEDIA. ASSURANCES? yes... NOTEPADS FACE DOWN, FOLLOW JARVIS INTO JURY ROOM... JURY BACK TOMORROW AT 9 AM 16:22:25 PLEASE BE SEATED. 10 MINUTE RECESS AND THEN CONTINUE WITH ANIMATION ISSUE AND PROFFERING FOR CONNOR'S TESTIMONY... WE WILL BE HERE TOMORROW AT 8 AM FOR DONNELLEY'S...... 10 MINUTE RECESS ====================== 16:44:54 PLEASE BE SEATED.... BACK ON RECORD, SEE SHOEMAKER SITTING ON STAND, MANTEI READY... GO AHEAD 16:45:10 mantei: going through your CV, graphic design degree in 1985? yes. additional degrees? always ongoing education. nothing in terms of post grad work with degree? no 16:45:44 not held as engineer or physicist? correct 16:45:56 take computer software and draw things or create things? that's one version. what's another? a lot of different types 16:46:16 as far as your prior experience testifying, other appearances? declarations and testified. how many times you were present in front of a jury? 17 16:46:43 how many of those were your testimonies objected to? you mean challenged.... 16:47:04 how many times did they object to you? whenever I testify in court, pretrial hearing 16:47:22 17 times, how many of those were animations created with motion suits? probably a dozen. title of the last one? people vs. green in Placerville 16:47:58 create these animations based on surveillance footage, how many of these involved situation like this one where you had nothing... just inserting figures? very rare that I had film to match animation, so pretty much the only one where I matched onto security camera 16:48:40 how many were figures in mid-lay or fight, in front of the jury? twice... that includes this one 16:49:01 most of them are... they're not person on person fights, most are shootings.... mostly just shootings 16:49:16 most of what you did, take bullet trajectories and place them? essentially, yes 16:49:35 taking raw data and drawing lines or putting figures in places they could've been but not like this case where it was an ongoing fluid situation like this one? some were multiple gunshots, sequence of events 16:50:07 but not physical between the two, just measuring trajectories? correct 16:50:19 what was the only time you testified in court, using the suit, involving physical fight to capture fluid situation? Greensburg 16:50:43 tell me about that one? an ex-police officer came up to vehicle and shot the person in vehicle, had to determine position of each of them... positioning when shot and their movements 16:51:11 involved distance between the two and a shooting? close approximation to each other.,... within open door of truck 16:51:30 not as in this case where you're trying to describe ongoing struggle like this one? one I'm currently working on now that is the same as that 16:51:50 for the moment, things where your testimony has been accepted for court purposes in front of jury in criminal case, sounds like this is the first time? ummm.... the suit I've used has been accepted in court in other cases 16:52:20 all the variables we just mentioned, using suit, inserting figures in court in criminal case in front of jury? with this close contact, yes 16:52:39 I think you said, only company in country using wireless motion capture for reconstruction? correct. 16:52:59 no issue if your peers are doing the same thing? correct. limited number that the company makes the suit 16:53:21 use the software, don't know the interworking, algorithms? correct 16:53:34 if the program were not working properly, unless shut down completely or giving you crazy results, wouldn't know that? I can verify if its working correctly... calibrate it 16:54:02 got raw data from station, did mapping on scene and put two people in suits? correct. out there at the scene, you told them what do to do? according to, yes 16:54:25 who were those people? two males. how big? relative size to martin and Zimmerman 16:54:38 how tall? Zimmerman was 5'8.... martin was 5'11 or 6 ft... not really that important for the person wearing the suit to be the exact size for the person doing the movement 16:55:15 did you measure these people? 5'11. how do you know... I'm 6 ft., approximately the same size... eyeball estimate? that's all that was necessary. how much did they weigh? not relevant. do you know or not? similar stature to the people I was representing. 16:55:55 how long were arms and legs? average size. did not measure them? I didn't measure their arms 16:56:09 got into poses.... suits give off pulses of energy that are documented by cameras? no that's not the way mine works... tell me how? 16 accelerometers, move your iPhone and it recognizes it.... those signals transfer to my laptop, apply to figure represented on laptop 16:56:58 they meaning what? the antennas that come in... applied to characters 16:57:11 pulses given off by accelerometers? go to two transmitters, send signal to laptop 16:57:29 each accelerometer has its own code? yes. antennas differentiate among each? yes 16:57:46 have green light to see if functioning properly.... 16:58:01 the version of this animation, final version now? yes 16:58:10 how many prior versions have there been? 2 prior versions, adjusted for more accuracy according to the witnesses 16:58:30 you adjusted based on witnesses, haven't actually read or listened to the actual testimony from witnesses? police reports... court room testimony? no 16:58:51 you changed them based upon what Zimmerman's attorneys told you people said in court? yes 16:59:03 that actually apparently was different enough from original you changed it twice? just to be more accurate, yes 16:59:20 the... understand that most of what you do to reconstruct crime scene, things mapped and known and static in their positioning.... and that is reconstructing crime scene, but adding figures and animation what are you doing? also reconstructing crime scene..... my gathering of data and put into context, sometimes when a jury receives coronary report, bullet trajectory angle, don't know how its relevant or how it applies to the scene... I take all different aspects and put into context 17:00:46 which pieces of evidence... which testimony did you incorporate into this animation? Jeremy wineberg. did he testify in court?..... 17:01:18 what actual court room testimony was incorporated? Jennifer lauer, john good, and Sonja mora.... 17:01:38 you show in this animation an initial contact by two figures, whose testimony did you use to depict that encounter? part of it is from the discovery that you gave us 17:02:05 whose testimony did you use? omara: trial or pretrial? TESTIMONY PRESENTED AT TRIAL....omara: all of Zimmerman's statements are in trial. 17:02:33 IT HAS TO BE TRIAL TESTIMONY OR EVIDENCE.... WHICH DID YOU USE IN YOUR ANIMATION? for initial contact it was Jennifer lauer's statement 17:02:59 she saw that occur? she didn't see it occur, she heard it occur 17:03:08 you are depicting it visually? correct. she didn't testify she could depict visually? just pin pointed the initial contact, in the T to the left of her condo 17:03:34 ever say it must have started there? PLEASE SHUT OFF YOUR PHONE..... IT WAS ON VIBRATE AND ITS NOT NOW 17:04:02 your indication is that she testified it must've started there? I have a question.... so for evidence which the judge was asking, police reports too? no, evidence or testimony I mean something in this court room during trial, outside of court is not evidence for now 17:04:50 omara: have to identify what's in trial.... DONT WANT YOU TO INFER.... IT WOULD BE ANYTHING HEARD BY THE JURY IN THIS COURTROOM BY WAY OF TESTIMONY OR EVIDENCE INTRODUCED... I was not allowed to watch the trial 17:05:31 if I were to ask you if this animation accurately show what's been testified, I don't know? I'm not sure what the proceedings, what went on in court... according to evidence I've received 17:06:00 not the discovery matters, not what a lawyer told you... ask you does this animation accurately show what has been testified to in this court room, you don't know? yes.... if it's not in my consultations with attorneys it would've changed, it's been adjusted to testimony in court 17:06:38 none of which you have heard or observed yourself? correct. none of which evidence you have seen yourself? none of the evidence in court, yes 17:06:55 part of this animation shows the initial encounter where the figures walk up... victim was left handed? I believe so 17:07:13 don't show anyone jumping out of bush? no evidence for that. nothing? ok 17:07:24 nobody emerging out of darkness, people just walk up to each other and stand face to face? for seconds, yes 17:07:41 animation also, do show and plot various items? correct. that's sort of in a 40 ft. area of that slope ground? correct 17:08:07 animation I saw, takes white arrow from encounter and zooms to a place 40 ft. away where we see the two figures bound up together? correct. reason for that is, teleported? direction of martin and Zimmerman consisted with witness police reports and trail of evidence going there 17:08:54 trail of evidence is just a trail, doesn't have a direction.... place where things are found doesn't have a direction until you bring it what others said? correct... reason for arrow is the one witnessed event to the next one... didn't add anything 17:09:33 the animation can't show it because you have no idea how it happened right? correct 17:09:43 get to where figures re-emerge, john good? correct. how tall is he? 6 ft. know this how? given that info from attorneys. not from anything in court but from attorneys? yes who got it from good 17:10:15 where was he standing? sliding door and the right side slides over, about a ft. out from the door... where did you get that from? good. his in court testimony? consultation with attorneys 17:10:41 where on patio he's standing, pick a spot? straight out from door, one foot. don't know which side? I didn't pick it that's where he was sitting or standing 17:11:04 in court? through consultation. before court? I'm not sure... during the trial, not sure when 17:11:19 he told you exactly where on patio? yes. how big by how big? two pillars on corner, 7.5 ft. from one side to another... tell you one ft. from one side to the other? 1 ft. from the door 17:11:54 start with something else with animation, true or not...... the animation contains artificial light? correct. properties to show things even though dark outside? correct 17:12:24 intentionally no effort to document lighting? yes 17:12:39 most important thing is seeing detail even though that's not detail that night? correct, plenty of people can testify to the lighting... accurate of that night? no 17:13:08 in your decision about where to place the people.... where to instruct those wearing the suits... done before court testimony? probably within the month before.... prior to trial proceedings? correct 17:13:38 told them based on your best estimates? based on police reports and interviews. how many interviews did you read? lauers, goods, a couple hand written reports (3) 17:14:06 like witness statements? yes. that's it? yes 17:14:14 based on those you told these people where to go and what to do? based on that and the 911 call 17:14:33 911 call by lauer? yes. she saw none of this? correct 17:14:42 and john good from whose perspective this is shown was not on phone? correct. show lauers phone call and figures doing points to that? right... pin point gun shot, but to any of the rest of it... where the figures were at during any point of the 911 call? only figure other than Zimmerman and martin is good.... WERE YOU FINISHED WITH ANSWER? no... FINISH... good specified when he came in during the 911 call on the video, when he came in how long out there and when he went back in 17:16:06 what video did good say he came in through the 911 call? based on consultation and the placement of the video 17:16:20 telling this court that john good stated exactly where he was during portions of jenna lauer's call? how long he was outside 17:16:37 matched specific audio to the actions of good and figures on ground? correct. what in court testimony or evidence you were provided that tells you john good saw two figures doing x when jenna lauer was saying y? no in court testimony. no out of court testimony either? consultation with attorneys on how long he was out there and when he came out 17:17:21 integrating visual perspective of one witness who has no idea what jenna lauer is doing? not just based on her call, but he can base it on when the gun shot went off 17:17:49 I understand when the gun shot went off, telling court prior to the gun shot that john good visual witness and lauer audio witness, match up with good is seeing? if you take 911 call from gunshot and good says he was in condo at particular time before gun shot, point when he went in... particular time of how long he was out there, back track from the gun shot and determine from those when he came out and went back in.... 17:18:57 those were not exact, they were estimations? it's an estimation on his part.... nothing more than estimation on your part? based on witness that was there who said how long he was out there and how long after the gun shot went off 17:19:36 that animation is specific, play a portion of that recording in conjunction with video or simulated video.. all based on nothing more than estimations? by the person witnessing it 17:20:09 none of that could be said to be exact or accurate to point to say for certain that's what he was seeing at the time jenna was saying a word? not specific to exact word... your animation makes it very specific, does it? yes 17:20:40 nothing in that animation that tells me the call is generally going on, that animation looks like they're going on at the same time? correct, scenario according to witness and evidence 17:21:08 which witness and evidence that came out in court? consultation with attorneys 17:21:22 no way good can say at time lauer said this I was doing this? I don't think that's what he based that..... he can't say exactly according to what she was saying 17:21:47 he was gone from visual view while lauer is still on phone... no one has clocked however many seconds? correct 17:22:06 nonetheless, animation purports to showing? yes. animation reported to be more accurate than we know the evidence can be? the purpose of him involved in animation isn't so much whether he was outside for 10 seconds vs. 7 seconds, its putting him into location and showing what he saw at that time.... but you don't know at that time because you don't know what was going on with that call? his is based on when the gun shot went off... estimation upon estimation upon estimation...... agree? only to the point that the witness.... 17:23:31 this was created but you're not pretending its accurate depiction of what went on, just estimation? according to witness that was involved 17:23:54 whom you've never heard testify? correct 17:24:37 were still treated to a view of two figures on ground? correct 17:24:46 what witness testimony are you relying on for those figures since good is no longer there? based on di maio's positioning 17:25:05 didn't hear him testify? consultation with dr... phone call last saturday? yes. after you had been deposed? correct 17:25:28 had conversation because you were asked to call him? I wasn't asked to call him... I asked about the doctor who was standing by.... not your idea after you had made another animation until you were set up with speaking with this doctor? 17:26:00 my idea from start we needed physical evidence of when shot went off 17:26:15 based on physical evidence? based on testimony, consultation from di maio's phone call. not testimony, phone call? correct 17:26:34 also told me yesterday that the one think you know for sure is the entry of the bullet wound was directly 90 degrees straight on? correct 17:26:53 position 3, tell me they're parallel to one another? horizontal to each other.... not just horizontal but parallel? yes. stacked on top like Lego logs? no there's space. space based on what? based on talking to, my conversation with di maio and inquiry into the scene to fit the characters together 17:27:49 how big is the space? between clothing or bodies... start with clothing? it varies, in my 3rd position I'm not quite sure, haven't measured... from the ground is 13-15 inches. approximately? not the purpose of final position is to know who's on top of bottom 17:28:42 purpose is to resemble the defense theory? not to resemble defense theory. some other theory? di maio's. based on 20 minute phone call? doesn't take long. 17:29:09 told you they were x inches away and so far apart? bent over Zimmerman. told you exact distances? the distance varies according to our conversation 2 inches in one spot and 4 inches from another 17:29:43 that's the distance between clothing and the shot? correct. have I asked about that space? that would depend on positioning 17:30:03 varies on estimations? yes but in this particular positioning.... purpose of positioning wasn't to get specific to measure with camera the distance between them, otherwise I would've put a camera there... just to show whose on top and bottom 17:30:42 not to be accurate as it happened but to show positions? correct 17:30:51 do you know whether that animation accurately depicts how they were that night? according to di maio that's the position and the findings 17:31:12 parallel and unknown? not completely parallel 17:31:24 so if I were to ask you, are you basing this on phone conversation or in court testimony you would say phone call? yes 17:31:56 said earlier, sometimes bullet trajectories you use metal rod? create a rod in the computer. in this case? showing bullet trajectory 17:32:17 doesn't show bullet, trajectory, the firearm or anything? not the purpose 17:32:26 but it doesn't show any of that? no 17:32:30 you were asked to leave the gun out, weren't you? no. ever told me you were? I don't believe I was told..... 17:34:36 last Wednesday 2nd deposition in the case? yes. show you here pg. 27 line 4....... 17:34:56 see that question answer? correct... it wasn't, not state I was told to leave it out it says in consultation with the attorney 17:35:16 your answer was I didn't make it on my own, just consultation with the attorneys... my input and their input 17:35:33 not the purpose of this video.... I did not put it in 17:35:43 video omits that? correct because that's not the purpose of the video..... 17:36:06 conditions in which you filmed those in the suit? recorded 17:36:14 in the day time rolling around? recorded yes 17:36:22 when you recorded them, obviously.... were these folks moving in rapid pace like fighting or getting up assuming pose? Object! while previous animations we had movement, in response to concerns we eliminated that, they're individual shots.. not relevant any more 17:37:20 first part of animation contains movement....omara: absolutely, but the part where they're moving from that point down. CLARIFY 17:37:40 reproducing and filming motion capture suits in action.... first interaction, position of bodies... 17:38:36 measured the areas from the drain boxes and sprinkler boxes to get correct position... who told you the distance? placement of them, position based on shell casing... position of his cell phone and where it was in relation to goods house 17:39:20 plug into animation? best to record on the scene to plug in elements... once created in computer adjust so its most accurate 17:40:09 didn't measure the shell casing? lay out little markers 17:40:21 took figures and put them in exact locations with shell casings, 6 ft. from porch... specific place? correct. did that based on what evidence? from goods testimony and consultation with attorneys 17:41:11 placed figures where they were in 3rd position based on your belief and knowledge and belief as to projection of shell casing not in the video? correct, relative to the position where Zimmerman was found 17:41:43 you mean martin? yes. that's position 4? correct, but 3 is relative 17:41:56 put the figures in certain position relative to shell case, no one testified about being close to shell casing, estimation on your part? correct it's just in proximity to shell casing, on the right of Zimmerman 17:42:32 on the right but 2 or 3 or 4 ft. from right, no idea how far? can't be that far from where martin ended up... proximity of evidence marker 6 has to be pretty close proximity to third position 17:43:06 I understand, getting at how high gun is off ground affects how far that casing goes? a lot of variables, not unremarkable 17:43:28 none of which you have direct evidence? just that a shell casing was found... no idea where it came from? we know approximately where it came from 17:43:51 animation shows figures in specific spot, based on animation of shell casing? based on last position and previous position and shell casing location 17:44:13 last position 4th is what happened after the defendant claimed he shot martin and martin fell off him and jumped on his back and moved his body? correct 17:44:33 no idea exactly how far that happened, just know where the body was found? close proximity to the final position 17:44:50 I understand, all happened in 40 ft. area? not giving me specifics 17:45:02 what does your animation give me those specifics? it's to one side of the shell casing, the cell phone, their previous position 17:45:26 based on series of estimations... INTERRUPT YOU, I SAW ANIMATION ONE BRIEF MOMENT, REMEMBER GENERALLY WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, BUT POSITIONS AND STUFF, HELPFUL IF YOU HAD ANIMATION UP AND HAD HIM EXPLAIN POSITIONS.... CAN WE DO THAT, IM REALLY TRYING TO FOLLOW TESTIMONY, WITHOUT LOOKING AT EACH FIGURE OR POSITION, HELPFUL IN CONJUNCTION WITH TESTIMONY 17:48:54 third position illustration? yes. yellow circles are items of evidence? correct 17:49:11 place you have these items in yellow circles is estimation? their positioned in between items of evidence 17:49:38 telling me they should be in that location as opposed to a few inches over... couldn't tell me because you're not trying to? correct.... positioning relative to each other is purpose 17:50:08 couldn't tell me what angle the persons head should be? right it wasn't still 17:50:26 still estimation? what part.... the actual positions of figures? placement according to dr. di maio. he said they looked exactly like that? their positioning. he described that degree of tilt to you? within 2 inches 17:51:01 how many inches did he say martins head was off the ground? that wasn't relevant. again an approximation? approximation of his head, yes 17:51:48 as far as these white things depicted, the sprinkler boxes? and drain boxes 17:52:07 hard metal plastic covers whatever their made of? correct 17:52:31 you also reviewed at least one statement from Zimmerman? supplied to me, not sure which one... use any to create this animation? any of animation or what part.. any part? some of the initial portion at the T intersection. that's it? yes all the rest are based on other witnesses.... 17:53:22 which statement from defendant? video walk through. only one you used? yes. 17:53:31 some reason you didn't use the others? because I had other witnesses that placed or positioned them throughout the animation 17:53:52 only used it as it relates to the beginning of this video? yes. in conjunction with lauer's testimony about that is where initial conflict took place 17:54:15 reason why you only used video as opposed to other statements? I had other witnesses that laid out scene from then on 17:54:38 talk to me about.....any types of validation done with this method for animation? 17:55:13 either the several types of software or programs used, other than buying and assuming they're working right, validation studies on them? validation on the motion capture suit. only the suit? and the 3d software I use... if some inaccuracy in any of the measurements I haven't found any 17:56:04 accurate to one measurement? accurate as you want, thousands of an inch... separate them to here? what was relevant to what I needed... measuring porch to shell casing, nothing in here required thousands of inch of accuracy 17:56:49 directed those wearing the suits, telling them to go at it with simulated fight or simply pose this way? just move according to what the witnesses wrote in police reports... what position there in, ground and pounding that type of movement and how they would naturally interact with ground and slope 17:57:40 directing a movie, go here and do this... they weren't just doing it on their own? correct based on location of evidence on scene, the type of surface they were on, what was written in police report in terms of what they were doing at that location 17:58:13 first part of that tape.... have them attempt to simulate speed of that or make that motion and you adjusted speed? swaying and reaction isn't sped up, that's actual movement 17:58:40 whether that's accurate as opposed to another estimation? it was just a movement portraying that occurrence and how somebody doing that motion 17:59:05 tell this court for certain it's an accurate depiction of motion, you'd tell me no, right? someone swinging and striking in the face.... there's other ways of doing it... other ways reconstructionist animate on computer, move arm and advance... estimating how it moves... advantage is you put the suit on and that's how the person will move 18:00:06 that's how that person that day moved with the suit on them? correct... can't tell me that's how they did it that night? just portraying one person coming up and striking another person in that matter with respect to their heights 18:00:37 understand the conclusion or depiction, this is not necessarily your opinion, but what you have attempted to create based on what you've been told my lawyers? no... it's my reconstruction based on discovery, putting the scene together, being out there with motion suits, and fine tuning it with consultation with attorneys... wasn't.... something created based on evidence and testimony and written reports not solely based on what an attorney told me to do 18:01:44 all the actual in court testimony would've been funneled through lawyers? correct 18:01:57 all action out there is estimated based upon your interpretation of what you were given in discovery? a reconstruction, yes based on evidence from discovery 18:02:20 example is the shell casing, know where it landed but not how it got there? and also their previous positioning and the shell casing REDIRECT 18:03:09 motion capture suits, next generation than those that exist before? correct. more accurate? more accurate, less clean up time, data is cleaner than other motion suits... you can also take into more environments 18:03:47 wireless? correct. 18:03:50 do you have to be in direct line of sight with computer antenna? not direct.. I could record someone from the other wall 18:04:11 new generation, the motion capture suits are accepted in your industry? yes... it's the most accurate way to capture movements 18:04:30 not much different than older motion capture suits? yes, restricted by fact they have to be recorded with camera, disadvantage is you can't see data on the arm... can see data on all accelerometers 18:05:04 hooked in to software to recreate movement in context of body? yes it captures it all 18:05:16 put 4 on a Frisbee and fly Frisbee and they would kick back information? yes. also been used, recordings of jumping out of plane and sky diving 18:05:45 in the concept of the beginning parts and modifications, ever waited until after trial is over to create your animation? it sounds senseless in the question.... animations normally done in anticipation of trial? yes. with the discovery? yes. 18:06:22 when you have that information available, go back and modify based on new information if given to you... go back and fit that in? yes 18:06:58 have you done that in the generation 3 of video you created based upon consultation with me and saying such things as? Objection! Leading! SUSTAINED. modified as we discussed? yes, whole purpose is to get as accurate as possible 18:07:32 testimonies in trial that led to modifications? yes 18:07:40 still with judge, changes in those stills based upon actual trial testimony as opposed to deposition or statement testimony? yes. take out one text and place with another? correct 18:08:11 were they're changes made to the stills based on testimony? more of a defining it better. from who? consultation with you and west. what was discussed in that? what came out in court and testimony 18:08:44 make those modifications to the stills? yes. 18:08:52 as to the... ever waited until middle of trial to begin creation of animation? no, begin as soon as I can... 18:09:10 in the information you were forwarded in this case, info from Zimmerman's various statements forwarded? yes. incorporate into your animation? yes, what his video testimony was and verify there's no conflicting or nothing that conflicts with what I used in creating the scene 18:09:57 other statements available, interview with law enforcement available? correct 18:10:09 what significance did you tend to Zimmerman's statements in assisting you creating any portion? initial conflict 18:10:28 was that specific to Zimmerman saying he was struck? yes 18:10:36 in a location approximate to location he was struck? backed up by lauer's positioning 18:10:53 in addition to lauers to place initial location? Jeremy wineberg's police report 18:11:12 other witnesses like jane surdyka who was in apartment behind the t? yes. utilized all of that? yes 18:11:29 any specific evidence found at scene to assist you in determining that was the initial altercation? yes... his flashlight key chain. 18:11:50 how did that assist you? it gives you direction... initial conflict that took place at t intersection, flashlight which goes down to the direction 18:12:20 mantei suggested this is just an estimation, look at that animation it's an estimation to initial location? correct. in conflict with any evidence in the discovery? no its not 18:12:49 have you recreate animation of a shell casing discharge and the way it spins, would you be able to create animation that accomplishes that? yes. how many spins the casing made to the ground? yes... in the computer... but do that with any gun it'll vary 18:13:39 inherent estimation variable? correct, certain scenarios you can create but not infinite... those in conflict with evidence and witness testimony those obviously can't be done that way... consistent with testimony witnesses and the scene 18:14:28 example in modifications, change... decision made not to show movement of bodies from initial to body of rest? yes. why? basically because from witness testimony we know which direction they moved in, not defined how they got from one position to the position by goods house... rather than create something, use arrow to show direction they moved in 18:15:28 decision by you as creator to avoid animation that wasn't documented by witness? yes 18:15:44 why did you use the stills.... where the information comes from to place them there? initial position came from john good.... second position came from john good 18:16:27 initial was at the T intersection? define as something else.... T intersection event, what's first event? first visual that john good had, labeled initial position 18:17:12 the first position you are speaking of..... 18:17:43 this is the t intersection event? yes 18:17:50 (animation playing) frailties in the animation, no witness to this? correct. estimation based on Zimmerman's testimony? right, no evidence or witnesses to dispute 18:18:27 that information right there, where does that come from... from Zimmerman's video walk through and Jeremy's police report., and surdyka? yes. 18:19:06 arrow instead of having figures move without witnesses? yes 18:19:17 this is what we know to be john goods sliding door? yes. based upon additional communication, his position modified? correct. how it was and why it was modified? initially had him come out from middle of sliding door, but after his refinement of his position I placed him on the left sliding door one foot out from middle... based on consultation from his specific recall? Objection! Leading! SUSTAINED 18:20:16 it was based on consultation with you and west on the feedback of good and placement from the scene.... did good look at animation and ask for modifications? yes... modifications changed here? yes 18:20:56 this is where the tape comes in? correct. 18:21:02 why the timing of the call began... was there a point that existed in lauers call and goods testimony as presented to you that was intersection that allowed you to relate the two? yes, the gun shot 18:21:39 do we have a timeline of lauers call... 45 seconds, also have a timeline of goods testimony with the lining up the gunshot in his testimony yes.... line up and give timeline for his goods actions.....? matching up that one event 18:22:35 what information did you have from good where he was when he heard the gunshot and how many seconds before that? he was on his way up to make 911 call, time we had if you go to gun shot and back up on goods timeline... gave estimate on from when he went into condo to the time the gunshot went off 18:23:18 calibrate your animation to jenna lauers phone call.... use goods estimation on how long it took him to leave the area.... Objection! SUSTAINED... IN REVIEWING MY NOTES, GOOD ALSO CALLED 911 AND WAS ON PHONE AND CONNECTED AT OR ABOUT TIME OF GUN SHOT... WAS THAT USED? WAS THAT USED IN YOUR COMPARISON WITH LAUER? no gun shot on his call. NOT BUT HIS TESTIMONY WAS HE HEARD THE GUN SHOT WHILE DIALING 911 AND I THOUGHT HE SAID HE WAS WAITING FOR THAT CALL TO CONNECT, WOULD KNOW WHEN THAT CALL CONNECTED... USE THAT AS BASIS FOR TIMELINE AND TESTIMONY OF GOOD? still waiting for it to connect. DID YOU USE THAT, CONSIDER AT ALL HIS KNOWN TIME... HEARD THE GUN SHOT WHILE DIALING, WAITING FOR CALL TO CONNECT, USE HIS 911 CONNECTION IN DOING COMPARISON? I used his estimation from how long it took him to how long it took him to make his call 18:25:42 if you were to have the time of the phone call and estimate from there the time it might take to connect would that help calibrate animation even more refined? yes. able to accomplish tonight? I wouldn't be able to re-render and re-do the animation but I can do some markings 18:26:25 if there was a few second difference, require moving audio track and animation would stay the same? yes. that's the only relation? 18:27:00 it would affect goods time that he went into the apartment 18:27:14 use of his estimation after leaving the view of the scene to 911 call is close to accurate? I DONT WANT TO INTERJECT, BUT ILL DO THAT WHEN YOU'RE DOING YOUR ARGUMENT.... ANY OBJECTION FROM THE STATE? objection for state asking questions, none whatsoever 18:28:05 ONLY TIMES HE GAVE WAS 7:15 PM WATCHING TV WITH WIFE, HEARD NOISE... OTHER TIMES HE GIVES ON CROSS WAS ENTIRE TIME HE WAS WATCHING WAS 8-10 SECONDS, DOESN'T SAY WHERE IN THAT TIME... BUT DO KNOW HE WAS DIALING AND WAITING FOR IT TO CONNECT WHEN HE HEARD THE GUN SHOT, DONT KNOW HOW LONG IN THE HOUSE BEFORE GUN SHOT, DONT KNOW WHAT 8-10 SECONDS WERE... PROBLEM IM HAVING IS THE USE OF THE LAUER 911 CALL IN CONJUNCTION WITH GOODS TESTIMONY, I DONT UNDERSTAND THAT TIMELINE 18:29:18 my understanding of testimony was that he left the area of the view of the scene, turned around grabbed his phone... WHAT TIME DID HE GO OUT THERE? RECORD IS CORRECT, THESE ARE JUST MY NOTES... BETWEEN 7:05-7:15... FIRST FAINT NOISE, COULDN'T HEAR WORDS, THEN HEARD IT AGAIN LOUDER, COULDN'T HEAR WORDS DIDN'T KNOW IF MORE THAN 1 PERSON, LOOK OUT SLIDING DOOR, CRACKED BLINDS, LIGHT ON PORCH, ONLY SEE SOMETHING OUT THERE, OPENED BLINDS AND DOOR, STEPPED OUT, VERTICAL ON GROUND, WHATS GOING ON.... NO OTHER TIME OTHER THAN WHEN HE HEARD GUN SHOT WAS WHEN HE WAS TRYING TO CONNECT, ENTIRE TIME WAS 8-10 SECONDS... BEGIN AT THE CRACK OF THE BLINDS OR STEPPING ONTO THE PORCH... LIKE TO KNOW IN THIS ANIMATION WHERE LAUERS CALL FITS INTO HIS TESTIMONY 18:31:16 call connect at 19:17:15..... we know lauer's call started at 19:16:11 and its 45 seconds into the call or at 7:16:56 that the gunshot goes off... DIFFERENT WITH TIMELINE YOU HAVE HERE IN CONNECTION WITH WHAT YOU HAVE HERE. 18:32:11 took good 15-20 seconds to get call, place it and connect it... don't have that testimony but lauers testimony that it took about 20 seconds... HE WAS WAITING FOR IT TO CONNECT.... AS I RECALL, DIALED AND WAS WAITING.... WHERES THE 8-10 HE VIEWED THIS... mantei: and the 30 second gap between the connection 18:33:15 DOESN'T HAVE TO BE EXACT, BUT WHEN TRYING TO OVERLAY CALL WITH ANIMATION HAS TO BE CLOSER TO EXACT THAN NOT CLOSER.... may be able to fix that by calling good.... HAVING THE HEARING NOW, NOT GOING TO HAVE THIS HEARING GO ON FOR DAYS AND DAYS.... I SHOULD NOT HAVE COMMENTED AND I COULD JUST RULE ON IT AFTER YOU FINISH.... NOT MAKING COMMENTS TO CALL GOOD INTO HEARING.... TRANSCRIPT AS TO IT... 18:34:24 omara: if court is accurate that goods phone call was connected at 7:17:15 and evidence from lauer the decision to make call and connection is 20-25 seconds... back it out, you are within seconds of hearing the gun shot on lauer's call... STOP YOU THERE, NOT AN ARGUMENT... FINISH WITH SHOEMAKER 18:35:17 did you utilize lauer's call and good's testimony as to when in relation he heard the gun shot? yes. that how you backed out the time that gunshot and went in reverse? correct 18:35:55 recall a time lag to calibrate back to lauer phone call? time lag between.................. 18:36:14 I'm not sure the exact number of seconds... let the judge know then what you used in determining when to start lauer tape to video? in backing it out.... going back inside is based on consultation with you and from his feedback on the video. 18:36:55 does the necessity of being absolutely accurately.... IM SORRY WHOSE FEEDBACK ON THE VIDEO? mr goods. WHEN DID THAT HAPPEN? in consultation with omara. WHAT DATE? no. AFTER TRIAL STARTED? yes... HE WAS UNDER SEQUESTRATION.... GOOD IS NOT AN EXPERT, WITNESS UNDER SEQUESTRATION... used to authenticate as it was his view... I fixed his problems with it... mantei: none of which was disclosed to the state until this point. 18:38:28 what information did you use to identify this as initial position of the two? his comment about..... this position looking at now? consultation with you from testimony 18:38:56 did you change this from true animation to still? yes just to eliminate or mitigate any random movements... just to show position according to good 18:39:29 done to make more accurate? yes. to avoid any other inaccuracies? yes 18:39:42 what was this change from first position to second? also based on consultation with you from his testimony 18:39:56 no animation at this point to avoid concerns? correct 18:40:16 how the determination was made to use third position? consultation with di maio and proximity to the prior position just seconds before... and the items of evidence around.... also include final resting place of martin? eventually 18:40:48 is the one were about to see related to third position? correct, marker 6.... one of the things that comes into play on the position... slope there, so its interaction on the slope 18:41:14 better identified by the posters? yes 18:41:24 does your program have laws in it like gravity? it does, but in this case those physical properties were provided by the suit 18:41:54 decision not to have animation? correct... just to show position 18:42:05 this is the position..... 18:42:15 this is the position that was modified based on conversation with di maio? yes. to what extent? leaning over Zimmerman to verify position.... leaning over you got from di maio based on his viewing of clothing? yes. and what he discussed was anticipated testimony? yes 18:42:59 and what is the after shot position what info for that? from mora's report of what she saw after the shot... any other information used as well? consistent with Zimmerman's video testimony 18:43:51 green circle, number 6 what is that? the location of martin. based on what? based on the marker from the total station data 18:44:14 all of these data points are from their total station? correct. you added the slope? yes 18:44:31 why does it stop at this location? mora's view... from that view point, the video uses 50 mm lens which is what a person perceives when they're looking at something 18:44:58 goes black until call is completed? yes 18:45:09 concern raised about lightning conditions... in other experience, times when you have to accomplish lighting or weather to make animation worthwhile? yes 18:45:32 tell us about it? focus on whether eye witness could really see what they saw, or weather on something... if your main focus for video, but problem with that is.... here in court room there's ambient light, hard to get accurate depiction of lighting conditions... vary on projector or printer you use... focus not on reconstructing the lighting but the detail of what was going on 18:46:29 animation created with artificiality to be viewed? correct 18:46:40 lighter than animation than it would be that night? correct 18:46:49 proper weather available to you that night? added rain. based on what? historic weather I received 18:47:07 any wind added? no wind.. it was 7 mph going NE.... would wind add or subtract to animation in this nature? no in this case 18:47:32 asked whether the software calibrates itself... how would you know it's working accurately, further insight what happens when it's not working properly? verify easily by measuring object you know size of.. 18:48:05 done that in your animations generally? yes. done in this one? yes. how? measure size of object, grab that object and chose tool and it'll give you the height and width 18:48:31 how you created the avatars are martin and Zimmerman? figures already created, didn't waste time, but adjusted certain things to match the figures and the clothing they were wearing 18:49:01 in your motion capture suit at 6'2 make it smaller to be martin at 5'11? correct. done for this? correct... even though they may not be the right size in recording you specify exact size it'll come in to the software.. make Martin 5'11? yes. and his shoes? and his hood 18:49:51 height after those additions? approximately around 6'2 18:50:05 in the still you used concerning moment of shot, would that view you had of it... gun in his right hand been visible? no. flash of gun visible from that angle? no. create another animation from ground level to show gun? correct if that was the purpose of what I was to create.... in this that wasn't the purpose... others can testify to that... just to show who was on top and who was on bottom 18:51:15 purpose limited to that? that's the main thing.... with di maio's input the person that was shot had to be the person on top... person doing shooting was on bottom 18:51:54 moment? YES 18:52:08 nothing further RECROSS 18:52:19 as far as representation.... second and third position... positions of hips change? correct 18:52:33 as far as I know that wasn't based on at least you didn't tell me it was based on witness statement or testimony? based on common sense...... 18:52:55 back up... common sense is if you kept martins figure... no way firearm would be accessible? in second position, correct 18:53:21 had to move to third position for him to access firearm? correct. didn't do that based on testimony, did that to be able to put those figures in position? in position relative to each other when di maio mentioned martin was shot..... and also accessibility 18:54:00 did di maio testify to gun? that's common sense. did he testify that? I didn't hear his testimony... asking me about something I had no knowledge about... 18:54:32 if the gun had to be accessible if we assume the figures were positioned as you placed them? correct so the gun is accessible 18:54:55 if evidence was martin figure was up at arm pits, no way accessible? not only the gun, but also the position of martin when shot. impossible... couldn't create animation to fit that scenario? with him straddling shoulders in position 3, no. wouldn't occur 18:55:35 position 3... in order to depict their angles at 90 degrees, straight in..? yes also in coroner's report.... he mentioned 90 degrees front to back but conversation with di maio he mentioned slightly from left to right 18:56:19 notes with conversation to di maio? just one. only note you took? yes. just that about the 90 degree angle? I already knew about 90 degree angle.. 18:56:43 just opened up folder and looked at something, what was that? just left to right. any other notes? just that 18:56:57 position in position 3, bodies had to be distanced apart from each other? correct. account for not just clothing differential? correct. account for length of arms involved? but you don't know what position. exactly 18:57:29 and the length of gun involved? a lot of variables I didn't portray 18:57:41 main thing accounted for are Zimmerman and martins position.... on top of each other 18:57:52 none of those variables are accounted for in that 3rd position? variables for bullet trajectory.. length of arms, distance, no accounted for, just show position of bodies? consistent with di maio's consultation 18:58:28 not accounted for in this animation? the variables you mentioned are not impossible 18:58:44 way of telling me they are not depicted in this animation? in this animation, but not expounded to point you are talking about 18:59:10 I can tell from this animation the length of distance between the gun, ground, body of martin? if you use photogrammetry, know the measurements 18:59:36 not what else I have to do... can I tell from this? figures in this are to scale... looking at scene, wonder about size of individuals involved... to scale... nothing's changed in relation to video 19:00:03 in their height? correct. and that's it? and their appearance to photos I received 19:00:16 no measurements of other parts of body? I had photos... can I tell that spacing from this animation or do I have to go into the data you have? can tell from the video..... assume we can't? not the purpose... you're looking for something that's not in the video, not the purpose. it's not there? the purpose isn't to examine bullet trajectory... to show relative position from one person to another where he had to be consistent with di maio's testimony.... 19:01:27 may have been another position? variable about 2 inches.... 19:01:39 MAY HE BE EXCUSED? yes. ANY OTHER WITNESS FROM DEFENSE? no. FROM THE STATE? no. LETS HAVE ARGUMENT 19:02:17 omara: daubert initial or applicability to the case... seems we've gone back and forth. YES WE HAVE... STATE SAID NO AND THEN YES, I DONT KNOW WHERE STATE STANDS... 19:02:49 mantei: daubert analysis and a pierce factor analysis... both apply to testimony and animation, asking for both 19:03:07 omara: under frye and daubert... generally accepted in community, not countered from the state.... admitted in courts a lot, by this very witness... never disqualified as expert upon attempt to have it in... I didn't present enormous amount of industry wide..... in his industry he stays up to date... involved since 95, past 14 years focused on this area and presented many times... never been excluded.... generally accepted, suggest it has been and is 19:04:35 this inquiry and say where it assist here today... will it help jury in consideration.... as to that I think the court needs to convinced its accurate, not perfect... based on when it was created.... most recent based on trial testimony.... up to date information available like trial testimony.... can't have trial testimony available to him... taken away frailties of the animation, no longer an animation but initial strike by martin... came solely from Zimmerman's testimony 19:06:05 WHERES THE TESTIMONY THAT MARTIN IS LEFT HANDED? injuries on the right side.....that's where it's from... never said he was right handed... hit him with left hand. WHO TESTIFIED TO THAT? Zimmerman. TESTIFIED HE WAS PUNCHED, DIDN'T SAY WHAT HAND... NOBODY TESTIFIED IT CAME FROM LEFT HANDED PUNCH AND SYBRINA SAID MARTIN WAS RIGHT HANDED...NO TESTIMONY TO SHOW IT WAS LEFT HANDED 19:07:09 rao testified and used her graphic identification and the injury came across the nose.... rao testified the punch came in this way... she said it went up..... punch came in from left to right because it hit him right here, inner right side of Zimmerman's face caused by knuckle.. no evidence to support anything else... fulton said he was right handed but that means it might be the hand you want to use first, but I don't know... hit Zimmerman on right side, that's the basis for the left strike.. 19:08:32 NOBODY COULD EVER HIT SOMEONE WITH RIGHT HAND AND CAUSE INJURY ON LEFT SIDE? 19:08:52 if he came at me with his right hand.... could be... only his testimony they were basically standing in front of each other... Zimmerman turned to him, reached down and got hit.... could Zimmerman turn all the way down this way.... yeah possibility.... more likely event was left handed throw.................. 19:10:01 that part of animation and then we took out some of the concerning parts of animation... after that it's just still photos based upon testimony... modified based upon john good saying in his testimony that it happened in certain relation to 911 call... main reason is we know we have reverse timing. 19:10:47 TALK ABOUT LAUER FOR A SECOND... SHE DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING.. SHOEMAKER TESTIFYING THAT THE TESTIMONY AT THAT T IS BASED UPON HER TESTIMONY... SHE NEVER SAID SHE SAW ANYTHING... HEARING AND SEEING.... BASED UPON HER TESTIMONY... IF WE ONLY KNOW WHAT SHE HEARD AND NOT WHAT SHE SAW, HOW DO YOU GET THAT IN? 19:11:35 lauer testified that she believed the altercation she heard, back forth and back conversation occurred outside to the left near the T.... SHE TESTIFIED THE BLINDS WERE DOWN, HUSBAND AND HER WERE HOME... WATCHING TV, ON LOVE SEAT FACING GLASS DOOR... OPEN... OBSTRUCTED BY BLINDS, HEARD VOICES, COULDN'T TELL WORDS... COMING FROM LEFT, LOUD TALKING SAME VOLUME TONE, MORE FLUSTERED THAN CONFRONTATIONAL... HEARD SCUFFLING LIKE SNEAKERS ON PAVEMENT AND GRASS... GRUNTING NOISE, AT FIRST SOUNDED LIKE PEOPLE STANDING UP AND THEN ROLLING ON GRASS, CALLED 911, 30 SECONDS TO CONNECT... DIDN'T SAY SHE SAW ANYTHING, COULD TELL VOICES WERE FROM LEFT AND IT GOT CLOSER AND LOUDER..... 19:13:24 never said she saw anything at all.. based on what she said she heard it come from.... I talk to her about the three parts of the conversation, red car blue car red car.... in my conversation with her at that point... the initial conversation beginning at T intersection.... THAT ANIMATION POSITION IS BASED ON HER TESTIMONY.. of what she heard.... CAN I SEE THAT POSITION AGAIN.... 19:15:07 in any case, she didn't see anything... in that sense the placement is an estimate on voice... in her cross she was more specific it happened in area of T intersection.... frailty of animation based upon non visual testimony 19:15:43 is it accurate.... limited to goods specific recollection 3 different positions... vertical and parallel.. on top of pathway and further down.... then he left, kept in that position, no evidence to support changes.... 19:16:32 the positioning was changed slightly and only to more like a mounting position because of di maio's anticipated testimony of how the shot went in 19:16:57 could it be like this? yes... might be like this but that as the bodies go up, can pulls straight down.... more like this.... at least di maio's testimony lessened the angle 19:17:29 that's it for the animation as to its accuracy... suggest with all the information in this case, non are direct witnesses except good... all have vantage points to offer, attempt by defense to present that as to what happened... helped the jury in how the defense says the case happened...... understanding graphically of how situation unfolded..... 19:18:31 IN PIERCE, THE STATE OR DEFENSE... THE STATE INTENDED TO INTRODUCE AND COURT RULED DEMONSTRATIVE ONLY... ANALYSIS OF THE COURT DID, DIDN'T GO BACK TO JURY, USED TO ASSIST EXPERT IN TESTIMONY 19:19:11 didn't find exclusion for evidence... state entered timeline... this court already allowed a presentation by the state in putting together various facts in a graphic way that assists the trial fact that helps their case... that's what an animation is, no reason it shouldn't be admitted into evidence... don't know that it was the ruling to suggest information can't be entered into evidence 19:20:11 criteria of piece, qualified as expert.... certainly applied to evidence in trial... not strictly limited... be consistent with evidence, can't go into matter not presented into evidence.... does it need to be perfect frame by frame rendition... needs to be accurate and fairly depict circumstances... frailties... light. explain to the jury, sure... not fatal frailty of evidence... what could've been seen from witness 19:21:37 under that context we've met frye, now daubert.... if otherwise accepted in community, court act like gatekeeper without further foundation to its acceptance and relevance we approve 19:22:05 mantei: this animation is enigma.... court cases... start with daubert line of cases 19:22:35 burdens on defense that the standards were satisfied 19:22:50 reference a 2013 decision.... second page in head note 3... daubert factors... number of them, not exhaustive or all inclusive... ones designated are 1 if the theory can be tested.... potential rate of error.... general acceptance....whether method is proper for case.... relationship to techniques of the method.... 19:24:14 he has never testified in criminal court in exactly the same thing he is trying to here... first time ever with these motion capture suits in conjunction with other things he is attempting to do... no one else with same method and equipment.... witness said I've never testified under circumstances like these before... nor do I believe that anybody else... he's kind of right 19:25:10 as it relates to this... refer to next page of opinion... quote additional cases... give you quote from case, nothing in daubert or rules to include from expert... what's going on here... gap between data of 911 call and animation... gap between testimony 19:26:06 WHAT WOULD BE DIFFERENCE IF SHOEMAKER CAME OFF STAND AND DID DRAWING OF WHAT HE CONSIDERED TO BE CRIME SCENE, COMPUTER IS ASSISTING THE DRAWING 19:26:33 this witness couldn't draw a correlation between 911 calls and the animation. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT COMPUTER PROGRAM AND SOFTWARE... NOT NECESSARILY FALLS WITHIN DAUBERT TEST... COULD MAKE THOSE DRAWINGS... ISSUE OF RELATING 911 CALL TO ANIMATION IS DIFFERENT ARGUMENT, WHAT WOULD PREVENT HAVING DEFENSE TESTIFY TO CRIME SCENE AND DRAW ON EASEL BOARD AT SAME TIME AS PLAYING TO 911 CALL 19:27:40 wouldn't have to worry about whether the drawing is purported to be accurate... this animation is substitutive evidence, not just demonstrative 19:28:07 IF COURT ALLOWED AS DEMONSTRATIVE, SAME ARGUMENT? same from different point of view.. .much higher for submitting as actual exhibit, still objecting for some of the same reason 19:28:31 OBJECTING FOR DAUBERT IF DEMONSTRATIVE? probably not.. only applies if it's going to be given to the jury.... testified to as demonstrative, witness that would do that has already testified and done it... he testified clearly on opinions to body without referencing that... other witnesses didn't need it 19:29:25 if counsel wanted to use something like this in closing argument, but as demonstrative.... is it necessary for witness to explain opinion, only ones who would need it already testified 19:29:56 his own testimony is only function told my lawyers... nothing required for witness testimony to be explained by this.... not the purpose of demonstrative exhibit... demonstrative aid meaning what, as closing argument aid... that's different... as expert using it I do have concerns with that, some daubert related.... GO AHEAD 19:30:56 no testimony offered or presented so far as would be the defenses burden for error, maintenance of standards... use for the movies.. this is a murder trial, not Casablanca.... not iron man... it's one thing to say I'm going to strap suits and create fiction... than to create fiction and say its reality 19:31:55 nothing submitted as it relates to satisfying that... further ill continue onto the court's opinion.... under head not 8... begin quoting another case...... reliability of experts method must be for specific facts at issue not general theories.................. still accurately depicts how the object behaves 19:33:15 beginning of his video.. evidence in testimony is martin is right handed, witness think he's left handed.... idea you assume based upon location on injury and body, struck by certain thing.. invalid... it is not hard for a right handed person to punch someone on the left side of their nose.... to sit here and say a punch with left hand... expert opinion without evidence is what they're talking about without validation 19:34:26 NOT A METHOD ISSUE, FACT ISSUE... INPUTTING FACTS INTO THE COMPUTER. and creating a result from those facts... COMPUTER WILL DO WHAT YOU TELL IT DO .... 19:34:56 if your method is to make assumptions not warranted by evidence. THATS THE COMPUTER......... large problem here as well 19:35:17 page 8... peer review, no testimony... error rate... no testimony, nothing involved in this case 19:35:35 page 13, reliability and relevance... talking about particular expert, that expert reiterates..... expert testimony should not........ that is again really what this is... attempt to have an expert in graphic design come in here and advance arguments presented by defense.... or from 20 minute phone call.... testimony today is not what witness expected it to be 19:36:50 experts reiterate arguments, positions, space... those are arguments no eye witness testimony... arguments advanced by council.... question for lay people on this jury, not product of expert testimony 19:37:37 move to third case... DA opinion from Louisiana... cases that discuss factors we have here.... page 5 of the copy demonstration videos.... talking about experts who went out and conducted filmed experiment and tried to match it closely.... further down the line, court concludes it will lead and confuse the jury.... 19:39:08 idea you don't have to be exact is correct... contemporaneous movie made, nothing advanced as demonstrative aid... that's not really the standard if what you got is not accurate enough.... not enough to say I'm in the vicinity, in proximity.. they are figures in this case, their hips and length of space between them... intentional assumptions and placed in animation.. done with purpose... not based on testimony... arguments as evidence 19:40:18 next case is salvatore case... page 5 of that opinion... talking about attempted video accident reconstruction, witness themselves.... note 7.... no engineer in engineering, not qualified 19:41:07 heard this witness has testified as accident reconstructions, actual reconstructions within crime scene are two very different things... when this witness has testified before, analyze bullet trajectories... not I put people on positions based on other witnesses 19:41:56 down to bottom, higher threshold for admissibility to recreate accident... expert opinion referenced in videos are not shoemakers.. only dr. di maio who didn't need it, reference it... testified without it 19:42:33 demonstrative evidence.... courts generally require proponent to establish similar conditions... does not appear to recreate accident..... this is being purported to be a crime scene or events taking place.. higher standard applies 19:43:17 lighting... start with the more obvious depiction of visuals from another witness who described general theory 19:43:42 that's not substantial similarity with actual conditions... idea that we have no idea how we get from the T doesn't explain that this is substantial similar condition... says I don't know 19:44:16 even as it relates to di maios testimony, his opinion was at the moment of gunshot he believed defendants statement was consistent with the evidence, not that it is how it happened or only way it could happen... just consistent 19:44:54 shoemaker is taking di maio's statement to him about the statement defendant he didn't use in connection to position 3 at all... only used defendants testimony to the first punch... that's his testimony 19:45:25 not the standard for admissibility 19:45:32 further and I think as it relates to daubert, if evidence admitted as substantive or demonstrative... court should fashion significant admonishment to jury along the lines of this is not a pretended to be depiction of events.. just scenario... not just how it happened, nor should they be confused by any indication 19:46:33 just stills by shoemaker showing location of physical evidence without figures.... no problem... add figures and depict things that are unknown.... hips in certain position because of his common sense without evidence. THATS WHERE, OMARA THE PURPOSE OF THE INTRODUCTION OF THIS ANIMATION... I DONT SEE WHERE ITS ASSISTING AN EXPERT IN TESTIFYING. omara: animation itself, just as state took distillation in a format... that's what this is, substantive evidence and puts together in a way that helps jury... Zimmerman, rao testimony in context rather than the timeline... YOUR ANIMATION IS MORE THAN A TIMELINE..... ITS DEPICTING POSITIONS BASED UPON.... john good's testimony.... in effect, compare to one of the witnesses mounting me, was that how martin mounted, no but it's an example... moras prance around court room...NOT TAKING THAT BACK INTO JURY ROOM TO PLAY OVER AND OVER AGAIN AS TO A RECREATION.... do have states compound exhibit..... taking distilled down... DID NOT INTERJECT ANIMATION FIGURES INTO THAT TIMELINE AS TO WHAT WAS HAPPENING WITH TWO INDIVIDUALS IN THOSE CALLS 19:50:03 ANIMATIONS DEPICTING MORE THAN THAT... BASED ON SHOEMAKERS COMMON SENSE, BASED ON ASSUMPTION THAT HE HIT ZIMMERMAN WITH LEFT HAND, BASED ON PHONE CALL WITH DI MAIO THAT WAS NO HIS TESTIMONY IN COURT.... DI MAIO TESTIFIED THAT MARTINS POSITION COULD'VE BEEN AT DIFFERENT ANGLES.... SO I NEED YOU TO RESPOND TO THAT 19:50:56 could've been pulled him back and he said the shirt wouldn't line up... RIONDA ASKED HIM GIVEN FACT THAT MARTINS HOODY WAS WET AND HAD A FULL CAN OF IN HIS POCKET MAY DETERMINE POSITION OF HIS BODY... his response said it had to be pulled away 2-4 inches.... could've been backing away and grabbed him and shot him.. he said it would pull to one side and holes wouldn't match up any more...only one scenario.... to answer your question, I would suggest a minimum demonstrative tool for me to show evidence.... that's a given that I could use in demonstrative evidence in this argument, substantive evidence is a distillation of known facts..... he can contest its left hand shot, doesn't mean... they could've brought in an animation..... her testimony was her presentation... 19:53:24 THAT DOESN'T GO BACK TO JURY ROOM TO PLAY OVER AND OVER AGAIN.. THATS WHAT I GRAPPLE WITH... WHATEVER WITNESSED TESTIFIED TO AND INSTRUCTION TO BELIEVABILITY AND THEY DISCUSS THAT, BUT AN ANIMATION THAT GOES BACK THAT THEY PLAY OVER AND OVER AGAIN.... GIVES WEIGHT TO SOMETHING THIS COURT IS NOT SURE COMPORTS WITH EVIDENCE PRESENTED IN TRIAL 19:54:16 proper distillation of evidence.... CASE LAW TO PROVIDE ME? no... rely on pierce.... cite back to courts presented by state, once determined its similar to evidence presented it is admissible 19:54:53 BOTH SIDES AGREEING PIERCE IS ONLY CASE IN FLORIDA AS IT RELATES TO COMPUTER ANIMATION. mantei: I gave another, pierce is only criminal 19:55:21 WHEN I LOOK AT PIERCE CASE... DEMONSTRATIVE CASE FOR EXPERTS OPINION... RULED AS DEMONSTRATIVE ONLY, DID IN THAT CASE.... THEY CITED TO... WHEN RESULTS USEFUL ACCEPTED WHEN CONFUSING SHOULD BE REJECTED 19:56:17 THAT THE PRESENTATION BE RELEVANT, AND REFLECT ORAL TESTIMONY OFFERED.... 19:56:32 ANY OTHER CASES... ILL READ YOUR CASES... NO OTHER BY THE DEFENSE, I UNDERSTAND BOTH ARGUMENTS.... 19:56:56 mantei: shoemaker didn't go over that..... can't compare this to the timeline... the timeline actually testified to a witness... underlying data are likewise in evidence... none of underlying data that shoemaker relies on is in front of this jury other than 911 call 19:57:50 the map of crime scene isn't what he's testifying, it's the figures and their movement... as far as the pullback... di maios testimony could've been in a different position he said was absolutely possible 19:58:40 the pierce case makes pretty clear detective badcock would be equivalent of di maio, necessary for his interpretation... not shoemaker.. if there was any witness who could use this as demonstrative was di maio and he didn't need it 19:59:29 closing remark of that... court can't use discretion to decide and nevertheless admit the evidence... has to be accurate, not precise... but accurate.... calls made to him, police report, testimony from those who have not testified... built into animation, hasn't heard a word of court testimony... everything he's got has been filtered through arguments 20:00:35 LIGHTS AUTOMATICALLY GO OUT AT A CERTAIN TIME, IS THERE A WAY WE CAN GET THEM BACK ON..... 20:00:56 I'M GOING TO RESERVE RULING ON THIS, LET YOU KNOW WHEN WE RECONVENE... PROFFERING OF CONNOR TESTIMONY..... IF HE TESTIFIES TO WHAT WAS FOUND ON MARTINS PHONE I CAN JUST LOOK AT WHAT YOURE LOOKING WITHOUT HAVING TO PROFFER... THAT WHAT HES GOING TO BE CALLED FOR? TEXT MESSAGES, VIDEOS OR PICTURES OFF OF MARTINS PHONE. omara: correct. DONT NEED TO HEAR PROFFER TESTIMONY, JUST SEE THE PICTURES. west: need proffer. NO JUST A PROFFER OF PICTURES YOUR SEEKING 20:02:12 for him to say how he found the information. JUST WHAT HE FOUND ON THE PHONE, HOW HE FOUND IT IS NOT RELEVANT... TRYING TO INTRODUCE PHOTOS, EMAILS OR TEXTS THATS WHAT I NEED TO LOOK AT.... WHAT ARE YOU SEEKING TO INTRODUCE BY WAY OF EVIDENCE THROUGH CONNOR. I can outline it... WELL YOU HAVE IT IN YOUR HAND ID LIKE TO SEE IT... 20:03:05 several pieces of information obtained from his phone... issue is ongoing because of the discovery... report from state on June 4th... still trying to process that... information provided in discovery in late February, Connor able to do some of the extracting... two main issues.... several conversations by martin attempting to require firearm. AUDIO OR WRITTEN? text messages 20:04:10 IF ITS VERBAL VOICE THAT MAY NOT BE AUTHENTICATION ISSUE, IF TEXT MESSAGE IT IS AUTHENTICATION. I need Connor to talk about authentication 20:04:33 the fighting issue... martins text messages of being in fight, effects of being in fight, lost first, won second and third wasn't done with him yet... confirming he was in the fight and explaining he got more hits in the first round cause he had me on the ground and I couldn't do anything... Facebook post from martin's half-brother Demetrius asking trayvon when you gonna teach me how to fight 20:05:34 first text I was paraphrasing, levandria... in a hidden file in martins phone... password accessible only in addition to password required... second level of access 20:06:07 one came from hidden texts, one was hidden facebook post, and another from cellbrite extraction report from michael french... offer his testimony to explain his access to phone to show only martin could have created the texts or engaged.... 20:06:46 OK STATE? 20:06:51 MARK AS COMPOSITE NN FOR IDENTIFICATION............................ 20:07:31 west: also can authenticate another way if court wants me to proffer that as well. PLEASE. 20:09:01 DID YOU HAVE SOME OTHERS, CONNOR CV MARKED AS OO, WAS NN THE THREE SHEETS YOU WANT INTRODUCED FOR CONNOR. that's what relates to the fighting and then other exhibits that relate to the gun... I'd like to deal with fighting issue... that's the crux of this, let me assemble the other material on the gun... consists of pictures from his phone taken by that phone show a hand wrapped around a firearm, provide that... series of conversations that occur around Feb. 18th just before coming to Sanford where he has several conversations about acquiring firearm 20:10:26 MR GUY ADDRESS NN? west: I can provide him another copy, he has this information, we got it from him... 20:10:56 guy: right back where we started.... if they don't know each other, inadmissible... no idea who this person is, not reputation evidence.... furthermore in addition to authentication issue how do we know what they're talking about, verbal or slap fight... 20:11:48 it would do nothing to aid this jury, doesn't tell us about martin, not about what Zimmerman knew of martin... not evidence they knew each other... specific evidence is inadmissible.... 20:12:25 guy: its inadmissible as to who sent it, what it's about... no context to them, pulled out at certain times, no conversations surrounding them... misleading and shouldn't be allowed... provided court case to you 20:13:09 that's all I have regarding text.... 20:13:15 FURTHER ARGUMENT FOR TEXT? yes... I have substantial argument... proffer Connors testimony. AS LONG AS I DONT GO INTO LONG PROFFER ABOUT HIS QUALIFICATIONS AND BACKGROUND, KEEP IT TO JUST TO WHERE HE FOUND THIS FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE PROFFER, LIMIT TO THAT I WILL ALLOW 20:14:00 also and we can ask Connor to testify, his qualifications are important... I HAVE THAT IN A CV...HE GOT FROM A PLACE THAT WAS SECOND LEVEL ACCESS, WHAT THE COURT MEANS BY THAT I WILL HEAR THAT PROFFER... DONT NEED TO GO INTO QUALIFICATIONS.... 20:14:38 other issue to point out is that guys argument completely misses the point... not reputation evidence... directly relates to the physical abilities.... his knowledge of fighting, participated in fight, knew what it's like to be on the bottom... NOT GOING TO TESTIFY WHATS INTENDED BY THIS, JUST THAT HE FOUND IT... guys argument is misleading and to its admissibility of it legally. HEAR THE LIMITED PROFFER FROM CONNOR, NOT THE ARGUMENTS.... GET MR CONNOR IN HERE AND TAKE A STEP AT A TIME..... 20:16:40 relates to gun matters as well... THAT'LL BE PP 20:16:46 (sworn in) 20:17:44 west: another exhibit I'll ask him to speak with briefly as well.. photos that were found on the phone... ALRIGHT DEFENSE COMPOSITE QQ 20:18:43 west: evening. name? richard Connor... 20:18:59 prior to you taking the stand, we marked a copy of your CV... admitted into evidence? would I so move? PROFFER... save time for court to review it... ILL REVIEW AS COMPOSITE, MARKED AS EVIDENCE IT GOES BACK TO JURY, HAVEN'T MADE DETERMINATION IF HES GOING TO TESTIFY.... admitted for this proffer... THAN NOT MARKED AS DOUBLE N... MARKED AS 1 FOR THIS HEARING... I have another copy, suggesting that jury doesn't get for identification.... ILL HAVE TO REMARK UNLESS YOU HAVE ANOTHER ONE... I can retrieve that one and substitute another.... CLERK CAN MARK THAT AS 1 FOR THIS PROFFER 20:20:48 does your CV describe your background and training in computer forensics? yes 20:21:08 training in computer examiner and computer analysis, licensed attorney? yes 20:21:20 testified as expert? yes... 20:21:33 are some of those set out in CV? yes 20:21:42 are you certified by cellbrite? yes. I went to their training 20:21:55 familiar with most recent software program is for cell phone analysis? yes. licensed copy for private sector? yes 20:22:14 use that software to analyze martins phone? yes 20:22:25 at some point in the discovery process did you receive what's been known as bin file? several bin files... 20:22:43 one you received in late February, represented to be data dump? yes I believe Feb. 23rd 20:22:57 opportunity to use you cell brite software and offers available to analyze data? yes 20:23:20 able to ID texts, facebook messages that were hidden from phone? yes 20:23:32 describe what your process was so far as cell bright technology? when you load the data into cell brite physical software, runs scripts and analyzes that... contact list and text messages, emails, pictures, videos.... songs and music... analyzed data section of the report 20:24:23 did you.... when you began process, opportunity to look at report that FDLE had done? yes. 20:24:41 when you did own analysis, indicate there may be additional information? yes 20:24:54 what did you do then with the bin file and other resources to try to capture or identify information? report is only what cell bright reads... bin file is the physical image of phones data... all data and files and free space... loaded into software and examine any file that's from the phone whether or not cellbrite able to analyze it 20:25:49 something that struck you when analyzing bin file and report? yes. one of the first things I did with the report... for each section it lists how many items are there, loaded it into cell bright to see if they matches... off by about 600 pictures... I had 600 more than FDLE report did 20:26:34 additional information not part of the report? yes. what did you do to find them? figure out which were different and if located in same areas 20:26:56 comparing FDLE report with preliminary cellbrite? correct. did it include updated report to the previously provided? at some point there was a second report... late February early march... different than first one, contain the 600 photos? no 20:27:46 have additional data you were able to find? yes. when? first week of June 20:27:55 next time that report was updated? yes 20:28:02 talk about what you did then to identify data that was on the phone.... able to extract additional information by own application? talking in general or pictures..... 20:28:24 however you choose, once you realize more data than in the report, what did you do to try and find it? a couple things... keyword searches.... against bin files... look through report, list the databases on the phone to see what app they belonged to 20:29:06 able to identify additional photos? yes. photos include pictures of hand gun? yes. hand wrapped around grip? yes 20:29:26 able to determine if the pictures were taken by that phone? yes. were they? yes they were. 20:30:06 this is more than just pictures, generally describe what that exhibit consists of? there are several text message exchanges where martin was trying to purchase or sell hand gun... two separate pictures, hand gun on table or something and another where it's in somebody's hand 20:30:48 able to find text on the phone? yes. were some deleted? yes. able to recover deleted texts? marked as deleted but data still on the phone 20:31:16 another version still on phone intact 20:31:23 picture on phone and want to delete it, purposeful? Objection! Speculation! SUSTAINED 20:31:38 something by accident or as result of the phone... require the operator to do something? usually yes... explain? normally pictures will stay on device until deleted or removed.. text messages depends on the phone will often stay on device until deleted or removed... device goes bad and memory card goes bad... usually user initiated 20:32:31 determine as expert whether this was user accident or not? yes. were some deleted and scattered within others that weren't? correct 20:32:54 your opinion these deleted messages were act of person on the phone? Objection! Speculation! SUSTAINED. COULD BE DELETED BY ANYBODY 20:33:19 asking if deleted by action someone took? yes. deleted by someone on purpose? yes 20:33:45 were you able to determine if the phone had passcode? yes. did it? yes. what does that mean? cant access data unless you know the passcode... if you don't can you operate phone? emergency call but not anything else 20:34:22 passcode has to be re-entered? may be 10 minutes and increase each time you put in wrong passcode 20:34:43 put in right passcode, put phone down and is idled after several minutes have to reenter code? yes. any reason that's not the case? I believe it did have time-out period 20:35:16 didn't have a time-out, only enter passcode once and it would remain open forever? until manually locked or restarted... defeat purpose of passcode? yes 20:35:38 that set of texts that relate to purchasing firearm? 20:35:51 identifiers on these texts who sent them and whether or not to trayvon or by trayvon? state which folder they are in, whether incoming or outgoing, date and time, status of message if read or sent... content of message and the status of message 20:36:35 indicated on extraction reports? yes 20:36:40 conversation between martins phone and fulton about revolver? yes... clustered in date? yes. when? between February 18th and 22nd 2012... how many separate collections? several, 1, 2, 3, 4... at least 4... 20:37:39 with different people? yes. identify who they are from the phone? yes... qua fulton, two others involved in addition to martin- spoonhead zack and jay, another set of conversations with another person named ron, person named dario and another about a gun with diamond... that's it... and conversation with fruit 20:38:45 all between February 18th and 22nd 2012? yes 20:38:54 were there some texts on the phone where martin was talking about coming to Sanford? yes. when he was coming to Sanford based on those? Feb. 20-21st 20:39:15 he was killed on Feb. 26th? correct 20:39:26 marked defendants QQ for proffer...... based upon information you retrieved? yes... appears to be of martin, resided on the cell phone. self-taken picture? yes. 20:40:02 taken with that same phone you analyzed? not sure... no meta data that identifies if photo was taken with camera on that phone 20:40:29 within picture file is data about the picture.... make and model of camera, date and time, gps coordinates... meta date 20:40:48 able from that data to learn more about the circumstances and device it was taken? where it exists yes... appears to be martin based on other photos you've seen? yes 20:41:26 were you also able to extract a series of text messages and other postings that relate to martin being in a fight? yes. how able to recover data that related to that? there was data on the phone, not parced or analyzed by cell bright software... when I went and manually looked at database, contained text messages... looked at database associated.... created by android app, super android spc I think.... designed to hide text messages 20:42:39 texts that were subject to his application were not put into main database, placed into another one only accessible to super android application, not parced by cell bright 20:43:12 how did that get your attention? there were a couple things.. don't remember exact order, running key word searches getting hits what looked like text messages not in parced text messages... the spc database was listed in databases, but no parced data in report....got to look at it and it contained texts 20:44:17 something you were piecing together more on phone than what was provided? yes... keep in mind, originally got data certain things I was asked to look at.... this was one of them 20:44:45 something else going on, hidden app... familiar with existence of those? yes I knew those apps existed 20:44:59 what did you do to find that app on this phone? probably describe what I mean by hidden, hidden by user of the phone unless you know the app and the code... have to pull up app put in passcode and view those text messages... hidden from user unless you know how to get them.... not hidden once I get them.... access and view database I can see the data in full text 20:45:57 passcode necessary to unlock the phone and a second to enter in this application? correct. 20:46:13 in order to get access to texts, need to know both passcodes? Objection! Leading! SUSTAINED... leeway to stay on track? ill rephrase 20:46:37 how many passcodes would it take to get access if someone handed the phone? at least 2. 20:47:16 maybe get lucky finding the app 20:47:24 have to figure out the first passcode and then another hidden app that had text messages and the passcode for that application? yes. able to send and receive texts? yes able to see texts hidden by that application and respond 20:48:02 gotten through those levels they could respond to the messages? yes, have access to the users would have 20:48:21 looking at context in regular texting and hiding files, consider whether someone else was using this phone to send and delete messages? that's always something we look for an keep in back of our mind, something I took into consideration 20:48:57 texts relating to gun and fighting, contained within larger conversation with same person? yes 20:49:11 appear to indicate relationship between that person and martin? yes 20:49:22 I'm losing track of my thinking here.... but were you able to collect the various texts from whatever source related to firearms and assemble them in exhibit before you? yes that's what I did 20:49:55 marked as NN..... 20:50:16 familiar with exhibit? yes. what is it? composite of data relating to fights 20:50:26 did all of that come from martins phone? yes. extract in some fashion or another? yes 20:50:36 mentioned earlier there was database accessible to hidden app as opposed through cell bright? accessing by user or by me... user has to go through special app and special password... cellbrite doesn't parce or analyze, but it's there and I can analyze and view it 20:51:15 looking at first page of NN, the header at the top has identifier as SPC log sorted by person......? I created this spread sheet comes off the phone.... a database in this case... consists of several tables, log table.... log of text messages, several other tables... contact or name table have the names of the persons he was texting.... in this is presented to me in cell brite software in a table.. use that for spread sheet, what I did.... 20:52:39 table in database, log table and excel extension of the file 20:52:53 longer conversation with lavandria, extract conversation about fight? yes... other messages going back and forth, extracting these specifically because they related to a fight... show number of levandria? yes. this from martins phone? yes. which of the two sent and which received? yes 20:53:37 able to identify date and time these messages were sent? yes 20:53:56 what is the first line in your exhibit? wyd? which is what you doing 20:54:29 who sent that? levandria. did martin responded? tired and sore. 20:54:39 response? me too but what happened to you. 20:54:55 when levandria said that what did martin say? fight. y?! cuz man that nigga snitched on me. she said? they y u always fightin u got suspended... he said? nah we ducked after school 20:55:42 response? I lost first round :( but won second and third. 20:55:55 and then repeat that with a different smile face? I lost first, but won the second and third. oh so it was three rounds? at least you won, but you need a stop fighting bay for real 20:56:39 did he respond? yes. what did he say? nah I'm not done with fool gonna have to see me again. what did she say? nah bay you aint gonna be satisfied until you get suspended... didn't breed enough for me, only nose 20:57:26 objection! SUSTAIN. seen typos before in phone analysis? the word breed does not make sense and is not intended... bleed... 20:57:52 ask to be stricken! west: this is a proffer unless the court hasn't ruled... RULED ON OBJECTION TO SPECULATION, WHATS WRITTEN THERE IS WRITTEN THERE... WHAT HE BELIEVES MAY MAKE SENSE, BUT MAYBE NOT THE AUTHOR OF IT 20:58:27 in your training and experience, occasion to try to make sense out of text messages or computer messages that weren't accurate from spelling? Objection! Relevance! OVERRULED.... yes 20:59:02 in context of this text sequence as you try to sort data, does the word breed as opposed to bleed make sense? put in context with the rest of the message, not enough and only nose... I think talking about bleeding from nose. Objection! Speculation! SUSTAINED 20:59:55 were you able to find another conversation around that time that referenced that fight? yes. to whom? michael suave french. do you know that person from information on the phone? yes 21:00:31 what is the conversation martin and french had? martin said yeah cause he got more hits, had me on ground and I couldn't do nothing... he responded dang bro 21:01:07 also find reference to fighting by relative? yes. who? demetrius martin... where was that located or posted? on phone in facebook database... FB.DB... inside database there are different tables... in mailbox thread table in the database of the phone... what did the message say? from demetrius, when you gonna teach me how to fight 21:02:15 other information his relationship with martin? some kind of brother, half-brother... sharing some father... what makes you think that? another message from demetrius asking trayvon if dad had a facebook page 21:02:54 based upon context they were talking about common parent? yes 21:03:16 other references to fighting or questions... other discussions in the context of your review of text messages where they discussed fighting? yes.. didn't extract those because you didn't find related to event? correct or because I could not put in date time or who sent them 21:03:56 I would move the marked exhibits into evidence. HAVE TO TAKE THEM OUT OF WHERE THEY'VE BEEN MARKED IN THE CASE.... NN AS 2, PP AS 3, AND QQ AS 4 TO THIS PROFFER 21:04:39 in summary Connor, identifying the difference places on the phone where you found information, overall scope reflected in reports..... 21:05:03 some information in report that you were able to verify in bin file? yes. additional info you were able to extract, not contained in any FDLE report prior to June 4th? correct. information in this file that you were able to extract from applications that were hidden? Object! Leading! Asked and Answered! JURYS NOT HERE, ITS FINE 21:05:55 had to download software and review what was otherwise not visible? no it was not parced or analyzed by cell bright, manually identify it wasn't on the phone.. access to data.... 21:06:26 some of that report is reflected in pages before you? correct. as well as information extracted from it? correct... and from bin file? yes. picture of martin, profile picture and picture of hand gun with the hand? yes 21:06:59 were the pictures of the hand gun with the hand taken by his phone? yes they were CROSS 21:07:28 mantei: when did you notify defense council about additional information? soon after I found it... late februaryish? or early march 21:07:53 aware of who's name the phone was in? the mother's maybe.... 21:08:04 not trayvon martins? his name was not on bill or account 21:08:12 this was a phone on family account, one of several? correct. 21:08:20 can you tell me... referenced this discussion over a gun.... buy or sell? no the different conversations I identified.. in each of them or most of them martin was looking to purchase.. in one there was a discussion about someone else's gun and in last one someone was trying to buy one from martin. a 22? several different calibers. obviously none he had on him? that's what I've heard 21:09:18 as far as this discussions about fighting... in any of them is...... in any of discussions, who was operating keypad? I was not there when messages were not there, however when you view 8000 or 9000 texts on a phone, get a flavor or cadence for the people.... I think I can get a pretty good idea whether it's the same person or not 21:10:16 long way you would like to think so but can't tell me for sure? all appear to be by the same person 21:10:31 profile picture... 3 separate dates...? no that's the data from the phone, on their 3 times... all created on 11-15 2011? probably yes 21:10:52 same picture just repeated? correct 21:11:00 profile picture nothing to do with hands and guns, just torso and face shot? correct 21:11:13 not posted in connection with either frights or guns? posted in terms of text messages correct 21:11:28 deletion can be accomplished by anyone who knew the phone and codes? yes. not there to tell me who did any of that? I was not there when.... 21:11:55 when were they accomplished, in mass or little by little? I can't tell that 21:12:05 hypothetical, if a person parent or sibling had discovered stuff in phone and deleted it, couldn't tell me if done all at once or deleted as he went along? I can give you my opinion 21:12:41 there's nothing in the data that tells when a text was deleted, but certain ones are and certain ones aren't... look for patterns. when it was done you can't tell me? correct. and by whom, I know you have a suspicion? I wasn't there when it was deleted 21:13:16 material in the phone, any reason to suspect Zimmerman knew about it? I don't know... no communications to anyone called Zimmerman? no REDIRECT 21:13:42 mass deletion of texts, were texts deleted related to certain subjects? and people.... texts from certain people were deleted... 21:14:01 texts about drugs and drug use? yes. about the guns? yes 21:14:13 anything that would indicate to you someone other than martin got a hold of this phone and deleted messages at once? no. 21:14:29 images of porn on phone that were not deleted? Object! Beyond Scope SUSTAINED 21:14:47 I submit if some family member got a hold of phone they wouldn't have left porn on it... mantei: doesn't have to do with scope of proffer.. 21:15:17 explain that? pictures of the gun were hidden also on the phone by a separate application, created a folder in a program file with french language... renamed extension... jpg.... also changed extension from .jpg to .dpm.... this app moved them and hid them and was password protected, not deleted off the phone..... whoever using phone would have to have the code and get to the items 21:16:43 separate hidden applications? yes. there were 2 hidden apps? yes. 21:16:54 texts in one and pictures of gun in another? yes 21:17:03 casual user wouldn't see those pictures unless they knew how to access? exactly 21:17:17 not appear to be a picture? correct, just browsing content.. they'd be bin files not picture files 21:17:33 MAY HE BE EXCUSED? yes. THANK YOU, YOU'RE EXCUSED 21:17:51 TESTIMONIES BEEN PROFFERED, I'LL HEAR ARGUMENTS 21:18:00 west: additional evidence to proffer..... Rachel jeantel was also deposed over two days.... while she had denied martin talked with her about fighting in deposition in April she acknowledged conversation with martin that he told her he was in a fight and told her he knew how to fight and was in one that he won... only renew acquaintance with him after a number of years.... conversation of fights took place in weeks prior to martin traveling to Sanford 21:19:27 closes loop on authentication. PROFER FOR PURPOSE OF CONNORS TESTIMONY OR ANOTHER ISSUED IN FRONT OF JURY.... court already raised question of authentication. IS IT FOR PURPOSES OF THIS HEARING OR THE TRIAL? no for this 21:22:11 DEFENDANTS EXHIBIT #5 FOR PURPOSES OF THIS HEARING... #5 is transcript? YES... I HAVE OTHER EXHIBITS HERE, NOT MARKED BY LISA... READY FOR ARGUMENT 21:22:54 west: before I forget, Zimmerman has 10:00 curfew? EXTENDED FOR 30 MINUTES AFTER COURT IS CONCLUDED 21:23:14 argument part of this... asking Connor be allowed to testify for the fighting and the gun and discussions of the gun... I'm not ready tonight to make argument why gun I DONT HAVE THE GUN, THREE PICTURES OF THE PROFILE OF MARTIN.. exhibit marked with discussion of gun. RIGHT BUT I DONT HAVE THE PICTURES OF THE GUN... ONLY PARTS OF THIS EXHIBIT, NO GUN... does the court have exhibit referencing the gun? 21:24:37 EXHIBIT #3 IS EXTRACTION REPORT.... OH YES HERE IS IT, WELL LETS SEE IF PICTURES ARE ATTACHED... HERE THEY ARE 21:25:06 I don't want to address that tonight, hour is late... not saying Connor can testify to the gun and texts... not directly related to facts of the case, more aggressive.. supporting violent tendency... WHAT EVIDENCE CODE ARE YOU SEEKING? most squarely admissible under, well no.. different depending on what parts of exhibit... picture of martin is predicate to martin on his phone... shows his physique... gun pictures and discussion of buying gun is not directly related to the fighting issue... that central core... two legal grounds 90.803... exception to the hearsay prohibition against hearsay....relates to physical condition 21:27:00 in primary text with levandria, martin asked how he's doing and he's tired and sore... fight he was in and he won.. WHAT EVIDENCE CODE? 90.803. text messages regarding fighting 90.803... and also under legal authority chambers vs. Mississippi... not the firearm pictures yet, not connected yet with evidence before the jury 21:27:57 concentrate on fighting and its admissible under several theories, not as reputation theory but under 90.803... reflecting physical condition.... at the time martin was in the fight and explains how he won the fight... losing first round because opponent was on top of him much like testimony he rendered Zimmerman in this case. SEEKING UNDER 90.803, SUB 3? yes.. OK GO AHEAD 21:29:02 talks about having been involved in orchestrated fight... 3 rounds.... talks about how he won second and third and won the fight... also able to hit in the nose and make them bleed, not satisfied with amount of blood... not done yet with this guy... cautioned he should quit doing this 21:29:55 corroborated by conversation with michael french about this event.... we know those are connected in time and content... helping toward authentication that those were his words he communicated with people regularly 21:30:30 conversations with them on other subjects 21:30:40 also a facebook post by martins younger brother demetrius, martin has several children.... one is 2-3 years younger is demetrius martin 21:31:08 we have more loop being closed... demetrius asked trayvon when he was going to teach him how to fight... though he knew how to fight enough to ask for his training 21:31:31 jeantel deposition, told her he had been in a fight... had won the fight, know that from jeantel who knows his voice and personally and testified it was martin who told her about a fight he won 21:31:57 strong circumstantial evidence if not clear evidence... his words being sent to his friends about a fight he was proud he won, draw blood from man's noise and prevail despite difficult first round 21:32:27 connected don'ts on authenticating this.... relevant because physical abilities is relevant... jury instruction says that... this jury decide his physical capabilities and knowledge.. experience in fights having been put in position of vulnerability... in that fight, orchestrated 3 round fight.... when he lost the first round and he couldn't get up there was other rounds...... 21:33:40 been in fight, knew how to fight... knew what Zimmerman would experience when he was on top of him because similar to past 21:33:55 relevant because state took efforts to make that relevant for Zimmerman... physician's assistant folgate.... when Zimmerman spoke with her about his exercise regimen... worked out aerobically with MMA... big deal of that... experience as MMA based upon medical errors from Altamonte physician... relevant in states case, likewise in our case... jury makes that decision 21:34:59 because I think this information shows existence of martins mental state after this event occurred.... tired and sore admissible under 90.803 at time of event... not suggesting that statement was him talking about Feb. 2012, but his thinking and emotional condition at this time 21:35:47 clearly compelling evidence in support of Zimmerman's self-defense claim... testimony is martin sucker punched him... able to get him onto ground where he was mounted... know from testimony, mounting is straddling around hips, vulnerable position... limited acts one can do unless skilled to get out from under it.... know good said he saw martin mounted MMA style... know from physical evidence frankly especially testimony corroborates that... shot was fired from ground up... corroborates and is consistent with what good observed when he went out to investigate... compelling evidence and highly relevant and admissible under 90.803 21:37:32 also relevant because not to admit it would violate articles and 5th 6th amendments... confront witnesses and due process 21:38:07 this theory, constitutional principle of preservation is discussed in chambers vs. miss..... what's to be taken from that decision, states hearsay rules can't be mechanistically applied to deny an accused right to mount the defense... any rule of exclusion would be a mechanistic application of that rule.... prohibits especially under circumstances where the evidence is reliable.... his phone and words in context to other individual conversations... skill in fighting, able to injure person, not done with him yet... consistent with Feb. 26th when Zimmerman screaming for help but martin not done with him yet 21:39:53 indeed closed the loop with jeantels deposition..... talking with her about winning a fight and knowing how to fight 21:40:12 not something that isn't authenticated and isn't reliable... not just someone else typing this out, can't be the case now that you've heard context of these text messages... highly probable value of residence...default should be Zimmerman to present defense... urge court to allow Connor to testify 21:41:04 guy: he's made my point, orchestrated fight, how many rounds... someone's mounted another person... not in here... why this evidence shouldn't be before jury.... told a story that is not in these messages on this phone... don't know what type of fight he's talking about 21:41:46 don't know if fight is code for something else 21:41:53 we don't know anything about if there was a fight... who is opponent was, Andre the giant or a little girl... that's why this shouldn't be admitted 21:42:14 doesn't even address authenticity issue... we don't know who typed messages, don't know how they're connected.... levandria and french were days apart.... jeantel was weeks later 21:42:50 authenticity issue of mental state... no indication of when these fights took place..... west: mantei did the cross and now guy is doing argument... guy: it's my issue, but Connor was mantei's witness... OKAY GO AHEAD 21:43:31 so again we've got authenticity issue, no definitiveness to when these occurred or what was meant by these words, are they code.... danger is that its orchestrated fight, mounting... none of that in here 21:44:11 any probative value is outweighed by effect of jury imagining what's meant and may have been from martin and may have been about a fight... court wants me to address about photo about firearm? ADDRESS AT LATER TIME... 21:44:48 photo appears to be martin.... offered for... best photo for jury to consider if the one taken on medical examiners photo... don't know if this photo was right after a workout and was pumped up 21:45:25 I see no probative value to the photo... already in evidence... moment...... 21:45:40 they relied on chambers vs. miss... don't think purpose of that is to irradiate evidence code to allow in items subject to speculation... ask court to continue to grant states motion and deny this motion 21:46:11 ANY FURTHER ARGUMENT? 21:46:18 west: content of messages.. they are what they are... jury see them and give whatever weight based on what they mean... authentication, this issue is a mess on the discovery of this issue... rionda stood before court and said we gave defense everything... that wasn't true.... we finally got the report from brenton on June 4th... still haven't had chance to go through it... there is ongoing discovery issue... guy stood there silently when rionda said we gave them everything... we know that's just not true 21:47:45 can't get through this issue with time table..., no authentication issue, does the court think there is one is from states misconduct... COMING FROM SAME PHONE.... we did not have ability to... we were misled, given...... GO AHEAD... given a report at the same time as bin file, report was misleading, not the same information state had at this time... HE FOUND 600 ADDITIONAL PHOTOS THE STATE DID NOT KNOW ABOUT.. that's not true... testimony before this court.... SIDE ISSUE, MY POINT BEING IF YOU HAD 5 YEARS TO LOOK AT BIN FILE, STILL COMING FROM SAME PHONE, CORRECT? yes, data set is the data set. 21:49:22 INFORMATION YOU ARE SEEKING NOW, I DO HAVE AUTHENTICATION ISSUE... 90.901.A MOST COMMON METHOD FOR ELECTRONIC RECORD IS TESTIMONY OF THE PERSON WHO CREATED IT.... FOOTNOTE #3 GRIFFIN VS STATE.... ELECTRONIC DOCUMENT, TEXT, FACEBOOK... DIRECT TESTIMONY OF THE AUTHOR THAT IDENTIFY THE AUTHOR... EMAIL MESSAGES MARKED, SENDER CELL PHONE AND USER NAME AND PROFILE PICTURE... COULD BE GENERATED BY THIRD PARTY, NOT EQUATED OTHERS........2011 CASE, EVIDENCE OF ELECTRONIC MEDIA THAT BARES AUTHORS NAME IS NOT SUFFICIENT ENOUGH.... 21:52:01 MY POINT BEING THAT WHAT HAS BEEN PRESENTED, EXHIBIT 2, AND EXHIBIT 3... HAS NOTHING IDENTIFYING MR. MARTIN... DOESN'T SAY HEY THIS IS TRAYVON... GOING ON TO LEVANDRIA, COMING BACK IN FROM LEVANDRIA... ANYONE COULD HAVE SENT THESE MESSAGES... PEOPLE HAVE CHILDREN THAT PICK UP PHONE AND PLAY WITH THEM... NO IDENTIFYING MARKS THESE ARE CREATED OR SENT BY MARTIN... CONCERN ABOUT THAT 21:53:10 had double level of security... ANY SEVEN YEAR OLD CAN FIGURE OUT A PASSCODE... fdle couldn't do it for almost a year....ANOTHER PERSON MAY KNOW THAT PERSON... FDLE DIDN'T KNOW THE PASSWORD... 21:53:50 all of it came off his phone, thousands of pictures and texts... no indication someone else was using his phone..... Manuel vs. state.... suggest when the state didn't give us the information timely... WHAT ON THESE TEXTS SAY THEY ARE CREATED BY MARTIN... would've had time to find the witnesses on the other end.... caught them doing it, get on June 4th.... judge.... we asked for time, asked to delay case few days... what could we have done to further the issue under circumstances state is proprietor... not fair Zimmerman can't put on defense... now it's our fault to deny Zimmerman this right violates the Florida and US constitution 21:56:01 guy: I would offer him the opportunity to apologize to me for accusing me of standing by while rionda stated... NOT DOING THIS.... 21:56:14 COURT IN RECESS, SEE YOU AT 8 IN THE MORNING 21:56:26 COURT IS IN RECESS... SEE YOU AT 8 IN THE MORNING... DONNELLEY WHO MAY HAVE VIOLATED SEQUESTRATION... SECOND TIME THAT I'VE HEARD A VIOLATION BY WITNESSES, DONT WANT TO TAKE THAT UP AT 9 AND HAVE JURY WAIT... RECESS UNTIL 8.... omara: not able to prepare and get my witnesses together. west: can't keep up with this pace.... weekends a tonight.... (judge walking out as west continues to talk) COURT IN RECESS UNTIL 8 AM ================================== George Zimmerman's defense attorneys are flying through their case, and could finish as early as today. They plan to drive home their view that Zimmerman acted in self-defense when he shot and killed 17 year-old Trayvon Martin. On Monday, Zimmerman's lawyers called a string of witnesses who all identified the screams heard during a 9-1-1 call as those of Zimmerman. They also called Trayvon Martin's father Tracy to the stand to respond to testimony from the lead detective that Martin initially said the voice screaming was not Trayvon's. Martin said he never said it wasn't his son, just that he couldn't tell. After repeatedly listening to it, he says he became certain that was the last words of his son before he was killed.
Sports: women’s football, women’s basketball, women’s volleyball and hockey (Angers/Belfast)
Atlantique
ZIMMERMAN TRIAL POOL 070913 P10 - PATCH OF GAP
INT BROLL GEORGE ZIMMERMAN TRAYVON MARTIN TRIAL / SWITCHED POOL FEED / NOTE - THIS IS THE LAST 20 MINUTES OF THE HEARING AND PATCHES THE GAP BETWEEN 19:50:00 AND 19:55:45 - FROM P9 / TIME CODES WILL NOT MATCH SINCE THIS IS A RE-FEED NOTE: Do not use any pictures of the Trayvon Martin gunshot wound shown during this morning's court testimony.It was from his autopsy and was inadvertently broadcast. Under FL law autopsy photos are exempt from public record We cannot show the picture when it was displayed or when it was in the hands of the witness KATIE HUBER LOG **NOTE: JUDGE'S COMMENTS IN CAPS **NAMES OF WITNESSES IN RED **VISUAL DESCRIPTIONS IN (PARENTHESES) **GOOD STATEMENTS/VIDEO BOLD 8:31:06 PLEASE BE SEATED. GOOD MORNING.... (defense team is not present) 8:31:37 ON THE RECORD.... STATE VS. ZIMMERMAN 8:31:56 omara: issue of the animation, deposition last night that focused the inquiry, state still has issues... not so much admissibility but applicability to the facts 8:32:19 mantei: supplemented original issue.... daubert issue and early concerns.... part 3 of the witnesses deposition... now done from states perspective, move from witness creating exhibit that represented physical evidence and police reports and witness statements... changes from animation taken to fit to theory who has yet to testify to it... now a daubert issue, simple representation and physical items to create an essentially animated picture or theory that di maio discussed with witness Saturday after shoemaker was deposed twice but before di maio's deposition 8:34:04 because of what came out in that deposition, expand hearing to include daubert hearing... daubert-Frye-pierce hearing, all issues need to be flushed out... filed supplemental motion accordingly... witness had other still-pictures and a computer diagram, haven't gotten those physical things from the witness..... apologize for telling the court we want what was said we didn't want yesterday, but given yesterday I believe it is 8:36:53 (judge nelson reading the motion) 8:39:10 DEFENSE RESPONSE? 8:39:17 omara: factual response first, concern evidence by the state addressed one fact issue that is undisputed... dr. shiping bao and our medical examiner expert... gunshot entered at 90 degree angle, closet to a straight through shot... no dispute as to that fact... the state's concern, attended to making of the animations.... well aware of deposed and given copies of.... added to that fact, the potential of the distance from gun to body.. only distance he would give was 0.4 to 4 ft. other witness says 2-4 inches 8:41:09 states concern with that, fine with not using that still... not part of the animation, use in closing as demonstrative... withdrawn to make sure that was clear 8:41:34 underlying fact the state suggests concern with the positioning of the bodies when the shot was fired... gun and body at 90 degrees, not know and depicted in animation as probable positioning is what I guess is in issue... body and gun together........ only eye witness testimony when he saw it... left a few seconds before..... state can argue to the jury something different.... it happened, based upon evidence and shiping bao's testimony, animation that has bodies in that position, suggest what they want... don't believe and never seen evidence admissibility having some argument that it may have happened differently 8:43:30 I don't understand why that makes it a Frye or daubert admissibility concern.... it is specifically in line with facts of evidence and how things happened.... if we were to go through a daubert piece Frye standing...... not certain, I know they talked but didn't come up with anything different to john good's testimony 8:44:35 saying now it's just based upon what we talked about... no its based on 90 degree angle.. 8:44:54 what you'll see is it is more than animation, series of stills... response to states concerns in the past... took out animation and placed with a still.... movement of the arms.... SORRY TO INTERRUPT, JUST START WITH HEARING AND GIVE ARGUMENT AFTER THAT... DEFENSE HAS BURDEN, CALL FIRST WITNESS 8:46:37 (sworn in) 8:46:48 name? daniel shoemaker... address? California. name of company? contrast forensic... type of business? crime scene accident reconstruction.... I take reports and photos from the scene.... I take all of that and put into context for the recreation 8:47:40 how you got into this business? information graphics for fortune 500 companies. when that began? 26 years ago. who'd you work for? viewcom systems in Ohio... did corporate presentations for tire companies in Akron 8:48:25 the days before PowerPoint? days before desktop computers.... a lot of art graphic work, poster presentation? we had a sophisticated computer and it did slides. how long with them? 5 years. position? senior artist 8:49:01 you would take on a project, create the tools? work with the client on modifications... any formal education in this area? bachelor in fine arts. 8:49:38 advertising and marketing, corporate identity 8:49:48 graphic presentation to audience? yes, the best way... various ideas and procedures. 8:50:00 for 5 years? yes. and then? to California, same thing for a lot of companies in bay area 8:50:15 contract basis? worked for company, senior artist. which company? dolphin multimedia. same job description? similar job as in Ohio... being in bay area, more access to up to date software, more up to date technology 8:50:55 any difference in first five years to now? main difference is doing a lot of information graphics for governmental proposals.... information graphics for governmental proposals and information graphics of crime scene recreation for attorneys. how long in Cali? 13 years. 8:51:50 name changed? contrast design to contrast forensic. owner/sole proprietor... 8:52:07 type of work you focused on? initially started out by working with attorneys on designing their information, court room presentations were a bit below that..... gone from information graphics to attorneys like that to drawing crime scenes... progressed quite a lot to the point with the equipment I'm using now 8:52:59 what type of software or hardware was available to you when you started? mostly drawing out a scene.... scale and accurate, mostly 2-D.... from there it's gone to 3-D to the point where the reconstruction and the software got more sophisticated.... start with you going out to scene with tape roller and get a measurement? yeah 8:54:06 software I use, I have two kinds for using my total station data.......... aras 360.... 8:54:34 start with foundation point, total station.... bring us back to an idea when you walk onto a scene and what do you create? progressed from tape measure to robotic laser, set up on tripod and measure crime scene... series of points and 3-D space 8:55:25 used now by law enforcement? yes and road crews 8:55:38 set up that laser here, bounce off points in court room and have a data configuration of the entire outline of the court room? two types... type I have is point by point... I lay out 2-500 points in a scene... I walk around with a pocket computer and prism, everywhere I go hit the computer point where I am... laser follows me around... creates a point cloud of the whole scene..... 8:56:50 how does that compare to total station software? how does what compare........ total station gathers data and then export to aras 360....... 8:57:28 once you get that information, what you do to see if information is there? look at the data and examine it, another piece of software that I have... visual statement, between those two... 8:58:10 within context of aras 360, gathering environment digitally... motion capture suit for gathering....wireless, accelerometers... capture movement accurately and bring into the scene.... accuracy of the scene 8:59:16 give court examples for the motion capture suits... in other cases? use a few ways, I use it.... a month ago I had to go to impound lot, death in a vehicle... get into vehicle and it still sees the movement.... typical one has balls on the suit with high speed cameras following it, but the cameras won't follow behind the wall or into the vehicle..... my suit is I can take it, accelerometers to measure my movement 9:00:51 perfect for court because it gives you a running log of all the movements..... somebody hits something and cause damage.... do the same action from the accelerometers see how much force I used 9:01:24 what software exists behind those suits to interpret that and make it relevant to presentation? software that came with suit, engineers that developed it... not only used it for motion capture but also biometrics for physical therapy, monitor movement from day to day 9:02:07 put on those suits if I had range of motion problem and the suits will measure progress? yes, printout of all the movements 9:02:26 software the interprets the movement of the suits, criteria that can be put in to determine force, speed and effect of objects moving through space? yes, could do that in the reconstruction 9:02:56 how this suit gives data for recreation? put on the suit, still considered crime scene... didn't want to disrupt it... t vac suit to protect the scene, somebody opened the door tried to pull the person out.... he reached for a gun and shot him.... shot the person coming into the car? yes 9:03:49 very good use of the suit, had an attorney pull me out and record it in real time 9:04:06 what you were able to recreate? in the truck? yes..... 9:04:27 I had accurate measurements of the truck, recreated the truck, my movements fit well within the truck, exports motion file.... bring into 3D program... map their movements onto figure that matches the person involved... map onto the person's skeleton 9:05:11 how do you get size of person to be accurate? from police reports and coroners reports 9:05:23 does the software recreate body in proper proportion? doesn't do any simulation, I just have a figure that I size to the size that I need.... 9:05:50 can specify what height the person is... weight? weight is more the appearance from photos 9:06:05 helpful and do you have another sample of the car one? I have another sample 9:06:22 happened in a sams club parking lot........... 9:09:33 since it's just the court, approach the bench and you could see off the computer screen? FINE YOU MAY BRING IT UP HERE... COUNCIL APPROACH 9:10:15 this is a sample of a motion filed from the scene... how is the scene recreated for the background of event? in software. where did information come from? security camera, placed vehicles where they were in the video, better representation than the security camera 9:11:04 about to see the animations, how does the movement get placed into environment? import from motion capture software. 9:11:28 how does it get placed in right location? move figures around based on scene. come up with alternatives based on witnesses and evidence? yes, can't change movement, just the location of figures 9:12:28 graphic information from witnesses and evidence? yes 9:12:37 say that the movement of the person, how do you decide the speed? timed from security camera..... nothing further as far as that... OKAY THANK YOU 9:13:06 chance to look at that animation, anything different in the software you used in that representation than one in zimmerman case? zimmerman case was more total station data, data that was provided from DA's office 9:13:43 are there any course work or training programs you go through to enhance your abilities for this work? both in aras 360, classes through that and trained through that. only required to go through 1, but I've gone to 3 total station 9:14:24 software that law enforcement uses? total station is the piece of equipment 9:14:38 total station information available from law enforcement in this case? correct 9:14:52 who does the training for that? software companies train 9:15:03 most recent time you took training? training in those courses, a couple years... on my CV 9:15:22 aras 360 software, continually update my skills... webinar every Friday that I watch. any significant changes in program or still the same? still the same, maybe an update every 6 months 9:16:00 training and certification on using the software and using it with total station. 9:16:20 have current version of software? yes. up to date with that software? yes 9:16:34 creating computer graphic animations? luxology modo... whats that 3D software? creating 3d scenes, used for animation movies. 9:17:17 allow you to present environment or frame work? yes and create the scene 9:17:42 start putting in elements? yes. how are they accurate? measurements from total station data.... 9:17:59 bounce off points and import into program? yes..... also one part is I have a helicopter, didn't use in this case... just a drone, take photo of scene I have the data points from total station and it'll lay it on or drape it onto those points, accurate out door reconstruction of the scene 9:18:46 bird's eye view, more accurate data points? yes 9:19:02 opportunity to create animations and testify as expert? yes. what period of time you did that? ongoing for last 13 years... criminal and civil cases 9:19:30 first time you created animation in court case? 2009 9:19:46 tell the court, have you ever gotten to point where animations were utilized in court? yes. experience you had in civil and criminal settings with your testimony? I used motion capture suits for animation but to verify a person's position, did one a few months ago... in a vehicle, shot through window, show a couple more times... which were done in the car... verify his position when 3 shots were fired 9:20:48 explain how... name for motion suit? initial motion capture suit. IMCS 9:21:20 matched vehicle used and recorded movement getting out... in the figure that matched the victim, put in the rod to match bullet trajectory... looked at positions getting out of car to see which positions the trajectory should be 9:21:55 talk in context....? calibrate at beginning of recording. for accuracy? yes. 9:22:24 doing movement, but computer gathering data on 16 points that are moving? yes. computer may not know it's a body, just 16 points? in real time on computer, there's a mannequin 9:22:59 not the exact video of the driver moving his arms, but rather you decided how the body moves, how do you address that frailty? look at certain things you know from the discovery, bullet trajectory, opening of the door, physical characteristics of the truck... look at scenarios to find which one matches the scene and evidence and discovery you have 9:23:48 do an animation at the point you created is specific? Objection! 9:24:02 consideration based on evidence know to you at the time? yes. modify animation to match witnesses or other things you've heard? yes, whatever's more accurate 9:24:23 put on the suit, software allows you to change configuration of body for height? yes. how do you look at body size to accomplish that on the program? most done through photos from reports 9:25:06 take measurements of those photos, ratio comparisons and put on the mannequin? yes measurements from reports.... any measurements you can take. 9:25:35 also look at photographs? yes 9:25:52 I come in after the fact, have to rely on police photos taken from the scene.... don't have certain measurements, but you may have one measurement of an item in a photograph... 9:26:22 how does that assist you with measurements? one known object with measurement you can figure out other items 9:26:50 I can tell how far from the wall you are.......................... lay down a plane in the software if you know one measurement apply to the grid and extrapolate the evidence 9:27:26 don't know the algorithms or math behind it, has been certified to work? yes 9:27:42 this type software, does that have application in entertainment industry? yes. suit I have was used in avatar, iron man, x-man... used in creating characters... also used in madden football... record suits and apply the figures 9:28:27 iron man is placed on top of him in the movie? in the computer the 3D program 9:28:42 talking about your experience in testifying... how many times in court your animations were presented? need CV? yes. moment? YES 9:29:19 come back to your CV.... experience in testifying for the animations. use of suits and presentation in court? most work since I acquired the suit in 2008.... probably 20. 9:30:00 types of cases you worked on and what courts? also on my CV, list of the counties 9:31:35 type cases and court rooms you presented? 59 criminal trials, 21 civil trials... declaration or testified in 20 of those.... 9:32:15 trying to figure out shooting incidents, worked with department of justice and police officer related shootings, stabbings, it varies quite a bit. 9:32:36 in each of the 59 cases, take on data and graphic presentation? yes 9:32:49 are we now talking about spectrum of murder cases, know the charges or just the information? sometimes told more detail and give creation from the evidence 9:33:17 what percentage for defense and prosecution? 100% on the defense, has to do with defensive police officers and police officer involved shootings 9:33:43 if the department of Justice with a civil case against them or a shooting occurred, work with them on that and presentation of their material 9:34:13 presented testimony in court in any of the criminal cases? presented personally or... after being qualified, you personally? probably all 59 9:34:48 qualified as expert various counties.... 16 counties here... all in California? yes 9:35:20 are these counties in which the courts authorized you as an expert? all the courts where my information was presented, all qualified, never denied 9:36:00 (listing counties) 9:36:47 have you ever testified in Florida before? no. outside of California? no. how long have you had motion suits? since 2008 9:37:04 in those counties, which counties were you... did you testify in those counties or was the information you created presented? both... my information was through either as expert testimony or a declaration... sometimes my material can be testified to by another witness... 9:38:01 I just speak to the accuracy of the creation... 9:38:09 have you testified in court concerning accuracy and methods used to create? yes. 9:38:24 what counties and types of cases you've testified to? I don't have a listing ..... what cases have you testified to in court, what types of cases? all the ones I've testified in court have been criminal trials 9:39:06 what you testified to and the animations? plasa county, shooting reconstruction, position of shooter and victim, the order of shots.... testify? yes. expert in this area? yes. 9:39:58 another case? contracusta county, determine position of the person from the 3 shots... determine there was only 1 through window and the other 2 were outside vehicle. expert? yes. 9:40:34 one more from another case? a couple down in Marino valley, two of them actually... one was inside house, threatening suicide, police officers responded and they were waiting at corner of garage waiting for him to come out and another officer was looking out to the street and the other office was looking at doorway, determine who shot... which officer and the position of person in house.... in my reconstruction, person in house was on floor in kitchen... two counts of murder to police officer... in house the entire time. police said person came out with gun, fired 3 shots, partner turned around and shot the partner in elbow... which shots came first and position of door....... second series, position of the door... no way someone came through door when shots went off, tight space outside the door he would've been hit, had to be in the.... 9:43:08 accepted in the court? yes. give evidence to the jury in that case? yes 9:43:24 other cases where you've been attempted to qualify as expert? no. in all 59 then, by affidavit, declaration, give your testimony to what you created? declaration or testimony was 20 cases, never been disqualified 9:43:59 experience on civil side similar? mostly info designed for attorneys to present to jury 9:44:13 any civil that went to jury? not in civil trials 9:44:35 zimmerman case? first became involved toward end of April... initial conversation in august, but my first meeting with attorneys was end of April 9:44:58 in 2012? yes. went through medical condition that took you out of sorts for several months? yes. all resolved? well se 9:45:14 back to work, talked in April this year? yes. what information did you gather and review, what tasks given on behalf of this case? to do a reconstruction of the scene with the information we had and creation of an animated timeline... 9:45:50 inside your qualifications? yes. not a lot of opportunity to have live audio of the occurrence, different in this case 9:46:23 unique because we had audio evidence, real time available for your recreation? yes, helps with the timeline 9:46:39 similar to security camera makes its more accurate? yes. video surveillance not in this case? no 9:46:59 what information did you gather to assist you in the work? discovery from DA office, photos, reports, audio from 911 calls, questioning at PD of witnesses... depositions? yes. photos from scene and total station data 9:47:48 any information you needed to create animation that you did not have available? use of motion capture suit at the scene, not available to me... made two visits to the scene 9:48:16 came back to utilize motion capture suits? yes. when that was done? second week in may 9:48:40 explain what you do then, who did it, how you assure accuracy? good where I can interact with suits at the scene, 9:49:26 7 points that were labeled windows and they were not in position to be windows.... laser bounced off and was different than what it was? yes... laser pointed up to 2nd story window, went through tree and picked up branches... 6 points on one side and another point that are in the wrong location, not to use it 9:50:20 address that or fix it? I didn't manipulate the data, just didn't use them 9:50:41 any other measuring of the scene now that you're on scene? matter port scanner.... sets up on tripod, has a little computer and cameras.... one that takes photos and another one takes infrared for distance 9:51:19 iPad interface, twirl in 360 and scan around scanner, walk it through the scene... captures intricate parts of the scene as well as textramap of the photos 9:51:49 helpful to get the slope and positioning of buildings and sidewalk. more accurate that total station then? yes it added to the total station data, verified the scanner with the total station data so it all matched 9:52:31 did matter port allow for better graphic representation of the sloping? yes. total station had not done that? didn't measure very many points.... mainly measured the drains and sprinkler fix... didn't do measuring of slope 9:53:08 matter for even more accurate rendition of sloping of ground? yes 9:53:25 SHOEMAKER STANDING FOR AN HOUR NOW.... I THOUGHT IT WAS GOING TO BE SHORT, WOULD YOU LIKE TO TAKE A SEAT SIR? how much longer.... omara: drag him back down here in a moment, so I'll move it along 9:53:58 go to scene to start working on project? correct.... motion capture suit, who did them and frailty of others using it? a couple volunteers from your law office that put the suits on, timing for scenario where they were on the ground, used audio on the 911 call to time it with shot of the gun 9:54:46 also john good's statements and deposition testimony? yes. used for the positioning.... information from Ms. mora, saw zimmerman on top of martin after shot? yes. assist in your creation? yes 9:55:18 also have Lauer 911 audio, has a shot and matter of time before shot? yes. 9:55:36 what other information? Ms. Lauer's police report. she first heard altercation at the T? yes. and Jeremy's? yes 9:55:58 created poster graphics, stills of the scene based upon that testimony as well? yes. recently removed Jeremy's statements since he didn't testify? yes 9:56:24 modifying animation and the posters to come in mind with actual trial testimony? yes. as disclosed to you by me? yes to get most accurate representation of it 9:56:47 able to create animation based on info available to you? yes 9:56:57 sources of that information, seen discovery- witness, depositions, autopsy, reports.... also diagrams made by witnesses and other information in discovery? correct. 9:57:36 a lot of information from defense? yes. extraneous to recreation but to see if it was relevant? yes 9:58:03 conversations with me and others on my behalf for the creation? yes 9:58:13 sources of information? everything you mentioned. anything else? my going to the scene and scanning the scene during motion capture 9:58:41 anything you would have liked to have had in creating the posters that was not available to you? I believe I had everything I needed to create the scene 9:59:06 present the animation.................... 10:00:33 BRING UP TO THE BENCH AND I'LL LOOK AT IT UP HERE.... 10:01:40 (video playing on shoemaker's laptop, audio of 911 call.... no visual of the video) 10:02:47 there are posters that he created.... mantei: new ones? omara: some are new.... 10:03:22 advise the court what this is and how created? from 3d image of how it was created, to explain location of markers...... where'd you get the markings and put at that location? straight from total station data, also have a flat 2D illustration of the scene. incorporated as well? yes 10:04:15 basically the same thing, different view. 10:04:33 to show the slope.... 10:05:28 this is just to show photographs from discovery of what was at those markers 10:05:42 different parts of different items, where located and top left hand corner... imported and picture we gave you? yes. 10:06:12 IN THE MIDDLE? from the point of view from good. to the left is good head? his ear... taken with 50 mm lens in the software, closely resembles what a person will see 10:06:42 line going above the case, distance measurement? edge of porch to marker number a 10:06:58 what it looks like? 49.5 mm., rounded to 50 10:07:10 perspective one would see as humans looking at it? yes that's how they would appear 10:08:06 john goods to the left? yes 10:08:15 states what john good testified in trial regarding what he saw and the peoples descriptions? yes. yes 10:08:34 that is Ms. Mora's testimony in trial to what she saw from her column? yes. 10:08:52 what she would see from her location? yes 10:08:57 in these photos I didn't try to reconstruct the lighting, more important to see detail.....frailty of the posters, lighting was nothing for this evening? jury would have a hard time seeing detail 10:10:07 moment? YES 10:10:34 PROBLEM THEY'RE HAVING IS WITH THE APPLE COMPUTER, CHECK IT OUT OVER LUNCH... get his presentation on a PC. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? just briefly: have been doing this graphic information in court for 13 years? yes. has never been disqualified in court? correct. 10:11:20 awareness of industry and others who did this? only one in US with wireless motion capture suit.... older style ones available? reconstruction are using, but very rare to find one with motion capture suit, whether the balls or the wireless 10:12:21 used in video games and videos? yes 10:12:25 software you utilize, tell the court where that fits in to industry 10:12:56 how long? luxology around probably 4 years.... I believe 4.... started as version 201, now up to 701 10:13:16 ever attend seminars or conventions where others interact? yes.... 10:13:32 users group that gets together, presentations there. how often? just presented once 10:13:44 made up of people who use software on ongoing basis? yes.... 10:13:59 aras 360 gets together every Friday.... keep up on that part of the industry? yes 10:14:11 is this software accepted whether accident recreations or others? yes, highway patrol uses it... 3 basic software... visual statement, aras 360... another software called crime time or something like that.... Sanford police uses on there's 10:14:57 is the software you use the most up to date software for this work? yes,... industry standard for accident and crime scene reconstruction 10:15:18 use this type of software to do the work? mostly used in police departments 10:15:34 80% of aras 360 are police departments, others are accident or crime scene reconstructionist like myself.... user group meetings interaction? yes, get an answer at the end of the week 10:16:07 accident reconstructionist, type of software used in this industry? yes, mines cutting edge 10:16:24 more advanced, only one who uses new style of motion suits for your work? correct. are used in entertainment industry? correct and medical rehabilitation 10:16:50 limited based on expense? yes. nothing further CROSS 10:17:00 mantei: 5 minute break and the witness sit in stand? 10:17:10 COURT IN RECESS FOR 5 MINUTES ============================================ 10:24:29 PLEASE BE SEATED. IS SHOEMAKER HERE? he is. HOW MUCH LONGER IS THIS GOING TO TAKE.... JURY IN BACK SINCE 9, I STAYED LATE TO GET THIS ACCOMPLISHED....mantei: 45 minutes. NO. DO IT LATER... SHOEMAKER REMAIN OUTSIDE, CONTINUE HEARING AFTER COURT.... READY WITH NEXT WITNESS? READY TO BRING JURY IN? omara: approach VERY BRIEF (sidebar) 10:26:55 (zimmerman walking in, tan suit, white shirt, gray tie) 10:27:16 (omara talking to zimmerman) 10:30:53 (sidebar) 10:34:21 MR ZIMMERMAN, PLEASE STAND.... INFORMED BY COUNCIL THAT TESTIMONY OF DR. DI MAIO IS CARVED DOWN... DID YOU HAVE DISCUSSIONS WITH OMARA ABOUT DR DI MAIOS TESTIMONY? yes. AGREE WITH HIS REPRESENTATION NOT TO ASK CERTAIN AREAS, YOU AGREE WITH THAT? yes. HAS ANYBODY THREATENED YOU TO DO THAT? no. READY FOR JURY? west: not yet. HOW CLOSE ARE WE? need the physical evidence in the court. PLEASE OPEN LOCKER DOOR AND GET OUT WHAT YOU NEED...... 10:37:48 NOW READY FOR JURY? LET'S BRING THE JURY IN.... 10:39:59 PLEASE BE SEATED, WELCOME BACK... I APOLOGIZE FOR KEEPING YOU BACK THERE... QUESTIONS: DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE CASE? NO HANDS RAISED. READ OR LISTEN TO REPORTS ABOUT THE HOUSE? NO HANDS RAISED. USE ELECTRONIC DEVICE FOR RESEARCH? NO HANDS RAISED. READ OR CREATE SOCIAL MEDIA? NO HANDS RAISED. 10:40:53 west: call Vincent Di Maio 10:41:27 (sworn in) 10:41:54 west: good morning.... name? Dr. Vincent Di Maio 10:42:13 profession? physician, employed in private practice of forensic pathology.... degree? yes back in 1965 in NY 10:42:39 educational background? graduated med school 1965, 1 yr. internship in pathology, did a 3 year residency, 1 year fellowship in forensic pathology, specialty board exams 10:43:39 board certification? yes... it means you've successfully completed training in specialty... taken written and practical exam and certified and recognized as specialist 10:44:07 mentioned anatomical, pathology...? pathology is branch of medicine with death from disease..... examine tissue removed from someone.... mole, breast tissue... tells your physician the disease, and tells you the diagnosis... wont contact them, physician has contact 10:45:10 clinical pathologist is concerned with tests done... blood test, urine test... 10:45:23 forensic pathologist is concerned with application to medical science and the law... function as medical examiner, determine cause of death and manner of death... individuals thought to have died of violence, accidents suicides or homicides..... exact course of death is not known... autopsy..... based on circumstances, the findings and tests done make determination on cause and manner 10:46:25 professional positions following training? having trouble hearing you..... 10:47:09 following training you've outlined, idea of the professional position you held? after training, went into army for 2 years... armed forces institute in pathology.... chief of medical legal section, then wound ballistic section... moved to Dallas, TX medical examiner there summer 1972- Feb. 1981.... became chief medical examiner for Bexar county Texas.... san Antonio...... from march 1981-until I retired Dec. 2006. 10:48:40 for 16 of the years I was there, I was in charge of crime lab... retired and went into complete private practice, doing since then... also the editor of the American journal of forensic pathology.... chairmen of Texas crime labs....... 10:49:30 director of crime lab for 16 years, role? police had crime lab, county took over when I came..... basic documentation, established DNA Lab.... usually things, drug ID, DNA, trace evidence 10:50:11 work include knowing how to package evidence that may have biological or DNA evidence? yes. but you teach the forensic pathologists, they know that even if not in the lab.... technique to packaging... 10:50:50 certain requirements when packing biological samples, wet fluids? yes, dry out material... package each in paper... if you don't let it dry and put in plastic, the bacteria love that... multiply... mold... stinks and everything deteriorates 10:51:35 well known for a while? yeah I'd say... 30 years that I know of 10:51:45 back you've done with group that monitors labs? Texas forensic science commission... yeah what does that involve? government agency.... problem with labs reported and investigated and issued a report... want tests to be done proper.... labs reporting themselves 10:52:50 in addition to professional positions, also had academic appointments? University of Texas system.. assistant professor, associate professor and full professors before I retired. what subject? pathology 10:53:21 have you in addition to your day to day work as medical examiner and work at the University as professor, published any books or articles? 88 articles and 13 book chapters and then I've published 4 books.... first was gunshot wounds, wrote myself... published in English, French and Spanish... forensic pathology with my father, he's deceased now... third book was handbook of forensic pathology wrote with a colleague, 4th book is excited delirium syndrome... I'm the junior author of that book, wife is senior author.... 10:54:51 your work in gun shots.... first book you wrote, updated over time? 2 editions published and the 3rd edition is going to the publishers in another week or two.... 10:55:17 describe for jury the purpose of focus of that book? book starts out instructing about fire arms, wounds, riffles, hand guns, how to do an autopsy, collect evidence and what you can do with analysis 10:55:51 gunshot wounds, how a pathologist could learn things like the distance from the shot? right, contact, near, loose, distant... range, nature of wound 10:56:20 work you've been doing your entire career? yes, very strong interest in gunshot wounds 10:56:35 written 13 chapters, in others books? correct. how does that work? solicit me to write the chapter 10:56:55 are some of those books more comprehensive look than what you wrote? I don't think so... depends, chapters aren't always about gunshot wounds 10:57:23 how many of those chapters that you recall involve gunshot wounds? I think about 7 10:57:36 authored or participated in 88 peer review article? it's a scientific article submitted to journal... when the journal receives it, sends to others to see if it should be published and editor decides to publish. peers mean other pathologists? yes. published becomes available to other researches to use or educate themselves? it is.... central on computer with articles listed, review articles on the computer... essentially a library. 10:59:14 how many articles involved gunshot wounds? 35 or 37 10:59:28 over entire span of your career? these events, these writings were developed over time you worked? yes, over 40 years 10:59:52 worked in baxer county as medical examiner, perform autopsies? yes, about 9,000 and then I reviewed autopsies that were done under my jurisdiction another 28,000..... 11:00:43 called by prosecutor, typically? yes 11:00:50 as medical examiner testified in court to the autopsies I did 11:01:08 staff that helped? 4 full time, 1 part time physicians... approved for program to train fellows.... 38 or 39 approved to train 11:01:42 how many autopsies would be done in the year? 1500 autopsies and another 1500 we would just do external exams 11:02:04 last autopsy I did was in October and retired in December 11:02:14 takes week or a month to complete an autopsy 11:02:23 since 1981 when you began work in baxer county, private consultant? yes. mostly civil, a few criminal cases.... outside baxer I could testify for the defense 11:02:58 don't do many private criminal cases such as now 11:03:09 working as consultant since 2007? right 11:03:26 private practice as consultant since then? yes 11:03:33 majority of work in connection with civil cases? yes. include gunshot injuries? yes.... alleged suicides, accidental discharge 11:04:05 mentioned you were in the military? yes that's when I started my firearm research... study mechanism of firearms and review gunshot wounds 11:04:43 when I was in charge of the wound section I had another study in Vietnam, photos of those injured or killed by different weapons, attempt to study those.... 50,000 slides of this 11:05:16 mentioned microphotography... what a picture of bullet leaving gun looks like? micro flash... only this flash is very quick, take photos of things moving through air, freeze them when the flash goes off 11:05:56 take moment the mechanics of what happens when bullet fired from gun? firepit hits the cartridge case...................... gun powder burns, converted to gas... gradual pressure to build up... bullet at front, fixed in.... push out of bullet into barrel, gripped by riffling, takes a while.... during this time some gas will get around the bullet... gas in front, the bullet, and then bulk of case... barrel filled with air, as bullet goes down, pushes the gas in front and behind... first thing you get is a little cloud of gas, not big, pretty soon after that get the bulk of the gas... in that, the bullet and unburned or burning grains of powder 11:08:13 can the gas that comes out first, combined with air in barrel? will to certain degree, mostly the larger cloud of gas... column of gas and air pushed straight ahead.... hold gun against clothing, this column of gas and air tears hole and then the bullet gets to clothing and the soot gets to the clothing.... that material after hole is made comes back to the other side.. 11:09:21 hole made by gas first, followed by bullet and then followed by soot? right...... blank cartridges are not dangerous, you can kill yourself with it.... the gas form will tear through skin and muscle in your lung... you don't need bullet to kill you with contact wounds 11:10:17 written articles about head trauma? yes... one peer reviewed article, one chapter 11:10:35 blunt force trauma to the head? right 11:10:42 served as editor of peer reviewed scientific journals? yes 11:10:55 does that work include whether or not to accept submission for publication? yes I have final say 11:11:20 work you've done specifically..... expertise in firearms and injuries, have you done work for united states government? yes about 2 years ago.... US attorney's office during hurricane Katrina, police officers shot and wounded a number and killed 1.... done 1 or two other cases 11:12:10 for the marines? war crimes... testified for marine corp 11:12:20 British government? the bloody Sunday massacre.... and another case going in 2 months in Britain with a concussion head injury 11:12:52 united nations? yes. 11:13:07 jurisdictions you've testified as expert? in most states of the union, state courts, federal courts... Canada, Columbia.... by video.... south Africa, Israel 11:13:44 I don't believe we've touched upon.... state and federal? yes 11:13:56 professional awards? yes, from my medical school master teacher award, outstanding service awards...... 11:14:32 professional background and all detailed in CV? yes they are 11:15:04 defendants MM? yes. your CV? yes it is 11:15:24 offer as exhibit... ANY OBJECTIONS? rionda: we object! May we approach? YES YOU MAY (sidebar) 11:18:11 COME IN AS DEFENSE EXHIBIT 23.... 11:18:42 turn to work in this case, describe the materials that you have received for review and if you have notes reflecting that, happy to do so..... 11:19:14 material I reviewed were scene photos, zimmerman photos, autopsy report, medical records, witness statement and transcribed conversation by good, 911 calls, reenactment tape, firearm, examiner reports, and deposition of dr. rao 11:20:14 talk with you about...... opportunity to review the video recording of zimmerman reenacting the events surrounding the shooting? yes., access to witness statements? yes. reviewed all witness statements? I haven't 11:20:54 more about determining whether evidence is consistent with his accounts of what he said happened.... witness statements are all around, vary greatly... easiest way to hear is examine physical evidence and compare to defendants statements and see if consistent.... say bullet came in front, and it came from the back inconsistent 11:21:46 look at what zimmerman said and the forensic evidence which includes the pictures from autopsy, include looking at report from firearm expert who analyzed clothing? correct. two most important are the autopsy report and the reports by the firearms examiner.... secondary, scene photos... looking at autopsy and detailed report by firearms examiner.. 11:22:49 reach opinion as to the distance? yes 11:22:57 opinion from end of barrel to clothing? yes 11:23:03 what affect if any the clothing had on appearance on the skin? yes 11:23:16 well talk about those details in a moment, also talk with you about is your opinion of how long martin may have been alive, how long martin may have been conscious.....? they are different opinions because you can be alive and unconscious.... 11:23:57 the injury zimmerman sustained, reflected in photos from Sanford PD, review them? yes 11:24:12 talk with you a little about the injuries that you observed through photos sustained by martin from gunshot wound 11:24:34 general frame work for today.... talk about gunshot itself and the mechanics involved in that...... 11:25:08 evidence in this case, describe for jury what you saw when you looked at photos from the clothing and the wound to his skin, the gun shot or tattooing referenced in autopsy report, put it all together? photos show contact discharge of weapon against clothing, agree 100% with firearms examiner, at time of discharge, against clothing, tore clothing, soot all around, know the muzzle was in contact with clothing.... firearms examiner said it 11:26:29 look at the wound in the chest, different picture.... circular punched out wound, lay in area of powder tattooing 2x2.... marks on skin due to powder that comes out of the muzzle of gun... not powder burns, means whole bunch of things 11:27:14 when bullet comes out, mark and reaction, reddish..... marks are called powder tattoo marks... stippling. indicates that grain of powder hit skin and person was alive at the time, don't get that in dead people... distribution 2x2... certain density in the tattoo marks, not against the skin.... more than an inch away. based on concentration and the size of pattern, muzzle of gun was 2-4 inches away from the skin.... the barrel of gun was against the clothing but clothing had to be 2-4 inches away from body. 11:28:52 states 96... photo taken at medical examiner's office, showing entrance wound.... ? if you look, you'll see the hole from the bullet, punched out entrance, all around the entrance you see these little marks like ant bites..... powder tattoo marks.... redding brown the person was alive.... this indicates he was alive at time he was shot... muzzle was not in contact but had to be back... first time you see powder tattoo marks is when muzzle of 1/2 inch away, less.. you won't see.... area of tattoo gets bigger and bigger... increases in range, density will decrease.... this is very heavy density.... decreases until tattoo marks disappear..... 11:31:17 opinion to distance based on training and research? yeah, a lot of research....firearm examiners use heavy white paper and fire the gun, hole, and marks around it.... based on size and pattern give opinion from the range..... problem was it doesn't really reflect what happens on the skin..... did experiments, living animals... yes its valid.... to determine size of pattern by shooting against white paper is valid to at least 18 inches..... hand guns to rifles and shot guns and how it extends, how different types....... denser pattern, actually go out further bull powder because its stated in the report 11:33:11 exhibit is now on the screen, this is the 2 inch by inch tattooing pattern? yes sir 11:33:33 helps you to be precise with distance from 1/2 inch to 18 inches? less than 1/2 inch a hole with dense soot, no powder tattoo marks..... 11:34:11 how does pattern get broader? like a hose, the cone shape, farther you get away the bigger the spray pattern 11:34:34 water droplets just fall off, same with powder.. loses velocity and falls away 11:34:50 would the clothing, not disputed in this case.... clothing in between muzzle and skin, what affect if any would clothing have on the appearance of wounded skin? in this case none, clothing wasn't between powder and skin at time of discharge 11:35:38 hole there produced by gas and bullet.... if you had gun 6 inches away from clothing, clothing will filter out powder to a degree... in this case, clothing didn't filter that, you had a hole there and muzzle against the body.... everything coming out of muzzle was going into the hole 11:36:35 if pressed in his chest, what would you see differently? hole like that, surrounded by a halo of black soot and maybe on the skin, a grain or two of powder, but not powder tattooing... disperses the shoot, not the powder.... powder would be inside the body 11:37:11 medical examiner standpoint, hard call for you? no... this is basic 101 11:37:52 trajectory, photos of examine? no... x ray 11:38:06 reference the x ray if you wish, you know the path of the bullet through the right ventricle into lower right lung? right.... bullet hole in left chest, goes through the fifth intercostal space, space between 5th and 6th rib, went through there, hit sac surrounding heart, went through right ventricle and into the right lung.... you can see the led core of the bullet, see the jacket fragments.... bullet went front to back, left to his right because it went into the right lung, but it started on the left side 11:39:34 based on your review, must've been a slight left to right trajectory? yes. there's some, I can't quantitate it. not radical... bullet was go from his left to his right.... martins left to martins right? correct 11:40:09 standard way of describing wounds, talk left to right, deceased's view point 11:40:36 not precisely straight on? does not appear so 11:40:49 mechanics of that shot, putting together the defect on the clothing... result of contact on the muzzle, distance between clothing was 2-4 inches, not a contact.... you're understanding of Zimmerman's statement because of video, work essentially was to determine whether medical evidence was consistent with what he said happened? that's correct 11:41:39 aware zimmerman said martin was straddling him and leaning over him? yes. and zimmerman had gun in right hand? yes... describe what you know of that sequence of events? the medical evidence is consistent with his opinion/statement. reason it is, simplest thing is his gun was in his right hand.... shoot someone with right hand, natural to twist your hand, go from deceased left to right.... nature of defect in clothing and the tattoo.... lean over someone, clothing falls away from the chest... if lying on your back and someone shoots you, clothing against your chest... so the fact we know clothing was 2-4 inches away is consistent with someone leaning over the person doing the shooting and clothing is 2-4 inches away from person firing 11:43:38 clothing was wet, described as being damped.... the responding officers found an unopened can of a beverage in the front pouch of this sweatshirt.... find those facts consistent with what you saw? tend to reinforce.... clothing falls away from the body is gravity, have wet clothing, its heavier... pulling the shirt down, tends to pull away from body 11:45:03 wound itself by gap, tattooing and the face of the contact of the clothing, consistent with Zimmerman's account that martin was over him leaning 11:45:41 talk about martin's mechanics.... effect of him receiving that shot, how long he survived and how long he may have been conscious... what if anything he could do voluntarily at time of consciousness? #1 is the ability to move.... that is determined by amount of oxygen in your brain, you have a reserve of 10-15 seconds.... if right now I grabbed your heart and ripped it out, you could stand there and talk to me or walk over to me 10-15 seconds, brain controlling you.... that's minimum, assumes no blood is going to brain.... if more blood going to brain could be longer.... depends on blood pressure and how severe your wound 11:47:32 answer getting complicated, some get shot and immediately collapse and some get shot and don't know they got shot... 11:48:02 cardiac, in this case you have a through and through hole of right ventricle and at least one if not two into right lung.... losing blood, every time the heart contracts it pumps blood out the two holes in ventricle and at least one hole in the blood...... engage in struggle, heart rate increases... martin was healthy young man, if he's in struggle heart going/ beating more than 100 times a minute.... 11:49:08 every time heart beats, out comes the blood... say he's only beating 100, slow... loses a tablespoon of blood every time heart beats.... that's not much, 15 CCs, heart beating 100... losing 1500 CCs in a minute... quarter of blood supply.... second minute, lose another 1500.... lost more than 50% of blood supply.... 11:50:16 he's not pumping sufficient blood to anywhere, reached point where he's going to die.... assuming these conditions and all probability, nothings 100%... he's going to be dead within 1-3 minutes after being shot in this case.... heart effectively pumping blood, still get electrical activity, but not pumping.... how long as he conscious, significantly shorter than time necessary to die wouldn't have sufficient blood to brain 11:51:23 best you can give in estimates 11:51:33 in training and experience, familiar with incidents where individuals received similar or more serious and could still talk, move, voluntary actions for 10-15 seconds? yes, 12 gauge shot gun at point black range... heart was shredded, rain 65 ft. before he collapse 11:52:33 being shot in heart itself, quickly losing blood? nothing else than that..... not same as being shot in head? right. swat team immediately immobilize someone is to shoot in head 11:53:18 15 seconds capable of movement? potential for 10-15 seconds. moving arms from outstretch to underneath? Objection! SUSTAINED 11:53:49 could that include moving arms from outstretch to underneath in those 10-15 seconds? yes 11:54:10 lose consciousness, lose ability for voluntary movement? oh yeah... not feeling pain? correct 11:54:38 talk about the injury to martin's knuckle, remember in the photos an abrasion on left hand 4th finger? 1/4 by 1/8 scrap. agree its abrasion type? it appears to be 11:55:08 consistent with coming in contact with hard surface or impacting another surface? impacting another surface. concrete qualify? yes 11:55:35 would you expect to see bruising on knuckles if punching were going on? depends on what part of body you punch, softer portion you may not see it... may have been bruising that we didn't know about, doesn't make a difference.... too variable 11:56:29 take blood pressure to get bruising? yes. once blood pressure goes, then you don't have bruising.... can't bruise a dead body 11:56:52 in this instance, martin lost blood pressure very quickly? yes 11:57:02 dr. bao looking for bruising, better course would be to take a look internally? right 11:57:17 that was not done in this case? correct 11:57:31 move to the injuries that zimmerman sustained........ provided photos from the scene of his bloody nose? yes.... and photo taken of the back of his head showing streaming blood? yes 11:58:00 also provided photos taken later that night by Sanford PD? yes 11:58:15 talk about head trauma, mechanism of blood force injury to head? yes. what happens when hit in head by fist or concrete? well, ok.... what happened is the head wound...... say the heads fixed, made to move or is moving and stops suddenly, brain will shift... brain like gelatin, move back and forth inside cranium... as it moves, 3 possibilities, bruising by impacting the inside or you get bleeding, intracranial hemorrhage sufficient it could kill you, other type is brain cell injury..... connected through fibers which activates.... when brain moves back and forth from impact the axons will be stretched, within limited motion the way we are walking around and such.... no big deal.... if movement is violent, stretches the axons, causes injury to the wall if the movement is mild, the injury is prepared by axon... gradual increase in force like running into something and head goes forward and hits panel, so great it will injure axons and they won't be able to prepare and they die..... lot of brain cells and a lot of connections, can lose a good number and still be alright... at some point you'll have impairment and die 12:02:11 impacts like concrete, worry about intracranial bleeding and the axonal injury.... more bleeding than axon injury... always dangerous... if you hit your head here on the floor, carpet it absorbs.... if your head hits concrete, dangerous... but to kill somebody sure if you banged them hard enough.... didn't impact brain significant, still have stunning effect..... football players with concussions is just axon injury... could get mild concussion.... fall and hit your head, don't lose consciousness, appear stunned..... 12:03:45 stunning goes to concussion to injury..... stunned from the impact... better than concussion 12:04:07 progression depending on how hard the impact? yes and how many times, how much force is used.... if you get head hit against concrete with sufficient force to tear the scalp, you're going to be stunned..... not that common... hair cropped or bald removes the cushion... lacerations there's some trauma 12:05:08 talking about lacerations to the scalp, zimmerman had 2 lacerations to the back of his head, states 76..... identified as the photo taken of zimmerman that night, Jonathan manalo... evidence bleeding to head? yes two sites on the head 12:06:24 later saw pictures where blood was wiped away? right 12:06:42 take a look at 74.... what do you see in this picture? bruise on left side, not a good photograph 12:07:56 do you see in this photo what looks like 2 separate areas of swelling? yes... injury here and here, represent lacerations since it looks like clouded blood.... valley, impact site is swollen and then this is swollen here... this is not swollen, two separate impacts two different lacerations with area in between not swollen.... bleeding under the scalp 12:09:19 lump they get after hitting head is blood as opposed to another fluid? yes its blood.... 12:09:36 talk about curvature of the head, why its two separate impacts? real simple, unyielding surface, circular area hits it.... flatten on contact, you can see if it was one impact it would be swollen between the two 12:10:22 commented earlier, not easy to get laceration from flat object? yeah because it takes a force... everyone bangs their head, you don't get laceration 12:10:47 mechanism where laceration occurred? one is if direct impact, crush the skin and as you crush it and push inside the impact, get a tail... if you hit it at an angle so you slide, the surface holds it, and the rest of it pulls against that... so you tear, laceration is nothing but a tear.... 12:11:45 exhibit 57.... anything here that shows what you're talking about? see the swelling here and a little valley here, swollen here and swollen here... laceration here and a blood clot over the lacerations..... one of them is almost an inch and the other is 1/5 of an inch 12:12:33 laceration significant? in this case.... marker of force, real bad laceration rarely rarely.... people bled to death.... not this type of laceration.... indicates you had severe force, not just a bump 12:13:11 possible to have head struck on something hard enough to ring the bell, stun you and not leave mark? oh sure, see that in abused children.... not a mark on their head, but skull fracture 12:13:50 the presence of the injury on the outside, doesn't mean there wasn't additional impact or the impact was minor? you can get severe head trauma without any marks, or you can get marks and have head trauma.... more commonly you have trauma, but can get it without mark 12:14:30 amount of force necessary to cause those injuries, enough to cause stunning effect? oh yes. don't need to have a laceration or big bruise to..... get stunned.... medically referred to ultra-mild concussion... experience that when you hit your head 12:15:19 if you sustained a stunning blow like this and continued to receive additional blows to the head, would the additional blows continue to cause stunning effect? yeah. 12:15:46 short period of time, get multiple other concussions, people have died..... recognized syndrome 12:16:06 could be accumulative just that night into multiple stunning effects leading to concussion? oh yeah..... I'm using stunning because it's just a mild concussion.... not incapacitated, not knocked out.... hit head hard is stunning 12:16:55 there has been some discussion in testimony about punctate abrasions.... punctate in this photo? right here.... reddish markings, indicates impact with a flat surface that was not smooth 12:17:46 would concrete from every day sidewalk have that surface? yes 12:17:58 consistent with his head impacting a sidewalk? yes 12:18:17 punctate abrasion is around the temple? right, it's not smooth.... area here and here and here and here 12:18:36 noticeable lump higher up? right over here.... consequence of impact? yes.... a knot... hematoma 12:18:58 associated with the impact that caused punctate abrasions? yes sir 12:19:08 could that then be caused by 1 or more impacts with the sidewalk? yes sir. 12:19:22 let me show you states 70, a view of the right side of Zimmerman's head, see anything here that would suggest impact with a fist or sidewalk? start to see punctate and adhesion over here 12:19:55 another photo of same side, 71.... ? injury here, reddish areas 12:20:15 other side of the head, 73.... approach the witness? oh I can see its not problem 12:20:38 in this photo with blunt force trauma? marks here too, assume a print photo would show better, some punctate marks here. approach witness briefly? YES YOU MAY. 12:21:20 right here, you see an arch of punctate of abrasion, pile here and another arch.... hematoma anywhere? suggested, but not as distinct as other side 12:21:58 this area above the ear? swollen in that area, hard to say definitely 12:22:14 consistent with swelling as blunt force trauma? yes 12:22:25 this general area here? right 12:22:53 have seen exhibit 79... first photo taken at scene? yes. what signs of trauma do you see? have to look at original, this appears bruised... look at outline... swelling and abrasion there.... 12:23:39 if you look at this, see the congestion in nose and the abrasion, outline here is smooth and here it bulges out and comes back... compare to another photo, this is consistent with possible fracture.... next photo a few hours later, this swelling is not as prominent... that's what ENS thought he had a fractured nose 12:24:42 injury consistent with being punched in nose? yes sir. 12:24:53 exhibit 48.... take several hours later..... point out what you were referring too? swelling appears to be gone, it can't be gone if just blood... suggestive of fact he had displaced fracture here, when examined by ENS they just pushed it back in either consciously or not... held there by muscle 12:25:47 if displaced or not or even fractured, does trauma consistently show being struck in the face? right and of course another blow here 12:26:15 states 72.... part of forehead you were talking about? right.... vaguely see this line here, and another... when you look at the prints they're redding markings..... those are redding areas, not consistent with concrete, more like a punch than concrete 12:27:16 skin is intact, injury underneath skin.... something that doesn't wash out? oh no it doesn't wash out... underneath the skin 12:27:36 would it likely be a different impact than the one that caused injury? yes too far down, not the same thing 12:27:52 more to the right, see evidence there of some sort? right. mark like this and then mark here.... photograph myself.... 12:28:29 separate red mark on forehead? this and this are same impact.... I think you have 6 ID injuries, 2 lacerations on back, impacts on temple, that's 4, nose is 5 and the forehead is 6..... 12:29:12 may there also have been impacts that for one reason or another, land but didn't manifest in injury? Objection! Speculation! SUSTAINED 12:29:34 in a fight situation where someone may be resisting attack, expect them as being pushed to concrete to resist by trying to sit up? I would assume so 12:29:59 possible there may be other impacts, not as pronounced, some ability to resist? Objection! Speculation! OVERRULED 12:30:19 the head wasn't clean in some photos, definite evidence of 6... doesn't mean only 6, but the 6 I can say. moment? YES YOU MAY 12:30:53 (sidebar) 12:31:51 LADIES AND GENTLEMAN, RECESS FOR LUNCH. NO DISCUSSIONS. NO REPORTS. NO ELECTRONIC DEVICE. NO SOCIAL MEDIA. NOTEPADS FACE DOWN... RECESS UNTIL 1:30 12:32:53 FREE TO TAKE LUNCH BREAK, BE BACK AT 1:30, DONT DISCUSS TESTIMONY 12:33:08 COURT IN RECESS UNTIL 1:30 ======================================== 13:30:00 PLEASE BE SEATED, BACK ON RECORD. DR. DI MAIO OUTSIDE? 13:30:58 HAVE THE JURY COME IN..... 13:31:48 omara: approach for a moment? YES (sidebar) 13:32:31 WELCOME BACK... QUESTIONS: DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE CASE? NO HANDS RAISED. READ OR LISTEN TO ANY REPORTS ABOUT THE CASE? NO HANDS RAISED. USE ELECTRONIC DEVICE FOR RESEARCH? NO HANDS RAISED. READ OR CREATE SOCIAL MEDIA? NO HANDS RAISED CROSS 13:33:24 rionda: afternoon.... 13:33:38 not saying or testifying as to who started? correct. whether who attacked who, can't say? correct 13:33:59 in fact you can't testify as to who threw first punch? correct. whether there was a first punch? correct 13:34:18 you can't say whether it was martin defending or Zimmerman defending himself? when it first started, correct 13:34:34 only focusing on time of actual shot? that's correct 13:34:42 not stating that everything Zimmerman said in the reenactment is the gospel truth? correct. just the nature of gunshot wound is consistent with his accounts 13:35:10 gave 5 statements prior to that one? mentioned that to me before. in your depo? yes 13:35:22 why only the reenactment and not the other statements? I know what the reenactment says, holding to that account being presented here 13:36:05 correct in stating the 1st statement is most accurate? 1st is usually more accurate when giving weeks or months later... get that in depositions 13:36:27 mentioned prior experience in san Antonio, go to Alamo and go down to water? about 2 levels down 13:36:48 mentioned when you worked there for 15-20 years? 25 years 13:36:58 important for you to make sure you understood all facts? depends on the case, sometimes you want all the information, personal 13:37:20 bring you a case, want to know what all witnesses said, not just one... make sure consistent? in most cases yes sir 13:37:37 in this case, focused on defendant's statement and good's statement? focused on defendants... all that I'm concentrating on.... went to see if his statement was consistent with what I found... the rest I can't say. weren't provided statements from other witnesses? have to disregard them in regards to gunshot wound; only Zimmerman was there 13:38:31 another person was there? a couple witnesses.... well the other person there is not here? right 13:38:50 aware the deceased/ victim was on phone with lady? yes. didn't review her statement? no 13:39:09 worked with medical examiner, find all info before opinion? depends on the case... often info from witnesses goes toward manner of death and not cause of death 13:39:35 suggesting all witness testimony should be disregarded? not for the jury, in my purposes not important in my opinion 13:40:08 not saying that should be disregarded? not what I'm doing, for the jury 13:40:26 west asked you hypotheticals; in order to give opinion.... has to be based on accurate and truth? no, just supposed this and this happened. speculating? just giving presentation and asking what it is 13:41:06 agree that at least 1 statement you relied on, the reenactment, Zimmerman has self-interest? yes 13:41:27 argue he has bias in not telling the truth? one could argue that but I think that's your argument 13:41:41 if his statement doesn't match evidence, it's not the truth? that's correct sir 13:41:53 I guess in your review, aware that only person armed was Zimmerman? yes 13:42:04 aware that he wasn't armed with firearm, but also armed with a flashlight? yes, photo of flashlight in scene photos 13:42:23 this right here? yes. could this do damage to someone? I thought it was one of those old steel heavy things, not a really dangerous weapon... hit hard like that? may cause bruising, not of significance 13:43:11 not provided with statement of surdyka who described Zimmerman on top of martin before the shooting? not provided that statement 13:43:29 not provided statement of bahador were you? no sir 13:43:38 provided john good statement? yes. aware he gave additional sworn statement, didn't hear this at all? no sir, I don't think so (smacked hands) 13:44:00 aware that he also stated he didn't hear anything hitting concrete at all? no sir (smacked the desk) 13:44:31 mention that... shooting animals, animals were alive? yes.... animals kept in federally approved area; vet present at time and the animals have to be anesthetized. how many times were they shot? I'd have to read the paper, determine if testing firearm was valid. found it was? yes. 13:45:27 testified all over the world? a couple places. criminal matters for government and state? yes 13:45:43 testified....... in your years? 6 going on 7 now 13:46:06 said over 50 times or so? no I don't think I said a number of times I testified... most are civil cases 13:46:26 drew Peterson case? criminal... testified for defense? yes. how much are you paid today? same thing I charge everybody $400 an hour. how much charged so far? up to yesterday $2400, not a complicated case forensically.... 13:47:11 mention that..... notes, to refresh your memory? if you get a whole bunch of papers, easier to put the facts down 13:47:41 prepared a 5 or 6 page notes you provided to me and west? uh yeah 5 pages, double spaced/double sided... closer to 10 or 8 13:48:09 weren't there, viewed autopsy report? yes. opinion comes from Dr. Bao's medical report? yes 13:48:25 shot to the heart? yes. no dispute about that? correct 13:48:35 did I understand you correctly that if you pulled my heart out I could sit and walk and talk for how long? 10-15 seconds 13:48:56 I could just keep talking and talking and talking without a heart? that's right.... it's between 10-15 seconds, dependent on oxygen supply to the head... that's why SWAT will shoot in the head 13:49:25 even though my heart is gone id still feel pain or not? oh you'd still feel pain 13:49:38 believe it was 10-15 seconds....? I said I can't said, minimum amount of time was between 10-15 seconds. maximum was 3 minutes? in all medical probability no cardiac function after 1-3 minutes 13:50:16 not here to testify as to while this was going on who was yelling for help? no sir... not testifying to that 13:50:29 can't testify as to the statements George said he pulled gun from holster and shot? right I can just say the injuries are consistent with how he shot him, but not how he got the gun 13:50:56 how he claims he got the gun while someone was straddling him, can't say that happened that way? can't tell that by scientific method.... but Zimmerman said it happened that way, means its true right? can't testify to that 13:51:27 physically impossible to do what he said happened? I would say it 13:51:37 not here to say that and how he took the holster? right, outside my ability to make conclusion on that 13:51:49 just to say how close it was to skin and clothes? right 13:51:59 is it not true that one possibility is martin was over Zimmerman and he was like this.....? he'd be someway over him, not sure of the angle 13:52:24 this angle? I can't tell you... if you put your hand out, since it rotates.... still get the path, consistent with him being over 13:52:44 also consistent he was standing up? problem with that is the shirt would be pulled down.... if you shot through the shirt in that area, when the shirt is let go and put back in position, defect in shirt would be over here if pulled this way.... moved it to where it over lined the gun shot to get away from the chest 13:53:38 saying martin had to physically be on top like this? saying that physical evidence is consistent with martin being over Zimmerman 13:53:56 not also consistent with martin pulling away from Zimmerman on the ground, same angle, and Zimmerman shooting at that time? yes 13:54:40 the other question I had.... possibilities, blunt trauma to Zimmerman's head, concrete as possibility or maybe a tree branch for any of those bruises? if you hit someone with a tree branch 13:55:10 if you bump in it? where in face or back of head... either one? well you would expect abrasions.... he had contusion up there... abrasion is scrap. did he have any? yes. small on right side of nose and impact abrasions on temples and in the back 13:55:55 struggling with you, I push you and you hit the tree, caused that way? well you'd have to have a tree branch there and I didn't see any 13:56:20 if you just bumped a head.... wood gives, police used to carry wooden batons, less dangerous than metal... hit someone hard enough on back of head you get a laceration 13:56:50 any gardening at all? no my wife does 13:56:56 I do gardening and I get a bald head, bruise from tree branch? yeah an abrasion, abrasions back here 13:57:15 not aware that there were trees out there.... defendant says struggle near trees? I thought you meant trees on ground 13:57:40 possibility then correct for some of the abrasions? you could have one from the tree 13:57:54 could be from rolling on concrete as they both struggle or fight? yeah... impact with concrete 13:58:15 curious what you mentioned about martin, described injury to left hand..... what did Dr. Bao call it...? he called it so I have to go to with it. you saw the photo though? not sure if I did or not 13:58:51 assuming that's an abrasion, may be additional injuries under knuckles? no. can't disagree with it as an abrasion, but if you punch someone will you get bruises on knuckles, yes or no... if they suspected something they should've cut into hand and saw underneath 13:59:36 if persons alive, just wait a day or so and see if you have hemorrhaging.... but you said sometimes you won't see it? yes....... if it's not there it's not important 14:00:05 can hit someone and not leave bruising on knuckles? correct. Zimmerman could've hit him and not had bruising on knuckles? correct 14:00:26 shown photos of Zimmerman's head, opinions to what they were? yes.... someone familiar with his head, doctor from the past would know what's existing and what's not? may or may not.... you don't really remember a patients shape of head, especially if seeing multiple patients 14:01:04 that would be the best person to see George alive the next day, what he had and didn't have? in theory, if done correctly, yes..... emergency room records and doctor records are lousy in describing injuries 14:01:36 fire rescue do an honorable job? yes, not incompetent, treat them.... not document injuries 14:02:03 fire rescue are interested in injuries? in treating a person.... mention two lacerations, don't say where they are 14:02:22 folgate measured for you? yeah, but didn't say which one was on which side.... 14:02:52 talking about same photograph? the one with blood... clouded 14:03:07 agree with treatment it didn't need stitches? I agree, but outside my area of expertise... its treatment 14:03:47 you did review fire rescue report? yes 14:03:56 patient has GCS 15? glascoe index thing. what does it mean? that he's perfectly fine 14:04:19 people that dealt with him right after his interaction? correct 14:04:28 did I understand correctly you're saying difference between photo at scene..... 14:04:57 blood on front taken by police, something wrong with nose? yes... if you look at the photo take 4 hours later that deviation is not there 14:05:29 your opinion is you believe fire rescue did it without noticing they did it? its consistent with a fracture, since no one.... ENS thought there was a fraction, if it's now replaced that would account for differences... agree his nose is perfect? not swollen to right side as deviated in first photo 14:06:18 possible not fractured at all? the swelling would still be there and it's not 14:06:57 one is smaller than this and ones about like that? correct. that he'd die from those? no, indicative of hard impact 14:07:15 or just tree limb or rolling around? indicative of hard impact. 14:07:26 don't know if someone hitting him or rolling around? hard impact, that's all 14:07:45 aware that he was offered medical care and he declined? yes sir 14:07:57 also I believe folgate and fire rescue didn't notice other injuries to top of head, missed it? no.... the bleeding continued after ENS, or didn't notice it because they didn't consider it significant 14:08:31 went the next day to facility and folgate treated him and she didn't note all the injuries? medical personnel don't describe injuries properly 14:09:06 other thing I want to ask is... the photo taken at the scene, got blood there.... put my hand over that, expect my hand to have what? blood 14:09:54 agree that photograph I just showed you, bleeding like that... blood will go down if standing? depends how profusely... laying on my back, blood will go inward? partial, some will go in and out 14:10:32 more difficult to swallow or say anything? depends on how profusely 14:10:43 blood will go into my mouth eventually? yes. harder to swallow or talk? yeah unless you start swallowing it 14:10:59 you did not view the video taken of Zimmerman when brought to police and could walk fine? I've seen it.... kept playing it on TV all the time... seemed to be walking fine? correct 14:11:28 recording you saw of his interview was after that? yes. but that evening, he was walking and talking fine? yes 14:11:52 agree there's no witness to the actual shooting except defendant and deceased? correct 14:12:09 regarding gunshot wound, it was up to 4 inches as max and 2 as minimum? right... 2 inches accounting for sweatshirt and hoody? no. the hole creates barrier? right.... between the skin and muzzle 14:12:45 ever worn one of those hoodies? not that type 14:12:52 seen others wear them? yes sir.... wear them big? yes. hang down? yes. something in it, wouldn't it hang down? Objection! OVERRULED. yes sir 14:13:22 make it a little tighter? yes 14:13:49 asked about DNA, head of lab in Texas? yes. asked about DNA and possible packaging or improper packaging? yes 14:14:07 surprised that same object or evidence..... plastic would cause mold and degrade DNA? no I said you're supposed to dry the blood, package separately so that one piece doesn't contaminate the other... don't put in plastic bag, plastic is air tight... wrap in paper, the paper breathes 14:15:03 put the clothing in a bag....? always get mold into it, but if it dries... that's why you dry to get mold. assuming you don't? you'll get mold.... DNA gone? yeah you can lose some.... surprised if DNA was found in area that was mispackaged? no 14:15:49 said you reviewed firearms report? yes. 14:15:56 agreed with that in the sense that the findings and range, stippling, soot, gun powder? right 14:16:31 safe to assume that your opinion is that somehow after George was punched, injury to his nose... you believe it may have fractured and displaced and someone put it back? sure he could've. would've been painful? yes. 14:17:09 anybody could've done it? yes. and nobody could've done it and it wasn't as bad as it thinks? well if just swelling wouldn't go down in 4 hours... deviated because it was fractured 14:17:44 when we bleed, its profuse? scalp bleeding is always profuse... more than other areas? yes. why? no idea, that's how its designed 14:18:14 so the bottom line, possibilities about how the gunshot wound occurred? to a degree, consistent with his account 14:18:33 not saying his account, just when he already had gun out and pointing it at martin? yes. at that point, don't know if martin was backing away or going toward? consistent with Zimmerman's account 14:19:10 also consistent with martin pulling back? I told you that too, yes sir 14:19:31 not here to testify about holster or how it works? no. nor about firearm either 14:20:08 sweatshirt with hoody.... still going to grab if big? yes sir.... 14:20:38 testified about your expertise is once body is dead, just trauma? trauma is pathology, will testify to that... don't testify to treatment at all 14:21:06 aware that out there at the complex, also sprinkler boxes? I didn't see any of those 14:21:43 moment? YES.... 14:21:52 know whether Zimmerman is right or left handed? right handed 14:22:10 thank you very much REDIRECT 14:22:38 notes you prepared, a summary of measurements that martin was 5'11 and weigh 158 lb.? right. BMI was 22 which would be normal range for a person his size? correct 14:23:07 indicated that the location of gun shot? Objection Leading! SUSTAINED 14:23:18 where the gunshot wound was on martin? yes 14:23:25 do you need your notes to form your opinions once you have facts before you? no 14:23:35 do notes include several pages of photos that were most pertinent in assessing trauma? yes, 4 pages are just photos... shown those here? yes sir 14:23:56 the scope of your work was to consider the statement made to police about how the shooting took place at moment shot was fired and for you to consider forensic evidence to determine whether or not Zimmerman's statement is consistent with physical evidence? Objection! Leading and Compound. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION? yes. yes 14:24:54 I have to interpret objective evidence, not basing opinions on witnesses... they're wrong all the time... 14:25:08 review witness statements that contradicted physical evidence? all the time... someone stood over man and shot him and two architects and a secretary saw that, bullet from gun didn't match... half a dozen of those cases 14:25:51 bahador and didn't claim to see the individuals at time shot fired? no. surdyka said she was looking at individuals some distance away and believes she was looking at the fired shot, described Zimmerman on top of martin? Objection! Mischaracterization! REPHRASE 14:26:52 surdyka said she was looking out window and believes she was looking at individuals when shot was fired... at that time, Zimmerman was on top and martin was faced down... is that possible given forensic evidence you know? no sir, not possible.. he was shot in the front 14:27:35 would her statement do you good? no sir... example of how an eye witness gets it wrong? yes sir 14:27:53 did consider john goods statement.... ? Objection! Leading SUSTAINED 14:28:07 john good testified he saw Zimmerman on his back on the ground and saw martin straddling him on his knees, striking Zimmerman in an MMA style and then went back inside, some seconds later shots were fired.... position he saw consistent with forensic evidence? yes sir 14:28:54 that statement is separate and apart from Zimmerman? right, but wouldn't use that to give my opinion, use the evidence in conjunction with Zimmerman's statement 14:29:27 you pointed out in your direct evidence, there were two lacerations on the back of Zimmerman's head.... testified you believed those two to be from separate impact? yes sir. could see valley in between? yes 14:29:52 two blows that created lacerations? yes, so separate you couldn't get the two from one impact 14:30:22 are the two lacerations on the back of his head, consistent with two separate impacts? yes 14:30:38 is it... trying to figure out how to ask about tree branches, any big branches on ground to use as club? only trunks on ground and I didn't see anything 14:31:14 to receive lacerations from tree trunk, what would have had to happen? upright sitting and go back violently against the trunk on two occasions... still blunt trauma to back of head, twice 14:31:42 or it could have been on the sidewalk? right Objection! OVERRULED 14:31:58 is that scenario more plausible? cement is more plausible especially from the side of the head 14:32:18 commented of course, different role professionals play in dealing with people injured? right. 14:32:35 their objective is to treat someone, mine is to document injuries and interpret the injuries... their job is different than my job 14:33:07 opportunity to review the physician assistant notes that folgate took next day? yes. notice that she documented what would be black eyes? yes. 14:33:27 consistent with showing up later from blow to nose? secondary blackened of the eye, shows up later... punch eyes directly it would be more immediate 14:33:56 not surprising to you that the blow to the nose from the photos... might be associated black eyes the next day? wouldn't be surprising at all 14:34:17 issue whether his nose was actually deviated or just swelling, is that significant whether or not he was punched in the face? still punched in the face.... swelling is gone 4 hours later, nose displaced and put into position 14:34:55 possible his nose wasn't deviated.... does that matter if he was punched? obviously hit in the face and forehead 14:35:22 the GCS 15 scale, reference to paramedic note? area on the form where a 15 means they're walking, talking, breathing, heart rate, not really bad.... most people come into ER are 15... to go down you to get into trouble 14:36:00 not claiming that Zimmerman wasn't able to walk or talk that evening not withstanding his injuries? correct... more a stunning injury, not significant concussion 14:36:37 something that happens after the actual impact? Objection! Leading. REPHRASE 14:36:47 consequences of blow, those that develop over time? concussions show up immediately, problem is they can be subtle... that's why sporting events like having doctors there.... lay people won't pick up on concussions 14:37:24 feeling it when getting hit like that? oh yes. if you get punched in the nose, you know it. continue to hurt for a while? yes. what about getting head hit on concrete? could... especially if lacerations 14:37:59 able to know what was happening to them was life threatening? no because they're stunned... cant interpret 14:38:17 even looking at them outside, could say they're alright and then die a few hours later... that's why police should've taken Zimmerman to hospital, if he died in station family would've sued 14:38:54 even if no evidence of not walking or? you don't play around... jails always lose the lawsuits 14:39:14 if someone is in the process of being hit and having head struck on cement, stunning affect and the pain associate with it... in the moment, not knowing when it'll stop... say I can take 3 more of these? Objection! Leading! SUSTAINED 14:40:07 these circumstances.... overwhelming person on receiving end? Objection! Leading Argumentative! OVERRULED TO BOTH.... yes 14:40:31 some questions about the packaging of evidence, if wet and bio material... testimony that the wet outer shirt was sealed in bag while wet and placed in paper bag outside of that... good evidence handling? no sir.... when bag was open it smelled of mold? its decomposing... air dry and put in paper bags, not plastic 14:41:22 accepted forensic practice subjecting evidence to that type of packaging... in that condition for a month.... that would promote degradation or the integrity of DNA? oh yes 14:41:55 rionda mentioned if martin put hand over Zimmerman's nose at this point in time there may have been transfer of blood? yes. Objection! SUSTAINED 14:42:25 if martin put hand over Zimmerman in this condition, testimony there may have been transfer of blood? yes 14:42:40 I take it you would have no additional information if his nose was bleeding at some point during the incident? correct... impact to nose, eventually bleed can't tell if you'll bleed immediately... depends on position your head is in? yes 14:43:24 if you find something important but if you don't, absence doesn't make it important? right... general fact that's understood... especially if you don't know the statistical probability... how often do you find something, how often it occurs 14:44:09 do you agree environmental conditions affect physical evidence? oh yeah 14:44:24 about 3 hours from the event until martins body was transported, during that time... covered by blanket...body and hands were exposed to elements? right, do you wrap it tightly or wrap it loosely... plastic tends to rub and be stiff 14:45:07 also consider that there's been testimony, the weather varied from light drizzle to heavy rain... could affect DNA evidence collected? true. or how the hands were handled... or how they were washed prior to photo? that's why pathologist is supposed to be with the body, should never leave the body even if you have assistants helping you 14:46:06 why you may trust your assistants to follow protocol, you would verify? right... examine clothing on body before you take it off and then stand there to make sure they're doing it appropriately.... 14:46:53 marked as states 28..... Object! Beyond Scope of Cross! I DONT KNOW WHAT IT IS 14:47:14 states 28 offered in evidence, picture of martins chest on scene.... states 95 in evidence, photo at time of autopsy, before cleaning or washing? Same Objection! PLEASE APPROACH (sidebar) 14:49:50 states 28 was taken at the scene, any blood present in photo? yes blood around nipple. 14:50:06 look at states 95, taken at time of autopsy before body was clean, any blood? no... in the original photo, stream of blood and its missing in this photo. been cleaned? Objection! Speculation SUSTAINED, OVERRULED TO ARGUMENTATIVE RE-CROSS 14:51:08 photos shown to you....? gunshot wound, one at the scene 14:51:22 show the sweatshirt is up? yeah been pulled up 14:51:30 at the scene and transporting the body, sweatshirt down absorb the blood? sure 14:51:49 expect the blood in the sweatshirt? right 14:52:00 asked questions by west, agree he is not evidence? right. use his words to form opinion? no the reports and my report 14:52:37 agree there was absence of x rays or proof of broken nose? correct 14:52:48 agree there was absence or documentation of brain injury? oh yes 14:53:00 absence of anything being washed off the body? can't say it was washed or not... if that shirt was lying and they pulled it off, could wipe off blood... not supposed to do that.... take photo of wound intact before cleaned it 14:53:39 at the scene, remove clothing or stay on? the clothing should remain on body so the photo at scene is proper, but at medical examiner's office.... shouldn't have undressed body would be wiping it, techniques weren't correct. but you did rely on his findings? I had no other choice. document what occurred? right 14:54:44 absence of evidence anything was washed by rain? it would have to be, have to know how much was raining.. needed observation. pure speculation? yeah unless you were there 14:55:16 there was a baseness of vomiting, no vomit out there? no 14:55:26 agree that a jury who heard john good should rely on what he said on the witness stand? interesting, if he has a good statement at first and then not as good on the stand... depends 14:56:00 rely on his statement? disregarded witness........ supported or validated statements. witnesses are all over the place... but isn't what George said, in effect a witness? yes, but that's why you don't believe him.... check the tests and the autopsies 14:56:58 relied on one of his statements, gun was out and was 2-4 inches? right RE-RE-DIRECT 14:57:14 absence of evidence notion..... if good didn't testify that he heard George's head hitting cement like this, mean that Zimmerman's head didn't get hit? no 14:57:42 if good didn't hear martin hit Zimmerman in head, mean he wasn't hit in head? no 14:57:58 MAY HE BE EXCUSED? yes. yes. CALL NEXT WITNESS.... 14:58:24 omara: one moment...... 14:59:26 (sworn in) 14:59:43 rionda: approach? YES (sidebar) 15:00:23 name? norton bonaparte jr. occupation? city manager. employed? 1 yr. and a half. when this happened? yes 15:00:51 event of playing the 911 call to martin family.... decisions made for that point, not important now.. just event 15:01:23 decision was made to play tape for martin family? to play a number of tapes 15:01:34 police evidence tape? 911 and non-emergency number 15:01:47 focus attention on one even though several were played.. 15:01:54 who took care of process of playing the tapes? mayor's office, myself and mayor 15:02:09 was there any conversation with law enforcement as to how to accomplish? not witnesses, they were parents 15:02:24 conversation with law enforcement as to how to play the tapes to these people? no 15:02:43 you just... decide on your own? make them public, wanted to play to family first as courtesy 15:03:07 when decision to play the tapes for family, your decision or mayors decision on how to occur? decision to just play them 15:03:27 to play them separately? no there was not 15:03:42 it occurred then from other testimony, tape was played with entire family present? yes. you the one playing? I don't recall who was playing we used a computer 15:04:03 who was doing what with the tapes? disk, laptops so they could hear. who was doing what? I don't recall either myself or mayor. who was present? me, mayor, family, attorneys 15:04:32 law enforcement present? no. decision you and mayor made? I asked family and they said they would rather not have law enforcement present. discuss with chief lee? just informed him and other officers to not be in the same room 15:05:05 how many times the tape was played? which tape... the 911 tape? no I do not. always there? in the vicinity, not always in the room 15:05:23 either you or mayor in room at all times? I do not recall 15:05:32 how many times was the tape played while you were in the room? I don't recall. more than one? the tape with screams, yes... anyone in particular? I don't recall.. just wanted to hear it again 15:06:00 did you record or take notes to any responses they had from that one tape? no. record the even in any form or fashion? no we did not. recorded by audio or video? no. court reporter there to document? no it was not 15:06:27 was any consideration given to you or mayor to record it for law enforcement? releasing to media that evening, wanted family to have courtesy to hear it first 15:06:50 any consideration to concept to record it in case law enforcement needed it when half a dozen family members listened for the first time? that's a no 15:07:32 attorneys present, were martin family attorneys? correct. CROSS 15:07:55 rionda: bottom line was that it was the decent thing to play for family before release? our intent. that's why it occurred the way it did? that is correct 15:08:17 MAY HE BE EXCUSED? CALL NEXT WITNESS omara: approach? unique way to appear witness (sidebar) 15:10:31 TAKE A 15 MINUTE RECESS, NOTEPADS FACE DOWN ON CHAIR, FOLLOW DEPUTY OUT OF COURTROOM 15:11:03 PLEASE BE SEATED. COURT IN RECESS FOR 15 MINUTES =============================================================== 15:25:20 (Zimmerman talking with attorney assistant) 15:30:42 PLEASE BE SEATED... BACK ON RECORD... omara: have the witness ready on ipad, waiting for that to get ready.... my client is ok with representing this witness in this fashion. IS THAT CORRECT MR. ZIMMERMAN? yes your honor 15:37:25 (setting up the witness) omara: this will probably be my last witness and then begin proffer.... should be done tomorrow 15:39:17 PLEASE BE SEATED... defense calls eloise dillegard 15:39:29 (sworn in via FaceTime) 15:39:53 home sick, appreciate you spending time with us today. name? eloise dilligard. live at retreat at twin lakes? yes. how long? 2.5 years. moved out since then? yes 15:40:45 time you lived at retreat, knew George Zimmerman? I did. how long? ever since we moved in October 2009 15:41:06 friends? he was my neighbor, spoke on friendly basis... no problem with one another 15:41:15 knew of his involvement with watch program? yes 15:41:28 see him patrolling as part of the watch? no. knew him as friend or neighbor? friendly neighbor 15:41:41 focus attention on February 26th, the night martin was shot, remember? I do 15:41:55 tell the jury what first brought your attention to the event you came to find out was the shooting? I was coming from Wal-Mart, down Rinehart to go to Oregon and make left, police approached me from rear, he wanted to go around me.... coming up Oregon I noticed police were pulling into neighborhood... I looked down from mail station to left and saw crime scene tape.... I didn't want to go directly down, came around right hand side to go around back way, asked a couple guys.. they didn't know but another police was coming.... 15:43:10 weather like at that time? it was very rainy that night 15:43:19 at some point as you got closer to the crime scene, notice any familiar vehicle? yes. which? George's truck. describe? gray Honda ridgeline 15:43:49 where you noticed the truck? because of the way our street is, it was nearing the curb down by the crime scene which I believe was on retreat view circle 15:44:14 know the area as the T intersection? yes. 15:44:21 may not have known names then, a woman who lives on end section jenna lauer, know her? no 15:44:40 she was living in that first townhome just past at the intersection of the T, know what I'm talking about? yes 15:45:10 presume jennas was first in that row of houses, where was the truck parked in reference to that? truck would've been looking toward the east... slightly south of where her condo would be 15:45:36 walk out her front door, looking right at the truck? look to the right from her condo 15:45:52 that would put the truck on the curb to the right of that street from her condo? correct 15:46:07 retreat view circle, the one that circles around as perimeter? it does 15:46:16 is lauer on street that comes off of retreat view circle? her condo would be facing retreat view circle, yes 15:46:36 straight out her front door, into the clubhouse? no down the street to the west 15:46:52 saw it in the area of the crime scene? yes 15:47:00 may come back to map.... came up to the area describe what you saw? a few people standing on the sidewalk, people who were down by the yellow tape, I looked around to see if I saw George because I saw his truck, after I didn't see him I recognized a lady from HOA and asked her... she said Objection! Hearsay! SUSTAINED 15:48:12 omara: your honor.... did you know the person's name who you spoke to? I don't, she's from Pembroke pines 15:48:30 conversation with her about the events? I asked what was going on 15:48:39 at some point then, did you speak to any law enforcement officers? after I could not find George, I attempted to talk to some of other witnesses that were there and after I felt like well I'm not in harm's way, I was walking away and police came up and said you don't want to talk to me.... and I said I wasn't here when anything happened. 15:49:26 he said? we're trying to find someone who knows the people involved in shooting. further conversation? he was going to take a picture and bring to us. 15:49:55 did that officer identify to you by name? he did not... I'm usually pretty perceptive to look at name badge, but I don't remember 15:50:13 did he show you a picture or two of people involved? came back with an iPhone with two pictures.... 15:50:35 identify either by name or description the others who were present? young Caucasian man, either Jeremy or Jonathan.... and a couple there, married but I didn't get their names 15:51:01 present when the pictures were shown? they were. able to identify anyone in the two pictures? George Zimmerman my neighbor 15:51:20 seen those pictures here quite a bit in the court room, was that a picture where Zimmerman had a bloody nose? he did have a bloody nose, yes 15:51:41 describe the difference you saw between the picture that night and Zimmerman you knew before? nose was bloody and to me it looked disfigured, it was somewhat to the left or right, not the way I knew him.... 15:52:16 did it take you a minute or two to figure out that was the same person? his face still looked the same, only difference was disfigurement and the blood... advise police his name? yes. did anyone else identify the person as well? Objection! Hearsay! SUSTAINED 15:52:59 after identified George, shown a second picture? I was. identified that person? I didn't know his name, seen him in passing probably earlier that day, didn't know who he was. know now that was trayvon martin? yes 15:53:32 after you identified Zimmerman, who did you talk to about that event? that night..... if I can remember correctly, where his wife was.... I knew he was married and I didn't see her... looked to be heart, where's his wife 15:54:19 after that? nothing else I could do at that point, I was no longer in harm's way... went to my house, parked in my driveway, went up to George's house to see if Shellie was there, nobody came... shortly after Shellie pulled up.... perpendicular to the driveway and she asked me... Objection! Hearsay! SUSTAINED. omara: offered to be heard. NO SPEAKING RESPONSES. PLEASE APPROACH (Sidebar) 15:59:27 talking about conversation with Shellie Zimmerman? yes. brief. what did she do after that? once I completed my conversation she sped off to the crime scene 15:59:53 there with police... did you go back to the area that night at all? yes I did go back down there to make sure she was ok.... 16:00:13 present during, questioned by law enforcement, present during any other witnesses discussions? yes, the young man there alone and the other couple spoke to policeman about what they knew 16:00:46 were you there when those people gave statements to law enforcement? there for verbal, not written 16:01:00 be more precise... one might have been Jeremy and another Jonathan? that's what I think I remember, not sure 16:01:18 do you recall were there more than 3 that gave statements in your presence? in my presence, a couple and a gentleman by himself 16:01:43 did you give any verbal or written statements to police that night? no... he asked me my name and I gave it to him and my phone number 16:02:07 back to the time where you left the area and ran into Zimmerman and went back to look for her didn't find her and left? correct 16:02:28 give statements to law enforcement regarding what you heard? yes.... request that I called him, so I called.... he and another agent came to my house and interviewed me 16:02:53 gave statement about whatever information they gave you? correct 16:03:04 opportunity to listen to the lauer 911 tape? yes 16:03:25 tell me circumstances of the setting? first time I heard was when it was played on local news channel. by yourself or with others? I don't remember... how many times? besides that time, maybe 2 or 3 times 16:04:02 did you hear a voice screaming for help that you were able to recognize? heard the voice screaming in background and of the two I only heard George talk 16:04:26 who was screaming for help? based on fact I've only heard George's voice I would say that it was his... his who? George Zimmerman 16:04:44 when you say you heard him talk, how long you've known him? by that time 2.5 years. speak to you and speak to others in your presence? yes. ever hear him yell for his dog or laugh at a joke? never heard him yell at the dog, commands were like a regular voice... has a white male voice.... 16:05:36 states exhibit 1... can you identify the picture and walk us through a location you may have seen his truck...... 16:06:29 I'm going to move it a little bit to an area, can you describe what is barely on the screen on this point...? a blue line, a little bit of grass... 16:07:01 see the pool in the center of the photo? I can 16:07:26 (west and omara discussing the photo) 16:07:43 mirror images so ill move on.... 16:07:49 try and do it verbally.... familiar with complex? I am 16:07:58 gave us a drive through of how you entered into complex, which one? I came in the entrance that is in front of the elementary school 16:08:18 have the clubhouse in front of you and to the right? that is correct 16:08:30 from that point, coming in Oregon... took a back route to your complex, right on retreat view....? if you say back route, you're talking about Oregon that goes to.... 16:09:20 ok.. sorry about that, I think I confused my question a moment ago... first came in to subdivision and saw crime scene tape? correct. which way was crime scene from where you were driving in? to the left or east 16:10:00 normal way you would go to the left? no I would go to the right 16:10:10 start at the Oregon main entrance with clubhouse on the right, walk or drive us to the area where you did drive up to get better view of crime scene? if I were to drive in to the entrance, I would've made a left to the crime scene 16:10:52 where on that scene would you have scene George's truck? not even 3/10 of a mile down 16:11:08 have a present memory today as to where the truck was? parked on retreat view circle.... the T 16:11:31 could the truck have been parked not on retreat view but the second street in? yes.... not your first left, but second left on twin trees lane? right 16:11:55 that the street you turned down and saw his truck? it could've been, all I know is it was on one of those cubs 16:12:10 directly in front of, touch to right of lauer's townhome? yes 16:12:23 lauer's townhome... look out front door and to the right for his truck? correct. moment? YES YOU MAY 16:13:10 no further questions.... CROSS 16:13:40 I remember you 16:13:53 rionda: bottom line is that day you came into contact with police, suspect and victim, recognized one photo as George... now know the other was trayvon? correct 16:14:13 seen him earlier that day, just walking around? right 16:14:22 asked about the voice, saw on TV? right. no point of reference knew Zimmerman's voice but not martins? that's right 16:14:58 MAY SHE BE EXCUSED? yes. yes. 16:15:18 WHEN FINISHED WITH THAT, APPROACH FOR MOMENT? (sidebar) 16:21:04 MORE MATTERS WE NEED TO TAKE CARE OF TONIGHT, YOU CAN GO HOME AT THIS TIME.... ADMONITIONS: NO DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE CASE. NOT TO READ OR LISTEN TO THE CASE. NO ELECTRONIC DEVICE FOR RESEARCH. NO SOCIAL MEDIA. ASSURANCES? yes... NOTEPADS FACE DOWN, FOLLOW JARVIS INTO JURY ROOM... JURY BACK TOMORROW AT 9 AM 16:22:25 PLEASE BE SEATED. 10 MINUTE RECESS AND THEN CONTINUE WITH ANIMATION ISSUE AND PROFFERING FOR CONNOR'S TESTIMONY... WE WILL BE HERE TOMORROW AT 8 AM FOR DONNELLEY'S...... 10 MINUTE RECESS ====================== 16:44:54 PLEASE BE SEATED.... BACK ON RECORD, SEE SHOEMAKER SITTING ON STAND, MANTEI READY... GO AHEAD 16:45:10 mantei: going through your CV, graphic design degree in 1985? yes. additional degrees? always ongoing education. nothing in terms of post grad work with degree? no 16:45:44 not held as engineer or physicist? correct 16:45:56 take computer software and draw things or create things? that's one version. what's another? a lot of different types 16:46:16 as far as your prior experience testifying, other appearances? declarations and testified. how many times you were present in front of a jury? 17 16:46:43 how many of those were your testimonies objected to? you mean challenged.... 16:47:04 how many times did they object to you? whenever I testify in court, pretrial hearing 16:47:22 17 times, how many of those were animations created with motion suits? probably a dozen. title of the last one? people vs. green in Placerville 16:47:58 create these animations based on surveillance footage, how many of these involved situation like this one where you had nothing... just inserting figures? very rare that I had film to match animation, so pretty much the only one where I matched onto security camera 16:48:40 how many were figures in mid-lay or fight, in front of the jury? twice... that includes this one 16:49:01 most of them are... they're not person on person fights, most are shootings.... mostly just shootings 16:49:16 most of what you did, take bullet trajectories and place them? essentially, yes 16:49:35 taking raw data and drawing lines or putting figures in places they could've been but not like this case where it was an ongoing fluid situation like this one? some were multiple gunshots, sequence of events 16:50:07 but not physical between the two, just measuring trajectories? correct 16:50:19 what was the only time you testified in court, using the suit, involving physical fight to capture fluid situation? Greensburg 16:50:43 tell me about that one? an ex-police officer came up to vehicle and shot the person in vehicle, had to determine position of each of them... positioning when shot and their movements 16:51:11 involved distance between the two and a shooting? close approximation to each other.,... within open door of truck 16:51:30 not as in this case where you're trying to describe ongoing struggle like this one? one I'm currently working on now that is the same as that 16:51:50 for the moment, things where your testimony has been accepted for court purposes in front of jury in criminal case, sounds like this is the first time? ummm.... the suit I've used has been accepted in court in other cases 16:52:20 all the variables we just mentioned, using suit, inserting figures in court in criminal case in front of jury? with this close contact, yes 16:52:39 I think you said, only company in country using wireless motion capture for reconstruction? correct. 16:52:59 no issue if your peers are doing the same thing? correct. limited number that the company makes the suit 16:53:21 use the software, don't know the interworking, algorithms? correct 16:53:34 if the program were not working properly, unless shut down completely or giving you crazy results, wouldn't know that? I can verify if its working correctly... calibrate it 16:54:02 got raw data from station, did mapping on scene and put two people in suits? correct. out there at the scene, you told them what do to do? according to, yes 16:54:25 who were those people? two males. how big? relative size to martin and Zimmerman 16:54:38 how tall? Zimmerman was 5'8.... martin was 5'11 or 6 ft... not really that important for the person wearing the suit to be the exact size for the person doing the movement 16:55:15 did you measure these people? 5'11. how do you know... I'm 6 ft., approximately the same size... eyeball estimate? that's all that was necessary. how much did they weigh? not relevant. do you know or not? similar stature to the people I was representing. 16:55:55 how long were arms and legs? average size. did not measure them? I didn't measure their arms 16:56:09 got into poses.... suits give off pulses of energy that are documented by cameras? no that's not the way mine works... tell me how? 16 accelerometers, move your iPhone and it recognizes it.... those signals transfer to my laptop, apply to figure represented on laptop 16:56:58 they meaning what? the antennas that come in... applied to characters 16:57:11 pulses given off by accelerometers? go to two transmitters, send signal to laptop 16:57:29 each accelerometer has its own code? yes. antennas differentiate among each? yes 16:57:46 have green light to see if functioning properly.... 16:58:01 the version of this animation, final version now? yes 16:58:10 how many prior versions have there been? 2 prior versions, adjusted for more accuracy according to the witnesses 16:58:30 you adjusted based on witnesses, haven't actually read or listened to the actual testimony from witnesses? police reports... court room testimony? no 16:58:51 you changed them based upon what Zimmerman's attorneys told you people said in court? yes 16:59:03 that actually apparently was different enough from original you changed it twice? just to be more accurate, yes 16:59:20 the... understand that most of what you do to reconstruct crime scene, things mapped and known and static in their positioning.... and that is reconstructing crime scene, but adding figures and animation what are you doing? also reconstructing crime scene..... my gathering of data and put into context, sometimes when a jury receives coronary report, bullet trajectory angle, don't know how its relevant or how it applies to the scene... I take all different aspects and put into context 17:00:46 which pieces of evidence... which testimony did you incorporate into this animation? Jeremy wineberg. did he testify in court?..... 17:01:18 what actual court room testimony was incorporated? Jennifer lauer, john good, and Sonja mora.... 17:01:38 you show in this animation an initial contact by two figures, whose testimony did you use to depict that encounter? part of it is from the discovery that you gave us 17:02:05 whose testimony did you use? omara: trial or pretrial? TESTIMONY PRESENTED AT TRIAL....omara: all of Zimmerman's statements are in trial. 17:02:33 IT HAS TO BE TRIAL TESTIMONY OR EVIDENCE.... WHICH DID YOU USE IN YOUR ANIMATION? for initial contact it was Jennifer lauer's statement 17:02:59 she saw that occur? she didn't see it occur, she heard it occur 17:03:08 you are depicting it visually? correct. she didn't testify she could depict visually? just pin pointed the initial contact, in the T to the left of her condo 17:03:34 ever say it must have started there? PLEASE SHUT OFF YOUR PHONE..... IT WAS ON VIBRATE AND ITS NOT NOW 17:04:02 your indication is that she testified it must've started there? I have a question.... so for evidence which the judge was asking, police reports too? no, evidence or testimony I mean something in this court room during trial, outside of court is not evidence for now 17:04:50 omara: have to identify what's in trial.... DONT WANT YOU TO INFER.... IT WOULD BE ANYTHING HEARD BY THE JURY IN THIS COURTROOM BY WAY OF TESTIMONY OR EVIDENCE INTRODUCED... I was not allowed to watch the trial 17:05:31 if I were to ask you if this animation accurately show what's been testified, I don't know? I'm not sure what the proceedings, what went on in court... according to evidence I've received 17:06:00 not the discovery matters, not what a lawyer told you... ask you does this animation accurately show what has been testified to in this court room, you don't know? yes.... if it's not in my consultations with attorneys it would've changed, it's been adjusted to testimony in court 17:06:38 none of which you have heard or observed yourself? correct. none of which evidence you have seen yourself? none of the evidence in court, yes 17:06:55 part of this animation shows the initial encounter where the figures walk up... victim was left handed? I believe so 17:07:13 don't show anyone jumping out of bush? no evidence for that. nothing? ok 17:07:24 nobody emerging out of darkness, people just walk up to each other and stand face to face? for seconds, yes 17:07:41 animation also, do show and plot various items? correct. that's sort of in a 40 ft. area of that slope ground? correct 17:08:07 animation I saw, takes white arrow from encounter and zooms to a place 40 ft. away where we see the two figures bound up together? correct. reason for that is, teleported? direction of martin and Zimmerman consisted with witness police reports and trail of evidence going there 17:08:54 trail of evidence is just a trail, doesn't have a direction.... place where things are found doesn't have a direction until you bring it what others said? correct... reason for arrow is the one witnessed event to the next one... didn't add anything 17:09:33 the animation can't show it because you have no idea how it happened right? correct 17:09:43 get to where figures re-emerge, john good? correct. how tall is he? 6 ft. know this how? given that info from attorneys. not from anything in court but from attorneys? yes who got it from good 17:10:15 where was he standing? sliding door and the right side slides over, about a ft. out from the door... where did you get that from? good. his in court testimony? consultation with attorneys 17:10:41 where on patio he's standing, pick a spot? straight out from door, one foot. don't know which side? I didn't pick it that's where he was sitting or standing 17:11:04 in court? through consultation. before court? I'm not sure... during the trial, not sure when 17:11:19 he told you exactly where on patio? yes. how big by how big? two pillars on corner, 7.5 ft. from one side to another... tell you one ft. from one side to the other? 1 ft. from the door 17:11:54 start with something else with animation, true or not...... the animation contains artificial light? correct. properties to show things even though dark outside? correct 17:12:24 intentionally no effort to document lighting? yes 17:12:39 most important thing is seeing detail even though that's not detail that night? correct, plenty of people can testify to the lighting... accurate of that night? no 17:13:08 in your decision about where to place the people.... where to instruct those wearing the suits... done before court testimony? probably within the month before.... prior to trial proceedings? correct 17:13:38 told them based on your best estimates? based on police reports and interviews. how many interviews did you read? lauers, goods, a couple hand written reports (3) 17:14:06 like witness statements? yes. that's it? yes 17:14:14 based on those you told these people where to go and what to do? based on that and the 911 call 17:14:33 911 call by lauer? yes. she saw none of this? correct 17:14:42 and john good from whose perspective this is shown was not on phone? correct. show lauers phone call and figures doing points to that? right... pin point gun shot, but to any of the rest of it... where the figures were at during any point of the 911 call? only figure other than Zimmerman and martin is good.... WERE YOU FINISHED WITH ANSWER? no... FINISH... good specified when he came in during the 911 call on the video, when he came in how long out there and when he went back in 17:16:06 what video did good say he came in through the 911 call? based on consultation and the placement of the video 17:16:20 telling this court that john good stated exactly where he was during portions of jenna lauer's call? how long he was outside 17:16:37 matched specific audio to the actions of good and figures on ground? correct. what in court testimony or evidence you were provided that tells you john good saw two figures doing x when jenna lauer was saying y? no in court testimony. no out of court testimony either? consultation with attorneys on how long he was out there and when he came out 17:17:21 integrating visual perspective of one witness who has no idea what jenna lauer is doing? not just based on her call, but he can base it on when the gun shot went off 17:17:49 I understand when the gun shot went off, telling court prior to the gun shot that john good visual witness and lauer audio witness, match up with good is seeing? if you take 911 call from gunshot and good says he was in condo at particular time before gun shot, point when he went in... particular time of how long he was out there, back track from the gun shot and determine from those when he came out and went back in.... 17:18:57 those were not exact, they were estimations? it's an estimation on his part.... nothing more than estimation on your part? based on witness that was there who said how long he was out there and how long after the gun shot went off 17:19:36 that animation is specific, play a portion of that recording in conjunction with video or simulated video.. all based on nothing more than estimations? by the person witnessing it 17:20:09 none of that could be said to be exact or accurate to point to say for certain that's what he was seeing at the time jenna was saying a word? not specific to exact word... your animation makes it very specific, does it? yes 17:20:40 nothing in that animation that tells me the call is generally going on, that animation looks like they're going on at the same time? correct, scenario according to witness and evidence 17:21:08 which witness and evidence that came out in court? consultation with attorneys 17:21:22 no way good can say at time lauer said this I was doing this? I don't think that's what he based that..... he can't say exactly according to what she was saying 17:21:47 he was gone from visual view while lauer is still on phone... no one has clocked however many seconds? correct 17:22:06 nonetheless, animation purports to showing? yes. animation reported to be more accurate than we know the evidence can be? the purpose of him involved in animation isn't so much whether he was outside for 10 seconds vs. 7 seconds, its putting him into location and showing what he saw at that time.... but you don't know at that time because you don't know what was going on with that call? his is based on when the gun shot went off... estimation upon estimation upon estimation...... agree? only to the point that the witness.... 17:23:31 this was created but you're not pretending its accurate depiction of what went on, just estimation? according to witness that was involved 17:23:54 whom you've never heard testify? correct 17:24:37 were still treated to a view of two figures on ground? correct 17:24:46 what witness testimony are you relying on for those figures since good is no longer there? based on di maio's positioning 17:25:05 didn't hear him testify? consultation with dr... phone call last saturday? yes. after you had been deposed? correct 17:25:28 had conversation because you were asked to call him? I wasn't asked to call him... I asked about the doctor who was standing by.... not your idea after you had made another animation until you were set up with speaking with this doctor? 17:26:00 my idea from start we needed physical evidence of when shot went off 17:26:15 based on physical evidence? based on testimony, consultation from di maio's phone call. not testimony, phone call? correct 17:26:34 also told me yesterday that the one think you know for sure is the entry of the bullet wound was directly 90 degrees straight on? correct 17:26:53 position 3, tell me they're parallel to one another? horizontal to each other.... not just horizontal but parallel? yes. stacked on top like Lego logs? no there's space. space based on what? based on talking to, my conversation with di maio and inquiry into the scene to fit the characters together 17:27:49 how big is the space? between clothing or bodies... start with clothing? it varies, in my 3rd position I'm not quite sure, haven't measured... from the ground is 13-15 inches. approximately? not the purpose of final position is to know who's on top of bottom 17:28:42 purpose is to resemble the defense theory? not to resemble defense theory. some other theory? di maio's. based on 20 minute phone call? doesn't take long. 17:29:09 told you they were x inches away and so far apart? bent over Zimmerman. told you exact distances? the distance varies according to our conversation 2 inches in one spot and 4 inches from another 17:29:43 that's the distance between clothing and the shot? correct. have I asked about that space? that would depend on positioning 17:30:03 varies on estimations? yes but in this particular positioning.... purpose of positioning wasn't to get specific to measure with camera the distance between them, otherwise I would've put a camera there... just to show whose on top and bottom 17:30:42 not to be accurate as it happened but to show positions? correct 17:30:51 do you know whether that animation accurately depicts how they were that night? according to di maio that's the position and the findings 17:31:12 parallel and unknown? not completely parallel 17:31:24 so if I were to ask you, are you basing this on phone conversation or in court testimony you would say phone call? yes 17:31:56 said earlier, sometimes bullet trajectories you use metal rod? create a rod in the computer. in this case? showing bullet trajectory 17:32:17 doesn't show bullet, trajectory, the firearm or anything? not the purpose 17:32:26 but it doesn't show any of that? no 17:32:30 you were asked to leave the gun out, weren't you? no. ever told me you were? I don't believe I was told..... 17:34:36 last Wednesday 2nd deposition in the case? yes. show you here pg. 27 line 4....... 17:34:56 see that question answer? correct... it wasn't, not state I was told to leave it out it says in consultation with the attorney 17:35:16 your answer was I didn't make it on my own, just consultation with the attorneys... my input and their input 17:35:33 not the purpose of this video.... I did not put it in 17:35:43 video omits that? correct because that's not the purpose of the video..... 17:36:06 conditions in which you filmed those in the suit? recorded 17:36:14 in the day time rolling around? recorded yes 17:36:22 when you recorded them, obviously.... were these folks moving in rapid pace like fighting or getting up assuming pose? Object! while previous animations we had movement, in response to concerns we eliminated that, they're individual shots.. not relevant any more 17:37:20 first part of animation contains movement....omara: absolutely, but the part where they're moving from that point down. CLARIFY 17:37:40 reproducing and filming motion capture suits in action.... first interaction, position of bodies... 17:38:36 measured the areas from the drain boxes and sprinkler boxes to get correct position... who told you the distance? placement of them, position based on shell casing... position of his cell phone and where it was in relation to goods house 17:39:20 plug into animation? best to record on the scene to plug in elements... once created in computer adjust so its most accurate 17:40:09 didn't measure the shell casing? lay out little markers 17:40:21 took figures and put them in exact locations with shell casings, 6 ft. from porch... specific place? correct. did that based on what evidence? from goods testimony and consultation with attorneys 17:41:11 placed figures where they were in 3rd position based on your belief and knowledge and belief as to projection of shell casing not in the video? correct, relative to the position where Zimmerman was found 17:41:43 you mean martin? yes. that's position 4? correct, but 3 is relative 17:41:56 put the figures in certain position relative to shell case, no one testified about being close to shell casing, estimation on your part? correct it's just in proximity to shell casing, on the right of Zimmerman 17:42:32 on the right but 2 or 3 or 4 ft. from right, no idea how far? can't be that far from where martin ended up... proximity of evidence marker 6 has to be pretty close proximity to third position 17:43:06 I understand, getting at how high gun is off ground affects how far that casing goes? a lot of variables, not unremarkable 17:43:28 none of which you have direct evidence? just that a shell casing was found... no idea where it came from? we know approximately where it came from 17:43:51 animation shows figures in specific spot, based on animation of shell casing? based on last position and previous position and shell casing location 17:44:13 last position 4th is what happened after the defendant claimed he shot martin and martin fell off him and jumped on his back and moved his body? correct 17:44:33 no idea exactly how far that happened, just know where the body was found? close proximity to the final position 17:44:50 I understand, all happened in 40 ft. area? not giving me specifics 17:45:02 what does your animation give me those specifics? it's to one side of the shell casing, the cell phone, their previous position 17:45:26 based on series of estimations... INTERRUPT YOU, I SAW ANIMATION ONE BRIEF MOMENT, REMEMBER GENERALLY WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, BUT POSITIONS AND STUFF, HELPFUL IF YOU HAD ANIMATION UP AND HAD HIM EXPLAIN POSITIONS.... CAN WE DO THAT, IM REALLY TRYING TO FOLLOW TESTIMONY, WITHOUT LOOKING AT EACH FIGURE OR POSITION, HELPFUL IN CONJUNCTION WITH TESTIMONY 17:48:54 third position illustration? yes. yellow circles are items of evidence? correct 17:49:11 place you have these items in yellow circles is estimation? their positioned in between items of evidence 17:49:38 telling me they should be in that location as opposed to a few inches over... couldn't tell me because you're not trying to? correct.... positioning relative to each other is purpose 17:50:08 couldn't tell me what angle the persons head should be? right it wasn't still 17:50:26 still estimation? what part.... the actual positions of figures? placement according to dr. di maio. he said they looked exactly like that? their positioning. he described that degree of tilt to you? within 2 inches 17:51:01 how many inches did he say martins head was off the ground? that wasn't relevant. again an approximation? approximation of his head, yes 17:51:48 as far as these white things depicted, the sprinkler boxes? and drain boxes 17:52:07 hard metal plastic covers whatever their made of? correct 17:52:31 you also reviewed at least one statement from Zimmerman? supplied to me, not sure which one... use any to create this animation? any of animation or what part.. any part? some of the initial portion at the T intersection. that's it? yes all the rest are based on other witnesses.... 17:53:22 which statement from defendant? video walk through. only one you used? yes. 17:53:31 some reason you didn't use the others? because I had other witnesses that placed or positioned them throughout the animation 17:53:52 only used it as it relates to the beginning of this video? yes. in conjunction with lauer's testimony about that is where initial conflict took place 17:54:15 reason why you only used video as opposed to other statements? I had other witnesses that laid out scene from then on 17:54:38 talk to me about.....any types of validation done with this method for animation? 17:55:13 either the several types of software or programs used, other than buying and assuming they're working right, validation studies on them? validation on the motion capture suit. only the suit? and the 3d software I use... if some inaccuracy in any of the measurements I haven't found any 17:56:04 accurate to one measurement? accurate as you want, thousands of an inch... separate them to here? what was relevant to what I needed... measuring porch to shell casing, nothing in here required thousands of inch of accuracy 17:56:49 directed those wearing the suits, telling them to go at it with simulated fight or simply pose this way? just move according to what the witnesses wrote in police reports... what position there in, ground and pounding that type of movement and how they would naturally interact with ground and slope 17:57:40 directing a movie, go here and do this... they weren't just doing it on their own? correct based on location of evidence on scene, the type of surface they were on, what was written in police report in terms of what they were doing at that location 17:58:13 first part of that tape.... have them attempt to simulate speed of that or make that motion and you adjusted speed? swaying and reaction isn't sped up, that's actual movement 17:58:40 whether that's accurate as opposed to another estimation? it was just a movement portraying that occurrence and how somebody doing that motion 17:59:05 tell this court for certain it's an accurate depiction of motion, you'd tell me no, right? someone swinging and striking in the face.... there's other ways of doing it... other ways reconstructionist animate on computer, move arm and advance... estimating how it moves... advantage is you put the suit on and that's how the person will move 18:00:06 that's how that person that day moved with the suit on them? correct... can't tell me that's how they did it that night? just portraying one person coming up and striking another person in that matter with respect to their heights 18:00:37 understand the conclusion or depiction, this is not necessarily your opinion, but what you have attempted to create based on what you've been told my lawyers? no... it's my reconstruction based on discovery, putting the scene together, being out there with motion suits, and fine tuning it with consultation with attorneys... wasn't.... something created based on evidence and testimony and written reports not solely based on what an attorney told me to do 18:01:44 all the actual in court testimony would've been funneled through lawyers? correct 18:01:57 all action out there is estimated based upon your interpretation of what you were given in discovery? a reconstruction, yes based on evidence from discovery 18:02:20 example is the shell casing, know where it landed but not how it got there? and also their previous positioning and the shell casing REDIRECT 18:03:09 motion capture suits, next generation than those that exist before? correct. more accurate? more accurate, less clean up time, data is cleaner than other motion suits... you can also take into more environments 18:03:47 wireless? correct. 18:03:50 do you have to be in direct line of sight with computer antenna? not direct.. I could record someone from the other wall 18:04:11 new generation, the motion capture suits are accepted in your industry? yes... it's the most accurate way to capture movements 18:04:30 not much different than older motion capture suits? yes, restricted by fact they have to be recorded with camera, disadvantage is you can't see data on the arm... can see data on all accelerometers 18:05:04 hooked in to software to recreate movement in context of body? yes it captures it all 18:05:16 put 4 on a Frisbee and fly Frisbee and they would kick back information? yes. also been used, recordings of jumping out of plane and sky diving 18:05:45 in the concept of the beginning parts and modifications, ever waited until after trial is over to create your animation? it sounds senseless in the question.... animations normally done in anticipation of trial? yes. with the discovery? yes. 18:06:22 when you have that information available, go back and modify based on new information if given to you... go back and fit that in? yes 18:06:58 have you done that in the generation 3 of video you created based upon consultation with me and saying such things as? Objection! Leading! SUSTAINED. modified as we discussed? yes, whole purpose is to get as accurate as possible 18:07:32 testimonies in trial that led to modifications? yes 18:07:40 still with judge, changes in those stills based upon actual trial testimony as opposed to deposition or statement testimony? yes. take out one text and place with another? correct 18:08:11 were they're changes made to the stills based on testimony? more of a defining it better. from who? consultation with you and west. what was discussed in that? what came out in court and testimony 18:08:44 make those modifications to the stills? yes. 18:08:52 as to the... ever waited until middle of trial to begin creation of animation? no, begin as soon as I can... 18:09:10 in the information you were forwarded in this case, info from Zimmerman's various statements forwarded? yes. incorporate into your animation? yes, what his video testimony was and verify there's no conflicting or nothing that conflicts with what I used in creating the scene 18:09:57 other statements available, interview with law enforcement available? correct 18:10:09 what significance did you tend to Zimmerman's statements in assisting you creating any portion? initial conflict 18:10:28 was that specific to Zimmerman saying he was struck? yes 18:10:36 in a location approximate to location he was struck? backed up by lauer's positioning 18:10:53 in addition to lauers to place initial location? Jeremy wineberg's police report 18:11:12 other witnesses like jane surdyka who was in apartment behind the t? yes. utilized all of that? yes 18:11:29 any specific evidence found at scene to assist you in determining that was the initial altercation? yes... his flashlight key chain. 18:11:50 how did that assist you? it gives you direction... initial conflict that took place at t intersection, flashlight which goes down to the direction 18:12:20 mantei suggested this is just an estimation, look at that animation it's an estimation to initial location? correct. in conflict with any evidence in the discovery? no its not 18:12:49 have you recreate animation of a shell casing discharge and the way it spins, would you be able to create animation that accomplishes that? yes. how many spins the casing made to the ground? yes... in the computer... but do that with any gun it'll vary 18:13:39 inherent estimation variable? correct, certain scenarios you can create but not infinite... those in conflict with evidence and witness testimony those obviously can't be done that way... consistent with testimony witnesses and the scene 18:14:28 example in modifications, change... decision made not to show movement of bodies from initial to body of rest? yes. why? basically because from witness testimony we know which direction they moved in, not defined how they got from one position to the position by goods house... rather than create something, use arrow to show direction they moved in 18:15:28 decision by you as creator to avoid animation that wasn't documented by witness? yes 18:15:44 why did you use the stills.... where the information comes from to place them there? initial position came from john good.... second position came from john good 18:16:27 initial was at the T intersection? define as something else.... T intersection event, what's first event? first visual that john good had, labeled initial position 18:17:12 the first position you are speaking of..... 18:17:43 this is the t intersection event? yes 18:17:50 (animation playing) frailties in the animation, no witness to this? correct. estimation based on Zimmerman's testimony? right, no evidence or witnesses to dispute 18:18:27 that information right there, where does that come from... from Zimmerman's video walk through and Jeremy's police report., and surdyka? yes. 18:19:06 arrow instead of having figures move without witnesses? yes 18:19:17 this is what we know to be john goods sliding door? yes. based upon additional communication, his position modified? correct. how it was and why it was modified? initially had him come out from middle of sliding door, but after his refinement of his position I placed him on the left sliding door one foot out from middle... based on consultation from his specific recall? Objection! Leading! SUSTAINED 18:20:16 it was based on consultation with you and west on the feedback of good and placement from the scene.... did good look at animation and ask for modifications? yes... modifications changed here? yes 18:20:56 this is where the tape comes in? correct. 18:21:02 why the timing of the call began... was there a point that existed in lauers call and goods testimony as presented to you that was intersection that allowed you to relate the two? yes, the gun shot 18:21:39 do we have a timeline of lauers call... 45 seconds, also have a timeline of goods testimony with the lining up the gunshot in his testimony yes.... line up and give timeline for his goods actions.....? matching up that one event 18:22:35 what information did you have from good where he was when he heard the gunshot and how many seconds before that? he was on his way up to make 911 call, time we had if you go to gun shot and back up on goods timeline... gave estimate on from when he went into condo to the time the gunshot went off 18:23:18 calibrate your animation to jenna lauers phone call.... use goods estimation on how long it took him to leave the area.... Objection! SUSTAINED... IN REVIEWING MY NOTES, GOOD ALSO CALLED 911 AND WAS ON PHONE AND CONNECTED AT OR ABOUT TIME OF GUN SHOT... WAS THAT USED? WAS THAT USED IN YOUR COMPARISON WITH LAUER? no gun shot on his call. NOT BUT HIS TESTIMONY WAS HE HEARD THE GUN SHOT WHILE DIALING 911 AND I THOUGHT HE SAID HE WAS WAITING FOR THAT CALL TO CONNECT, WOULD KNOW WHEN THAT CALL CONNECTED... USE THAT AS BASIS FOR TIMELINE AND TESTIMONY OF GOOD? still waiting for it to connect. DID YOU USE THAT, CONSIDER AT ALL HIS KNOWN TIME... HEARD THE GUN SHOT WHILE DIALING, WAITING FOR CALL TO CONNECT, USE HIS 911 CONNECTION IN DOING COMPARISON? I used his estimation from how long it took him to how long it took him to make his call 18:25:42 if you were to have the time of the phone call and estimate from there the time it might take to connect would that help calibrate animation even more refined? yes. able to accomplish tonight? I wouldn't be able to re-render and re-do the animation but I can do some markings 18:26:25 if there was a few second difference, require moving audio track and animation would stay the same? yes. that's the only relation? 18:27:00 it would affect goods time that he went into the apartment 18:27:14 use of his estimation after leaving the view of the scene to 911 call is close to accurate? I DONT WANT TO INTERJECT, BUT ILL DO THAT WHEN YOU'RE DOING YOUR ARGUMENT.... ANY OBJECTION FROM THE STATE? objection for state asking questions, none whatsoever 18:28:05 ONLY TIMES HE GAVE WAS 7:15 PM WATCHING TV WITH WIFE, HEARD NOISE... OTHER TIMES HE GIVES ON CROSS WAS ENTIRE TIME HE WAS WATCHING WAS 8-10 SECONDS, DOESN'T SAY WHERE IN THAT TIME... BUT DO KNOW HE WAS DIALING AND WAITING FOR IT TO CONNECT WHEN HE HEARD THE GUN SHOT, DONT KNOW HOW LONG IN THE HOUSE BEFORE GUN SHOT, DONT KNOW WHAT 8-10 SECONDS WERE... PROBLEM IM HAVING IS THE USE OF THE LAUER 911 CALL IN CONJUNCTION WITH GOODS TESTIMONY, I DONT UNDERSTAND THAT TIMELINE 18:29:18 my understanding of testimony was that he left the area of the view of the scene, turned around grabbed his phone... WHAT TIME DID HE GO OUT THERE? RECORD IS CORRECT, THESE ARE JUST MY NOTES... BETWEEN 7:05-7:15... FIRST FAINT NOISE, COULDN'T HEAR WORDS, THEN HEARD IT AGAIN LOUDER, COULDN'T HEAR WORDS DIDN'T KNOW IF MORE THAN 1 PERSON, LOOK OUT SLIDING DOOR, CRACKED BLINDS, LIGHT ON PORCH, ONLY SEE SOMETHING OUT THERE, OPENED BLINDS AND DOOR, STEPPED OUT, VERTICAL ON GROUND, WHATS GOING ON.... NO OTHER TIME OTHER THAN WHEN HE HEARD GUN SHOT WAS WHEN HE WAS TRYING TO CONNECT, ENTIRE TIME WAS 8-10 SECONDS... BEGIN AT THE CRACK OF THE BLINDS OR STEPPING ONTO THE PORCH... LIKE TO KNOW IN THIS ANIMATION WHERE LAUERS CALL FITS INTO HIS TESTIMONY 18:31:16 call connect at 19:17:15..... we know lauer's call started at 19:16:11 and its 45 seconds into the call or at 7:16:56 that the gunshot goes off... DIFFERENT WITH TIMELINE YOU HAVE HERE IN CONNECTION WITH WHAT YOU HAVE HERE. 18:32:11 took good 15-20 seconds to get call, place it and connect it... don't have that testimony but lauers testimony that it took about 20 seconds... HE WAS WAITING FOR IT TO CONNECT.... AS I RECALL, DIALED AND WAS WAITING.... WHERES THE 8-10 HE VIEWED THIS... mantei: and the 30 second gap between the connection 18:33:15 DOESN'T HAVE TO BE EXACT, BUT WHEN TRYING TO OVERLAY CALL WITH ANIMATION HAS TO BE CLOSER TO EXACT THAN NOT CLOSER.... may be able to fix that by calling good.... HAVING THE HEARING NOW, NOT GOING TO HAVE THIS HEARING GO ON FOR DAYS AND DAYS.... I SHOULD NOT HAVE COMMENTED AND I COULD JUST RULE ON IT AFTER YOU FINISH.... NOT MAKING COMMENTS TO CALL GOOD INTO HEARING.... TRANSCRIPT AS TO IT... 18:34:24 omara: if court is accurate that goods phone call was connected at 7:17:15 and evidence from lauer the decision to make call and connection is 20-25 seconds... back it out, you are within seconds of hearing the gun shot on lauer's call... STOP YOU THERE, NOT AN ARGUMENT... FINISH WITH SHOEMAKER 18:35:17 did you utilize lauer's call and good's testimony as to when in relation he heard the gun shot? yes. that how you backed out the time that gunshot and went in reverse? correct 18:35:55 recall a time lag to calibrate back to lauer phone call? time lag between.................. 18:36:14 I'm not sure the exact number of seconds... let the judge know then what you used in determining when to start lauer tape to video? in backing it out.... going back inside is based on consultation with you and from his feedback on the video. 18:36:55 does the necessity of being absolutely accurately.... IM SORRY WHOSE FEEDBACK ON THE VIDEO? mr goods. WHEN DID THAT HAPPEN? in consultation with omara. WHAT DATE? no. AFTER TRIAL STARTED? yes... HE WAS UNDER SEQUESTRATION.... GOOD IS NOT AN EXPERT, WITNESS UNDER SEQUESTRATION... used to authenticate as it was his view... I fixed his problems with it... mantei: none of which was disclosed to the state until this point. 18:38:28 what information did you use to identify this as initial position of the two? his comment about..... this position looking at now? consultation with you from testimony 18:38:56 did you change this from true animation to still? yes just to eliminate or mitigate any random movements... just to show position according to good 18:39:29 done to make more accurate? yes. to avoid any other inaccuracies? yes 18:39:42 what was this change from first position to second? also based on consultation with you from his testimony 18:39:56 no animation at this point to avoid concerns? correct 18:40:16 how the determination was made to use third position? consultation with di maio and proximity to the prior position just seconds before... and the items of evidence around.... also include final resting place of martin? eventually 18:40:48 is the one were about to see related to third position? correct, marker 6.... one of the things that comes into play on the position... slope there, so its interaction on the slope 18:41:14 better identified by the posters? yes 18:41:24 does your program have laws in it like gravity? it does, but in this case those physical properties were provided by the suit 18:41:54 decision not to have animation? correct... just to show position 18:42:05 this is the position..... 18:42:15 this is the position that was modified based on conversation with di maio? yes. to what extent? leaning over Zimmerman to verify position.... leaning over you got from di maio based on his viewing of clothing? yes. and what he discussed was anticipated testimony? yes 18:42:59 and what is the after shot position what info for that? from mora's report of what she saw after the shot... any other information used as well? consistent with Zimmerman's video testimony 18:43:51 green circle, number 6 what is that? the location of martin. based on what? based on the marker from the total station data 18:44:14 all of these data points are from their total station? correct. you added the slope? yes 18:44:31 why does it stop at this location? mora's view... from that view point, the video uses 50 mm lens which is what a person perceives when they're looking at something 18:44:58 goes black until call is completed? yes 18:45:09 concern raised about lightning conditions... in other experience, times when you have to accomplish lighting or weather to make animation worthwhile? yes 18:45:32 tell us about it? focus on whether eye witness could really see what they saw, or weather on something... if your main focus for video, but problem with that is.... here in court room there's ambient light, hard to get accurate depiction of lighting conditions... vary on projector or printer you use... focus not on reconstructing the lighting but the detail of what was going on 18:46:29 animation created with artificiality to be viewed? correct 18:46:40 lighter than animation than it would be that night? correct 18:46:49 proper weather available to you that night? added rain. based on what? historic weather I received 18:47:07 any wind added? no wind.. it was 7 mph going NE.... would wind add or subtract to animation in this nature? no in this case 18:47:32 asked whether the software calibrates itself... how would you know it's working accurately, further insight what happens when it's not working properly? verify easily by measuring object you know size of.. 18:48:05 done that in your animations generally? yes. done in this one? yes. how? measure size of object, grab that object and chose tool and it'll give you the height and width 18:48:31 how you created the avatars are martin and Zimmerman? figures already created, didn't waste time, but adjusted certain things to match the figures and the clothing they were wearing 18:49:01 in your motion capture suit at 6'2 make it smaller to be martin at 5'11? correct. done for this? correct... even though they may not be the right size in recording you specify exact size it'll come in to the software.. make Martin 5'11? yes. and his shoes? and his hood 18:49:51 height after those additions? approximately around 6'2 18:50:05 in the still you used concerning moment of shot, would that view you had of it... gun in his right hand been visible? no. flash of gun visible from that angle? no. create another animation from ground level to show gun? correct if that was the purpose of what I was to create.... in this that wasn't the purpose... others can testify to that... just to show who was on top and who was on bottom 18:51:15 purpose limited to that? that's the main thing.... with di maio's input the person that was shot had to be the person on top... person doing shooting was on bottom 18:51:54 moment? YES 18:52:08 nothing further RECROSS 18:52:19 as far as representation.... second and third position... positions of hips change? correct 18:52:33 as far as I know that wasn't based on at least you didn't tell me it was based on witness statement or testimony? based on common sense...... 18:52:55 back up... common sense is if you kept martins figure... no way firearm would be accessible? in second position, correct 18:53:21 had to move to third position for him to access firearm? correct. didn't do that based on testimony, did that to be able to put those figures in position? in position relative to each other when di maio mentioned martin was shot..... and also accessibility 18:54:00 did di maio testify to gun? that's common sense. did he testify that? I didn't hear his testimony... asking me about something I had no knowledge about... 18:54:32 if the gun had to be accessible if we assume the figures were positioned as you placed them? correct so the gun is accessible 18:54:55 if evidence was martin figure was up at arm pits, no way accessible? not only the gun, but also the position of martin when shot. impossible... couldn't create animation to fit that scenario? with him straddling shoulders in position 3, no. wouldn't occur 18:55:35 position 3... in order to depict their angles at 90 degrees, straight in..? yes also in coroner's report.... he mentioned 90 degrees front to back but conversation with di maio he mentioned slightly from left to right 18:56:19 notes with conversation to di maio? just one. only note you took? yes. just that about the 90 degree angle? I already knew about 90 degree angle.. 18:56:43 just opened up folder and looked at something, what was that? just left to right. any other notes? just that 18:56:57 position in position 3, bodies had to be distanced apart from each other? correct. account for not just clothing differential? correct. account for length of arms involved? but you don't know what position. exactly 18:57:29 and the length of gun involved? a lot of variables I didn't portray 18:57:41 main thing accounted for are Zimmerman and martins position.... on top of each other 18:57:52 none of those variables are accounted for in that 3rd position? variables for bullet trajectory.. length of arms, distance, no accounted for, just show position of bodies? consistent with di maio's consultation 18:58:28 not accounted for in this animation? the variables you mentioned are not impossible 18:58:44 way of telling me they are not depicted in this animation? in this animation, but not expounded to point you are talking about 18:59:10 I can tell from this animation the length of distance between the gun, ground, body of martin? if you use photogrammetry, know the measurements 18:59:36 not what else I have to do... can I tell from this? figures in this are to scale... looking at scene, wonder about size of individuals involved... to scale... nothing's changed in relation to video 19:00:03 in their height? correct. and that's it? and their appearance to photos I received 19:00:16 no measurements of other parts of body? I had photos... can I tell that spacing from this animation or do I have to go into the data you have? can tell from the video..... assume we can't? not the purpose... you're looking for something that's not in the video, not the purpose. it's not there? the purpose isn't to examine bullet trajectory... to show relative position from one person to another where he had to be consistent with di maio's testimony.... 19:01:27 may have been another position? variable about 2 inches.... 19:01:39 MAY HE BE EXCUSED? yes. ANY OTHER WITNESS FROM DEFENSE? no. FROM THE STATE? no. LETS HAVE ARGUMENT 19:02:17 omara: daubert initial or applicability to the case... seems we've gone back and forth. YES WE HAVE... STATE SAID NO AND THEN YES, I DONT KNOW WHERE STATE STANDS... 19:02:49 mantei: daubert analysis and a pierce factor analysis... both apply to testimony and animation, asking for both 19:03:07 omara: under frye and daubert... generally accepted in community, not countered from the state.... admitted in courts a lot, by this very witness... never disqualified as expert upon attempt to have it in... I didn't present enormous amount of industry wide..... in his industry he stays up to date... involved since 95, past 14 years focused on this area and presented many times... never been excluded.... generally accepted, suggest it has been and is 19:04:35 this inquiry and say where it assist here today... will it help jury in consideration.... as to that I think the court needs to convinced its accurate, not perfect... based on when it was created.... most recent based on trial testimony.... up to date information available like trial testimony.... can't have trial testimony available to him... taken away frailties of the animation, no longer an animation but initial strike by martin... came solely from Zimmerman's testimony 19:06:05 WHERES THE TESTIMONY THAT MARTIN IS LEFT HANDED? injuries on the right side.....that's where it's from... never said he was right handed... hit him with left hand. WHO TESTIFIED TO THAT? Zimmerman. TESTIFIED HE WAS PUNCHED, DIDN'T SAY WHAT HAND... NOBODY TESTIFIED IT CAME FROM LEFT HANDED PUNCH AND SYBRINA SAID MARTIN WAS RIGHT HANDED...NO TESTIMONY TO SHOW IT WAS LEFT HANDED 19:07:09 rao testified and used her graphic identification and the injury came across the nose.... rao testified the punch came in this way... she said it went up..... punch came in from left to right because it hit him right here, inner right side of Zimmerman's face caused by knuckle.. no evidence to support anything else... fulton said he was right handed but that means it might be the hand you want to use first, but I don't know... hit Zimmerman on right side, that's the basis for the left strike.. 19:08:32 NOBODY COULD EVER HIT SOMEONE WITH RIGHT HAND AND CAUSE INJURY ON LEFT SIDE? 19:08:52 if he came at me with his right hand.... could be... only his testimony they were basically standing in front of each other... Zimmerman turned to him, reached down and got hit.... could Zimmerman turn all the way down this way.... yeah possibility.... more likely event was left handed throw.................. 19:10:01 that part of animation and then we took out some of the concerning parts of animation... after that it's just still photos based upon testimony... modified based upon john good saying in his testimony that it happened in certain relation to 911 call... main reason is we know we have reverse timing. 19:10:47 TALK ABOUT LAUER FOR A SECOND... SHE DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING.. SHOEMAKER TESTIFYING THAT THE TESTIMONY AT THAT T IS BASED UPON HER TESTIMONY... SHE NEVER SAID SHE SAW ANYTHING... HEARING AND SEEING.... BASED UPON HER TESTIMONY... IF WE ONLY KNOW WHAT SHE HEARD AND NOT WHAT SHE SAW, HOW DO YOU GET THAT IN? 19:11:35 lauer testified that she believed the altercation she heard, back forth and back conversation occurred outside to the left near the T.... SHE TESTIFIED THE BLINDS WERE DOWN, HUSBAND AND HER WERE HOME... WATCHING TV, ON LOVE SEAT FACING GLASS DOOR... OPEN... OBSTRUCTED BY BLINDS, HEARD VOICES, COULDN'T TELL WORDS... COMING FROM LEFT, LOUD TALKING SAME VOLUME TONE, MORE FLUSTERED THAN CONFRONTATIONAL... HEARD SCUFFLING LIKE SNEAKERS ON PAVEMENT AND GRASS... GRUNTING NOISE, AT FIRST SOUNDED LIKE PEOPLE STANDING UP AND THEN ROLLING ON GRASS, CALLED 911, 30 SECONDS TO CONNECT... DIDN'T SAY SHE SAW ANYTHING, COULD TELL VOICES WERE FROM LEFT AND IT GOT CLOSER AND LOUDER..... 19:13:24 never said she saw anything at all.. based on what she said she heard it come from.... I talk to her about the three parts of the conversation, red car blue car red car.... in my conversation with her at that point... the initial conversation beginning at T intersection.... THAT ANIMATION POSITION IS BASED ON HER TESTIMONY.. of what she heard.... CAN I SEE THAT POSITION AGAIN.... 19:15:07 in any case, she didn't see anything... in that sense the placement is an estimate on voice... in her cross she was more specific it happened in area of T intersection.... frailty of animation based upon non visual testimony 19:15:43 is it accurate.... limited to goods specific recollection 3 different positions... vertical and parallel.. on top of pathway and further down.... then he left, kept in that position, no evidence to support changes.... 19:16:32 the positioning was changed slightly and only to more like a mounting position because of di maio's anticipated testimony of how the shot went in 19:16:57 could it be like this? yes... might be like this but that as the bodies go up, can pulls straight down.... more like this.... at least di maio's testimony lessened the angle 19:17:29 that's it for the animation as to its accuracy... suggest with all the information in this case, non are direct witnesses except good... all have vantage points to offer, attempt by defense to present that as to what happened... helped the jury in how the defense says the case happened...... understanding graphically of how situation unfolded..... 19:18:31 IN PIERCE, THE STATE OR DEFENSE... THE STATE INTENDED TO INTRODUCE AND COURT RULED DEMONSTRATIVE ONLY... ANALYSIS OF THE COURT DID, DIDN'T GO BACK TO JURY, USED TO ASSIST EXPERT IN TESTIMONY 19:19:11 didn't find exclusion for evidence... state entered timeline... this court already allowed a presentation by the state in putting together various facts in a graphic way that assists the trial fact that helps their case... that's what an animation is, no reason it shouldn't be admitted into evidence... don't know that it was the ruling to suggest information can't be entered into evidence 19:20:11 criteria of piece, qualified as expert.... certainly applied to evidence in trial... not strictly limited... be consistent with evidence, can't go into matter not presented into evidence.... does it need to be perfect frame by frame rendition... needs to be accurate and fairly depict circumstances... frailties... light. explain to the jury, sure... not fatal frailty of evidence... what could've been seen from witness 19:21:37 under that context we've met frye, now daubert.... if otherwise accepted in community, court act like gatekeeper without further foundation to its acceptance and relevance we approve 19:22:05 mantei: this animation is enigma.... court cases... start with daubert line of cases 19:22:35 burdens on defense that the standards were satisfied 19:22:50 reference a 2013 decision.... second page in head note 3... daubert factors... number of them, not exhaustive or all inclusive... ones designated are 1 if the theory can be tested.... potential rate of error.... general acceptance....whether method is proper for case.... relationship to techniques of the method.... 19:24:14 he has never testified in criminal court in exactly the same thing he is trying to here... first time ever with these motion capture suits in conjunction with other things he is attempting to do... no one else with same method and equipment.... witness said I've never testified under circumstances like these before... nor do I believe that anybody else... he's kind of right 19:25:10 as it relates to this... refer to next page of opinion... quote additional cases... give you quote from case, nothing in daubert or rules to include from expert... what's going on here... gap between data of 911 call and animation... gap between testimony 19:26:06 WHAT WOULD BE DIFFERENCE IF SHOEMAKER CAME OFF STAND AND DID DRAWING OF WHAT HE CONSIDERED TO BE CRIME SCENE, COMPUTER IS ASSISTING THE DRAWING 19:26:33 this witness couldn't draw a correlation between 911 calls and the animation. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT COMPUTER PROGRAM AND SOFTWARE... NOT NECESSARILY FALLS WITHIN DAUBERT TEST... COULD MAKE THOSE DRAWINGS... ISSUE OF RELATING 911 CALL TO ANIMATION IS DIFFERENT ARGUMENT, WHAT WOULD PREVENT HAVING DEFENSE TESTIFY TO CRIME SCENE AND DRAW ON EASEL BOARD AT SAME TIME AS PLAYING TO 911 CALL 19:27:40 wouldn't have to worry about whether the drawing is purported to be accurate... this animation is substitutive evidence, not just demonstrative 19:28:07 IF COURT ALLOWED AS DEMONSTRATIVE, SAME ARGUMENT? same from different point of view.. .much higher for submitting as actual exhibit, still objecting for some of the same reason 19:28:31 OBJECTING FOR DAUBERT IF DEMONSTRATIVE? probably not.. only applies if it's going to be given to the jury.... testified to as demonstrative, witness that would do that has already testified and done it... he testified clearly on opinions to body without referencing that... other witnesses didn't need it 19:29:25 if counsel wanted to use something like this in closing argument, but as demonstrative.... is it necessary for witness to explain opinion, only ones who would need it already testified 19:29:56 his own testimony is only function told my lawyers... nothing required for witness testimony to be explained by this.... not the purpose of demonstrative exhibit... demonstrative aid meaning what, as closing argument aid... that's different... as expert using it I do have concerns with that, some daubert related.... GO AHEAD 19:30:56 no testimony offered or presented so far as would be the defenses burden for error, maintenance of standards... use for the movies.. this is a murder trial, not Casablanca.... not iron man... it's one thing to say I'm going to strap suits and create fiction... than to create fiction and say its reality 19:31:55 nothing submitted as it relates to satisfying that... further ill continue onto the court's opinion.... under head not 8... begin quoting another case...... reliability of experts method must be for specific facts at issue not general theories.................. still accurately depicts how the object behaves 19:33:15 beginning of his video.. evidence in testimony is martin is right handed, witness think he's left handed.... idea you assume based upon location on injury and body, struck by certain thing.. invalid... it is not hard for a right handed person to punch someone on the left side of their nose.... to sit here and say a punch with left hand... expert opinion without evidence is what they're talking about without validation 19:34:26 NOT A METHOD ISSUE, FACT ISSUE... INPUTTING FACTS INTO THE COMPUTER. and creating a result from those facts... COMPUTER WILL DO WHAT YOU TELL IT DO .... 19:34:56 if your method is to make assumptions not warranted by evidence. THATS THE COMPUTER......... large problem here as well 19:35:17 page 8... peer review, no testimony... error rate... no testimony, nothing involved in this case 19:35:35 page 13, reliability and relevance... talking about particular expert, that expert reiterates..... expert testimony should not........ that is again really what this is... attempt to have an expert in graphic design come in here and advance arguments presented by defense.... or from 20 minute phone call.... testimony today is not what witness expected it to be 19:36:50 experts reiterate arguments, positions, space... those are arguments no eye witness testimony... arguments advanced by council.... question for lay people on this jury, not product of expert testimony 19:37:37 move to third case... DA opinion from Louisiana... cases that discuss factors we have here.... page 5 of the copy demonstration videos.... talking about experts who went out and conducted filmed experiment and tried to match it closely.... further down the line, court concludes it will lead and confuse the jury.... 19:39:08 idea you don't have to be exact is correct... contemporaneous movie made, nothing advanced as demonstrative aid... that's not really the standard if what you got is not accurate enough.... not enough to say I'm in the vicinity, in proximity.. they are figures in this case, their hips and length of space between them... intentional assumptions and placed in animation.. done with purpose... not based on testimony... arguments as evidence 19:40:18 next case is salvatore case... page 5 of that opinion... talking about attempted video accident reconstruction, witness themselves.... note 7.... no engineer in engineering, not qualified 19:41:07 heard this witness has testified as accident reconstructions, actual reconstructions within crime scene are two very different things... when this witness has testified before, analyze bullet trajectories... not I put people on positions based on other witnesses 19:41:56 down to bottom, higher threshold for admissibility to recreate accident... expert opinion referenced in videos are not shoemakers.. only dr. di maio who didn't need it, reference it... testified without it 19:42:33 demonstrative evidence.... courts generally require proponent to establish similar conditions... does not appear to recreate accident..... this is being purported to be a crime scene or events taking place.. higher standard applies 19:43:17 lighting... start with the more obvious depiction of visuals from another witness who described general theory 19:43:42 that's not substantial similarity with actual conditions... idea that we have no idea how we get from the T doesn't explain that this is substantial similar condition... says I don't know 19:44:16 even as it relates to di maios testimony, his opinion was at the moment of gunshot he believed defendants statement was consistent with the evidence, not that it is how it happened or only way it could happen... just consistent 19:44:54 shoemaker is taking di maio's statement to him about the statement defendant he didn't use in connection to position 3 at all... only used defendants testimony to the first punch... that's his testimony 19:45:25 not the standard for admissibility 19:45:32 further and I think as it relates to daubert, if evidence admitted as substantive or demonstrative... court should fashion significant admonishment to jury along the lines of this is not a pretended to be depiction of events.. just scenario... not just how it happened, nor should they be confused by any indication 19:46:33 just stills by shoemaker showing location of physical evidence without figures.... no problem... add figures and depict things that are unknown.... hips in certain position because of his common sense without evidence. THATS WHERE, OMARA THE PURPOSE OF THE INTRODUCTION OF THIS ANIMATION... I DONT SEE WHERE ITS ASSISTING AN EXPERT IN TESTIFYING. omara: animation itself, just as state took distillation in a format... that's what this is, substantive evidence and puts together in a way that helps jury... Zimmerman, rao testimony in context rather than the timeline... YOUR ANIMATION IS MORE THAN A TIMELINE..... ITS DEPICTING POSITIONS BASED UPON.... john good's testimony.... in effect, compare to one of the witnesses mounting me, was that how martin mounted, no but it's an example... moras prance around court room...NOT TAKING THAT BACK INTO JURY ROOM TO PLAY OVER AND OVER AGAIN AS TO A RECREATION.... do have states compound exhibit..... taking distilled down... DID NOT INTERJECT ANIMATION FIGURES INTO THAT TIMELINE AS TO WHAT WAS HAPPENING WITH TWO INDIVIDUALS IN THOSE CALLS 19:50:03 ANIMATIONS DEPICTING MORE THAN THAT... BASED ON SHOEMAKERS COMMON SENSE, BASED ON ASSUMPTION THAT HE HIT ZIMMERMAN WITH LEFT HAND, BASED ON PHONE CALL WITH DI MAIO THAT WAS NO HIS TESTIMONY IN COURT.... DI MAIO TESTIFIED THAT MARTINS POSITION COULD'VE BEEN AT DIFFERENT ANGLES.... SO I NEED YOU TO RESPOND TO THAT 19:50:56 could've been pulled him back and he said the shirt wouldn't line up... RIONDA ASKED HIM GIVEN FACT THAT MARTINS HOODY WAS WET AND HAD A FULL CAN OF IN HIS POCKET MAY DETERMINE POSITION OF HIS BODY... his response said it had to be pulled away 2-4 inches.... could've been backing away and grabbed him and shot him.. he said it would pull to one side and holes wouldn't match up any more...only one scenario.... to answer your question, I would suggest a minimum demonstrative tool for me to show evidence.... that's a given that I could use in demonstrative evidence in this argument, substantive evidence is a distillation of known facts..... he can contest its left hand shot, doesn't mean... they could've brought in an animation..... her testimony was her presentation... 19:53:24 THAT DOESN'T GO BACK TO JURY ROOM TO PLAY OVER AND OVER AGAIN.. THATS WHAT I GRAPPLE WITH... WHATEVER WITNESSED TESTIFIED TO AND INSTRUCTION TO BELIEVABILITY AND THEY DISCUSS THAT, BUT AN ANIMATION THAT GOES BACK THAT THEY PLAY OVER AND OVER AGAIN.... GIVES WEIGHT TO SOMETHING THIS COURT IS NOT SURE COMPORTS WITH EVIDENCE PRESENTED IN TRIAL 19:54:16 proper distillation of evidence.... CASE LAW TO PROVIDE ME? no... rely on pierce.... cite back to courts presented by state, once determined its similar to evidence presented it is admissible 19:54:53 BOTH SIDES AGREEING PIERCE IS ONLY CASE IN FLORIDA AS IT RELATES TO COMPUTER ANIMATION. mantei: I gave another, pierce is only criminal 19:55:21 WHEN I LOOK AT PIERCE CASE... DEMONSTRATIVE CASE FOR EXPERTS OPINION... RULED AS DEMONSTRATIVE ONLY, DID IN THAT CASE.... THEY CITED TO... WHEN RESULTS USEFUL ACCEPTED WHEN CONFUSING SHOULD BE REJECTED 19:56:17 THAT THE PRESENTATION BE RELEVANT, AND REFLECT ORAL TESTIMONY OFFERED.... 19:56:32 ANY OTHER CASES... ILL READ YOUR CASES... NO OTHER BY THE DEFENSE, I UNDERSTAND BOTH ARGUMENTS.... 19:56:56 mantei: shoemaker didn't go over that..... can't compare this to the timeline... the timeline actually testified to a witness... underlying data are likewise in evidence... none of underlying data that shoemaker relies on is in front of this jury other than 911 call 19:57:50 the map of crime scene isn't what he's testifying, it's the figures and their movement... as far as the pullback... di maios testimony could've been in a different position he said was absolutely possible 19:58:40 the pierce case makes pretty clear detective badcock would be equivalent of di maio, necessary for his interpretation... not shoemaker.. if there was any witness who could use this as demonstrative was di maio and he didn't need it 19:59:29 closing remark of that... court can't use discretion to decide and nevertheless admit the evidence... has to be accurate, not precise... but accurate.... calls made to him, police report, testimony from those who have not testified... built into animation, hasn't heard a word of court testimony... everything he's got has been filtered through arguments 20:00:35 LIGHTS AUTOMATICALLY GO OUT AT A CERTAIN TIME, IS THERE A WAY WE CAN GET THEM BACK ON..... 20:00:56 I'M GOING TO RESERVE RULING ON THIS, LET YOU KNOW WHEN WE RECONVENE... PROFFERING OF CONNOR TESTIMONY..... IF HE TESTIFIES TO WHAT WAS FOUND ON MARTINS PHONE I CAN JUST LOOK AT WHAT YOURE LOOKING WITHOUT HAVING TO PROFFER... THAT WHAT HES GOING TO BE CALLED FOR? TEXT MESSAGES, VIDEOS OR PICTURES OFF OF MARTINS PHONE. omara: correct. DONT NEED TO HEAR PROFFER TESTIMONY, JUST SEE THE PICTURES. west: need proffer. NO JUST A PROFFER OF PICTURES YOUR SEEKING 20:02:12 for him to say how he found the information. JUST WHAT HE FOUND ON THE PHONE, HOW HE FOUND IT IS NOT RELEVANT... TRYING TO INTRODUCE PHOTOS, EMAILS OR TEXTS THATS WHAT I NEED TO LOOK AT.... WHAT ARE YOU SEEKING TO INTRODUCE BY WAY OF EVIDENCE THROUGH CONNOR. I can outline it... WELL YOU HAVE IT IN YOUR HAND ID LIKE TO SEE IT... 20:03:05 several pieces of information obtained from his phone... issue is ongoing because of the discovery... report from state on June 4th... still trying to process that... information provided in discovery in late February, Connor able to do some of the extracting... two main issues.... several conversations by martin attempting to require firearm. AUDIO OR WRITTEN? text messages 20:04:10 IF ITS VERBAL VOICE THAT MAY NOT BE AUTHENTICATION ISSUE, IF TEXT MESSAGE IT IS AUTHENTICATION. I need Connor to talk about authentication 20:04:33 the fighting issue... martins text messages of being in fight, effects of being in fight, lost first, won second and third wasn't done with him yet... confirming he was in the fight and explaining he got more hits in the first round cause he had me on the ground and I couldn't do anything... Facebook post from martin's half-brother Demetrius asking trayvon when you gonna teach me how to fight 20:05:34 first text I was paraphrasing, levandria... in a hidden file in martins phone... password accessible only in addition to password required... second level of access 20:06:07 one came from hidden texts, one was hidden facebook post, and another from cellbrite extraction report from michael french... offer his testimony to explain his access to phone to show only martin could have created the texts or engaged.... 20:06:46 OK STATE? 20:06:51 MARK AS COMPOSITE NN FOR IDENTIFICATION............................ 20:07:31 west: also can authenticate another way if court wants me to proffer that as well. PLEASE. 20:09:01 DID YOU HAVE SOME OTHERS, CONNOR CV MARKED AS OO, WAS NN THE THREE SHEETS YOU WANT INTRODUCED FOR CONNOR. that's what relates to the fighting and then other exhibits that relate to the gun... I'd like to deal with fighting issue... that's the crux of this, let me assemble the other material on the gun... consists of pictures from his phone taken by that phone show a hand wrapped around a firearm, provide that... series of conversations that occur around Feb. 18th just before coming to Sanford where he has several conversations about acquiring firearm 20:10:26 MR GUY ADDRESS NN? west: I can provide him another copy, he has this information, we got it from him... 20:10:56 guy: right back where we started.... if they don't know each other, inadmissible... no idea who this person is, not reputation evidence.... furthermore in addition to authentication issue how do we know what they're talking about, verbal or slap fight... 20:11:48 it would do nothing to aid this jury, doesn't tell us about martin, not about what Zimmerman knew of martin... not evidence they knew each other... specific evidence is inadmissible.... 20:12:25 guy: its inadmissible as to who sent it, what it's about... no context to them, pulled out at certain times, no conversations surrounding them... misleading and shouldn't be allowed... provided court case to you 20:13:09 that's all I have regarding text.... 20:13:15 FURTHER ARGUMENT FOR TEXT? yes... I have substantial argument... proffer Connors testimony. AS LONG AS I DONT GO INTO LONG PROFFER ABOUT HIS QUALIFICATIONS AND BACKGROUND, KEEP IT TO JUST TO WHERE HE FOUND THIS FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE PROFFER, LIMIT TO THAT I WILL ALLOW 20:14:00 also and we can ask Connor to testify, his qualifications are important... I HAVE THAT IN A CV...HE GOT FROM A PLACE THAT WAS SECOND LEVEL ACCESS, WHAT THE COURT MEANS BY THAT I WILL HEAR THAT PROFFER... DONT NEED TO GO INTO QUALIFICATIONS.... 20:14:38 other issue to point out is that guys argument completely misses the point... not reputation evidence... directly relates to the physical abilities.... his knowledge of fighting, participated in fight, knew what it's like to be on the bottom... NOT GOING TO TESTIFY WHATS INTENDED BY THIS, JUST THAT HE FOUND IT... guys argument is misleading and to its admissibility of it legally. HEAR THE LIMITED PROFFER FROM CONNOR, NOT THE ARGUMENTS.... GET MR CONNOR IN HERE AND TAKE A STEP AT A TIME..... 20:16:40 relates to gun matters as well... THAT'LL BE PP 20:16:46 (sworn in) 20:17:44 west: another exhibit I'll ask him to speak with briefly as well.. photos that were found on the phone... ALRIGHT DEFENSE COMPOSITE QQ 20:18:43 west: evening. name? richard Connor... 20:18:59 prior to you taking the stand, we marked a copy of your CV... admitted into evidence? would I so move? PROFFER... save time for court to review it... ILL REVIEW AS COMPOSITE, MARKED AS EVIDENCE IT GOES BACK TO JURY, HAVEN'T MADE DETERMINATION IF HES GOING TO TESTIFY.... admitted for this proffer... THAN NOT MARKED AS DOUBLE N... MARKED AS 1 FOR THIS HEARING... I have another copy, suggesting that jury doesn't get for identification.... ILL HAVE TO REMARK UNLESS YOU HAVE ANOTHER ONE... I can retrieve that one and substitute another.... CLERK CAN MARK THAT AS 1 FOR THIS PROFFER 20:20:48 does your CV describe your background and training in computer forensics? yes 20:21:08 training in computer examiner and computer analysis, licensed attorney? yes 20:21:20 testified as expert? yes... 20:21:33 are some of those set out in CV? yes 20:21:42 are you certified by cellbrite? yes. I went to their training 20:21:55 familiar with most recent software program is for cell phone analysis? yes. licensed copy for private sector? yes 20:22:14 use that software to analyze martins phone? yes 20:22:25 at some point in the discovery process did you receive what's been known as bin file? several bin files... 20:22:43 one you received in late February, represented to be data dump? yes I believe Feb. 23rd 20:22:57 opportunity to use you cell brite software and offers available to analyze data? yes 20:23:20 able to ID texts, facebook messages that were hidden from phone? yes 20:23:32 describe what your process was so far as cell bright technology? when you load the data into cell brite physical software, runs scripts and analyzes that... contact list and text messages, emails, pictures, videos.... songs and music... analyzed data section of the report 20:24:23 did you.... when you began process, opportunity to look at report that FDLE had done? yes. 20:24:41 when you did own analysis, indicate there may be additional information? yes 20:24:54 what did you do then with the bin file and other resources to try to capture or identify information? report is only what cell bright reads... bin file is the physical image of phones data... all data and files and free space... loaded into software and examine any file that's from the phone whether or not cellbrite able to analyze it 20:25:49 something that struck you when analyzing bin file and report? yes. one of the first things I did with the report... for each section it lists how many items are there, loaded it into cell bright to see if they matches... off by about 600 pictures... I had 600 more than FDLE report did 20:26:34 additional information not part of the report? yes. what did you do to find them? figure out which were different and if located in same areas 20:26:56 comparing FDLE report with preliminary cellbrite? correct. did it include updated report to the previously provided? at some point there was a second report... late February early march... different than first one, contain the 600 photos? no 20:27:46 have additional data you were able to find? yes. when? first week of June 20:27:55 next time that report was updated? yes 20:28:02 talk about what you did then to identify data that was on the phone.... able to extract additional information by own application? talking in general or pictures..... 20:28:24 however you choose, once you realize more data than in the report, what did you do to try and find it? a couple things... keyword searches.... against bin files... look through report, list the databases on the phone to see what app they belonged to 20:29:06 able to identify additional photos? yes. photos include pictures of hand gun? yes. hand wrapped around grip? yes 20:29:26 able to determine if the pictures were taken by that phone? yes. were they? yes they were. 20:30:06 this is more than just pictures, generally describe what that exhibit consists of? there are several text message exchanges where martin was trying to purchase or sell hand gun... two separate pictures, hand gun on table or something and another where it's in somebody's hand 20:30:48 able to find text on the phone? yes. were some deleted? yes. able to recover deleted texts? marked as deleted but data still on the phone 20:31:16 another version still on phone intact 20:31:23 picture on phone and want to delete it, purposeful? Objection! Speculation! SUSTAINED 20:31:38 something by accident or as result of the phone... require the operator to do something? usually yes... explain? normally pictures will stay on device until deleted or removed.. text messages depends on the phone will often stay on device until deleted or removed... device goes bad and memory card goes bad... usually user initiated 20:32:31 determine as expert whether this was user accident or not? yes. were some deleted and scattered within others that weren't? correct 20:32:54 your opinion these deleted messages were act of person on the phone? Objection! Speculation! SUSTAINED. COULD BE DELETED BY ANYBODY 20:33:19 asking if deleted by action someone took? yes. deleted by someone on purpose? yes 20:33:45 were you able to determine if the phone had passcode? yes. did it? yes. what does that mean? cant access data unless you know the passcode... if you don't can you operate phone? emergency call but not anything else 20:34:22 passcode has to be re-entered? may be 10 minutes and increase each time you put in wrong passcode 20:34:43 put in right passcode, put phone down and is idled after several minutes have to reenter code? yes. any reason that's not the case? I believe it did have time-out period 20:35:16 didn't have a time-out, only enter passcode once and it would remain open forever? until manually locked or restarted... defeat purpose of passcode? yes 20:35:38 that set of texts that relate to purchasing firearm? 20:35:51 identifiers on these texts who sent them and whether or not to trayvon or by trayvon? state which folder they are in, whether incoming or outgoing, date and time, status of message if read or sent... content of message and the status of message 20:36:35 indicated on extraction reports? yes 20:36:40 conversation between martins phone and fulton about revolver? yes... clustered in date? yes. when? between February 18th and 22nd 2012... how many separate collections? several, 1, 2, 3, 4... at least 4... 20:37:39 with different people? yes. identify who they are from the phone? yes... qua fulton, two others involved in addition to martin- spoonhead zack and jay, another set of conversations with another person named ron, person named dario and another about a gun with diamond... that's it... and conversation with fruit 20:38:45 all between February 18th and 22nd 2012? yes 20:38:54 were there some texts on the phone where martin was talking about coming to Sanford? yes. when he was coming to Sanford based on those? Feb. 20-21st 20:39:15 he was killed on Feb. 26th? correct 20:39:26 marked defendants QQ for proffer...... based upon information you retrieved? yes... appears to be of martin, resided on the cell phone. self-taken picture? yes. 20:40:02 taken with that same phone you analyzed? not sure... no meta data that identifies if photo was taken with camera on that phone 20:40:29 within picture file is data about the picture.... make and model of camera, date and time, gps coordinates... meta date 20:40:48 able from that data to learn more about the circumstances and device it was taken? where it exists yes... appears to be martin based on other photos you've seen? yes 20:41:26 were you also able to extract a series of text messages and other postings that relate to martin being in a fight? yes. how able to recover data that related to that? there was data on the phone, not parced or analyzed by cell bright software... when I went and manually looked at database, contained text messages... looked at database associated.... created by android app, super android spc I think.... designed to hide text messages 20:42:39 texts that were subject to his application were not put into main database, placed into another one only accessible to super android application, not parced by cell bright 20:43:12 how did that get your attention? there were a couple things.. don't remember exact order, running key word searches getting hits what looked like text messages not in parced text messages... the spc database was listed in databases, but no parced data in report....got to look at it and it contained texts 20:44:17 something you were piecing together more on phone than what was provided? yes... keep in mind, originally got data certain things I was asked to look at.... this was one of them 20:44:45 something else going on, hidden app... familiar with existence of those? yes I knew those apps existed 20:44:59 what did you do to find that app on this phone? probably describe what I mean by hidden, hidden by user of the phone unless you know the app and the code... have to pull up app put in passcode and view those text messages... hidden from user unless you know how to get them.... not hidden once I get them.... access and view database I can see the data in full text 20:45:57 passcode necessary to unlock the phone and a second to enter in this application? correct. 20:46:13 in order to get access to texts, need to know both passcodes? Objection! Leading! SUSTAINED... leeway to stay on track? ill rephrase 20:46:37 how many passcodes would it take to get access if someone handed the phone? at least 2. 20:47:16 maybe get lucky finding the app 20:47:24 have to figure out the first passcode and then another hidden app that had text messages and the passcode for that application? yes. able to send and receive texts? yes able to see texts hidden by that application and respond 20:48:02 gotten through those levels they could respond to the messages? yes, have access to the users would have 20:48:21 looking at context in regular texting and hiding files, consider whether someone else was using this phone to send and delete messages? that's always something we look for an keep in back of our mind, something I took into consideration 20:48:57 texts relating to gun and fighting, contained within larger conversation with same person? yes 20:49:11 appear to indicate relationship between that person and martin? yes 20:49:22 I'm losing track of my thinking here.... but were you able to collect the various texts from whatever source related to firearms and assemble them in exhibit before you? yes that's what I did 20:49:55 marked as NN..... 20:50:16 familiar with exhibit? yes. what is it? composite of data relating to fights 20:50:26 did all of that come from martins phone? yes. extract in some fashion or another? yes 20:50:36 mentioned earlier there was database accessible to hidden app as opposed through cell bright? accessing by user or by me... user has to go through special app and special password... cellbrite doesn't parce or analyze, but it's there and I can analyze and view it 20:51:15 looking at first page of NN, the header at the top has identifier as SPC log sorted by person......? I created this spread sheet comes off the phone.... a database in this case... consists of several tables, log table.... log of text messages, several other tables... contact or name table have the names of the persons he was texting.... in this is presented to me in cell brite software in a table.. use that for spread sheet, what I did.... 20:52:39 table in database, log table and excel extension of the file 20:52:53 longer conversation with lavandria, extract conversation about fight? yes... other messages going back and forth, extracting these specifically because they related to a fight... show number of levandria? yes. this from martins phone? yes. which of the two sent and which received? yes 20:53:37 able to identify date and time these messages were sent? yes 20:53:56 what is the first line in your exhibit? wyd? which is what you doing 20:54:29 who sent that? levandria. did martin responded? tired and sore. 20:54:39 response? me too but what happened to you. 20:54:55 when levandria said that what did martin say? fight. y?! cuz man that nigga snitched on me. she said? they y u always fightin u got suspended... he said? nah we ducked after school 20:55:42 response? I lost first round :( but won second and third. 20:55:55 and then repeat that with a different smile face? I lost first, but won the second and third. oh so it was three rounds? at least you won, but you need a stop fighting bay for real 20:56:39 did he respond? yes. what did he say? nah I'm not done with fool gonna have to see me again. what did she say? nah bay you aint gonna be satisfied until you get suspended... didn't breed enough for me, only nose 20:57:26 objection! SUSTAIN. seen typos before in phone analysis? the word breed does not make sense and is not intended... bleed... 20:57:52 ask to be stricken! west: this is a proffer unless the court hasn't ruled... RULED ON OBJECTION TO SPECULATION, WHATS WRITTEN THERE IS WRITTEN THERE... WHAT HE BELIEVES MAY MAKE SENSE, BUT MAYBE NOT THE AUTHOR OF IT 20:58:27 in your training and experience, occasion to try to make sense out of text messages or computer messages that weren't accurate from spelling? Objection! Relevance! OVERRULED.... yes 20:59:02 in context of this text sequence as you try to sort data, does the word breed as opposed to bleed make sense? put in context with the rest of the message, not enough and only nose... I think talking about bleeding from nose. Objection! Speculation! SUSTAINED 20:59:55 were you able to find another conversation around that time that referenced that fight? yes. to whom? michael suave french. do you know that person from information on the phone? yes 21:00:31 what is the conversation martin and french had? martin said yeah cause he got more hits, had me on ground and I couldn't do nothing... he responded dang bro 21:01:07 also find reference to fighting by relative? yes. who? demetrius martin... where was that located or posted? on phone in facebook database... FB.DB... inside database there are different tables... in mailbox thread table in the database of the phone... what did the message say? from demetrius, when you gonna teach me how to fight 21:02:15 other information his relationship with martin? some kind of brother, half-brother... sharing some father... what makes you think that? another message from demetrius asking trayvon if dad had a facebook page 21:02:54 based upon context they were talking about common parent? yes 21:03:16 other references to fighting or questions... other discussions in the context of your review of text messages where they discussed fighting? yes.. didn't extract those because you didn't find related to event? correct or because I could not put in date time or who sent them 21:03:56 I would move the marked exhibits into evidence. HAVE TO TAKE THEM OUT OF WHERE THEY'VE BEEN MARKED IN THE CASE.... NN AS 2, PP AS 3, AND QQ AS 4 TO THIS PROFFER 21:04:39 in summary Connor, identifying the difference places on the phone where you found information, overall scope reflected in reports..... 21:05:03 some information in report that you were able to verify in bin file? yes. additional info you were able to extract, not contained in any FDLE report prior to June 4th? correct. information in this file that you were able to extract from applications that were hidden? Object! Leading! Asked and Answered! JURYS NOT HERE, ITS FINE 21:05:55 had to download software and review what was otherwise not visible? no it was not parced or analyzed by cell bright, manually identify it wasn't on the phone.. access to data.... 21:06:26 some of that report is reflected in pages before you? correct. as well as information extracted from it? correct... and from bin file? yes. picture of martin, profile picture and picture of hand gun with the hand? yes 21:06:59 were the pictures of the hand gun with the hand taken by his phone? yes they were CROSS 21:07:28 mantei: when did you notify defense council about additional information? soon after I found it... late februaryish? or early march 21:07:53 aware of who's name the phone was in? the mother's maybe.... 21:08:04 not trayvon martins? his name was not on bill or account 21:08:12 this was a phone on family account, one of several? correct. 21:08:20 can you tell me... referenced this discussion over a gun.... buy or sell? no the different conversations I identified.. in each of them or most of them martin was looking to purchase.. in one there was a discussion about someone else's gun and in last one someone was trying to buy one from martin. a 22? several different calibers. obviously none he had on him? that's what I've heard 21:09:18 as far as this discussions about fighting... in any of them is...... in any of discussions, who was operating keypad? I was not there when messages were not there, however when you view 8000 or 9000 texts on a phone, get a flavor or cadence for the people.... I think I can get a pretty good idea whether it's the same person or not 21:10:16 long way you would like to think so but can't tell me for sure? all appear to be by the same person 21:10:31 profile picture... 3 separate dates...? no that's the data from the phone, on their 3 times... all created on 11-15 2011? probably yes 21:10:52 same picture just repeated? correct 21:11:00 profile picture nothing to do with hands and guns, just torso and face shot? correct 21:11:13 not posted in connection with either frights or guns? posted in terms of text messages correct 21:11:28 deletion can be accomplished by anyone who knew the phone and codes? yes. not there to tell me who did any of that? I was not there when.... 21:11:55 when were they accomplished, in mass or little by little? I can't tell that 21:12:05 hypothetical, if a person parent or sibling had discovered stuff in phone and deleted it, couldn't tell me if done all at once or deleted as he went along? I can give you my opinion 21:12:41 there's nothing in the data that tells when a text was deleted, but certain ones are and certain ones aren't... look for patterns. when it was done you can't tell me? correct. and by whom, I know you have a suspicion? I wasn't there when it was deleted 21:13:16 material in the phone, any reason to suspect Zimmerman knew about it? I don't know... no communications to anyone called Zimmerman? no REDIRECT 21:13:42 mass deletion of texts, were texts deleted related to certain subjects? and people.... texts from certain people were deleted... 21:14:01 texts about drugs and drug use? yes. about the guns? yes 21:14:13 anything that would indicate to you someone other than martin got a hold of this phone and deleted messages at once? no. 21:14:29 images of porn on phone that were not deleted? Object! Beyond Scope SUSTAINED 21:14:47 I submit if some family member got a hold of phone they wouldn't have left porn on it... mantei: doesn't have to do with scope of proffer.. 21:15:17 explain that? pictures of the gun were hidden also on the phone by a separate application, created a folder in a program file with french language... renamed extension... jpg.... also changed extension from .jpg to .dpm.... this app moved them and hid them and was password protected, not deleted off the phone..... whoever using phone would have to have the code and get to the items 21:16:43 separate hidden applications? yes. there were 2 hidden apps? yes. 21:16:54 texts in one and pictures of gun in another? yes 21:17:03 casual user wouldn't see those pictures unless they knew how to access? exactly 21:17:17 not appear to be a picture? correct, just browsing content.. they'd be bin files not picture files 21:17:33 MAY HE BE EXCUSED? yes. THANK YOU, YOU'RE EXCUSED 21:17:51 TESTIMONIES BEEN PROFFERED, I'LL HEAR ARGUMENTS 21:18:00 west: additional evidence to proffer..... Rachel jeantel was also deposed over two days.... while she had denied martin talked with her about fighting in deposition in April she acknowledged conversation with martin that he told her he was in a fight and told her he knew how to fight and was in one that he won... only renew acquaintance with him after a number of years.... conversation of fights took place in weeks prior to martin traveling to Sanford 21:19:27 closes loop on authentication. PROFER FOR PURPOSE OF CONNORS TESTIMONY OR ANOTHER ISSUED IN FRONT OF JURY.... court already raised question of authentication. IS IT FOR PURPOSES OF THIS HEARING OR THE TRIAL? no for this 21:22:11 DEFENDANTS EXHIBIT #5 FOR PURPOSES OF THIS HEARING... #5 is transcript? YES... I HAVE OTHER EXHIBITS HERE, NOT MARKED BY LISA... READY FOR ARGUMENT 21:22:54 west: before I forget, Zimmerman has 10:00 curfew? EXTENDED FOR 30 MINUTES AFTER COURT IS CONCLUDED 21:23:14 argument part of this... asking Connor be allowed to testify for the fighting and the gun and discussions of the gun... I'm not ready tonight to make argument why gun I DONT HAVE THE GUN, THREE PICTURES OF THE PROFILE OF MARTIN.. exhibit marked with discussion of gun. RIGHT BUT I DONT HAVE THE PICTURES OF THE GUN... ONLY PARTS OF THIS EXHIBIT, NO GUN... does the court have exhibit referencing the gun? 21:24:37 EXHIBIT #3 IS EXTRACTION REPORT.... OH YES HERE IS IT, WELL LETS SEE IF PICTURES ARE ATTACHED... HERE THEY ARE 21:25:06 I don't want to address that tonight, hour is late... not saying Connor can testify to the gun and texts... not directly related to facts of the case, more aggressive.. supporting violent tendency... WHAT EVIDENCE CODE ARE YOU SEEKING? most squarely admissible under, well no.. different depending on what parts of exhibit... picture of martin is predicate to martin on his phone... shows his physique... gun pictures and discussion of buying gun is not directly related to the fighting issue... that central core... two legal grounds 90.803... exception to the hearsay prohibition against hearsay....relates to physical condition 21:27:00 in primary text with levandria, martin asked how he's doing and he's tired and sore... fight he was in and he won.. WHAT EVIDENCE CODE? 90.803. text messages regarding fighting 90.803... and also under legal authority chambers vs. Mississippi... not the firearm pictures yet, not connected yet with evidence before the jury 21:27:57 concentrate on fighting and its admissible under several theories, not as reputation theory but under 90.803... reflecting physical condition.... at the time martin was in the fight and explains how he won the fight... losing first round because opponent was on top of him much like testimony he rendered Zimmerman in this case. SEEKING UNDER 90.803, SUB 3? yes.. OK GO AHEAD 21:29:02 talks about having been involved in orchestrated fight... 3 rounds.... talks about how he won second and third and won the fight... also able to hit in the nose and make them bleed, not satisfied with amount of blood... not done yet with this guy... cautioned he should quit doing this 21:29:55 corroborated by conversation with michael french about this event.... we know those are connected in time and content... helping toward authentication that those were his words he communicated with people regularly 21:30:30 conversations with them on other subjects 21:30:40 also a facebook post by martins younger brother demetrius, martin has several children.... one is 2-3 years younger is demetrius martin 21:31:08 we have more loop being closed... demetrius asked trayvon when he was going to teach him how to fight... though he knew how to fight enough to ask for his training 21:31:31 jeantel deposition, told her he had been in a fight... had won the fight, know that from jeantel who knows his voice and personally and testified it was martin who told her about a fight he won 21:31:57 strong circumstantial evidence if not clear evidence... his words being sent to his friends about a fight he was proud he won, draw blood from man's noise and prevail despite difficult first round 21:32:27 connected don'ts on authenticating this.... relevant because physical abilities is relevant... jury instruction says that... this jury decide his physical capabilities and knowledge.. experience in fights having been put in position of vulnerability... in that fight, orchestrated 3 round fight.... when he lost the first round and he couldn't get up there was other rounds...... 21:33:40 been in fight, knew how to fight... knew what Zimmerman would experience when he was on top of him because similar to past 21:33:55 relevant because state took efforts to make that relevant for Zimmerman... physician's assistant folgate.... when Zimmerman spoke with her about his exercise regimen... worked out aerobically with MMA... big deal of that... experience as MMA based upon medical errors from Altamonte physician... relevant in states case, likewise in our case... jury makes that decision 21:34:59 because I think this information shows existence of martins mental state after this event occurred.... tired and sore admissible under 90.803 at time of event... not suggesting that statement was him talking about Feb. 2012, but his thinking and emotional condition at this time 21:35:47 clearly compelling evidence in support of Zimmerman's self-defense claim... testimony is martin sucker punched him... able to get him onto ground where he was mounted... know from testimony, mounting is straddling around hips, vulnerable position... limited acts one can do unless skilled to get out from under it.... know good said he saw martin mounted MMA style... know from physical evidence frankly especially testimony corroborates that... shot was fired from ground up... corroborates and is consistent with what good observed when he went out to investigate... compelling evidence and highly relevant and admissible under 90.803 21:37:32 also relevant because not to admit it would violate articles and 5th 6th amendments... confront witnesses and due process 21:38:07 this theory, constitutional principle of preservation is discussed in chambers vs. miss..... what's to be taken from that decision, states hearsay rules can't be mechanistically applied to deny an accused right to mount the defense... any rule of exclusion would be a mechanistic application of that rule.... prohibits especially under circumstances where the evidence is reliable.... his phone and words in context to other individual conversations... skill in fighting, able to injure person, not done with him yet... consistent with Feb. 26th when Zimmerman screaming for help but martin not done with him yet 21:39:53 indeed closed the loop with jeantels deposition..... talking with her about winning a fight and knowing how to fight 21:40:12 not something that isn't authenticated and isn't reliable... not just someone else typing this out, can't be the case now that you've heard context of these text messages... highly probable value of residence...default should be Zimmerman to present defense... urge court to allow Connor to testify 21:41:04 guy: he's made my point, orchestrated fight, how many rounds... someone's mounted another person... not in here... why this evidence shouldn't be before jury.... told a story that is not in these messages on this phone... don't know what type of fight he's talking about 21:41:46 don't know if fight is code for something else 21:41:53 we don't know anything about if there was a fight... who is opponent was, Andre the giant or a little girl... that's why this shouldn't be admitted 21:42:14 doesn't even address authenticity issue... we don't know who typed messages, don't know how they're connected.... levandria and french were days apart.... jeantel was weeks later 21:42:50 authenticity issue of mental state... no indication of when these fights took place..... west: mantei did the cross and now guy is doing argument... guy: it's my issue, but Connor was mantei's witness... OKAY GO AHEAD 21:43:31 so again we've got authenticity issue, no definitiveness to when these occurred or what was meant by these words, are they code.... danger is that its orchestrated fight, mounting... none of that in here 21:44:11 any probative value is outweighed by effect of jury imagining what's meant and may have been from martin and may have been about a fight... court wants me to address about photo about firearm? ADDRESS AT LATER TIME... 21:44:48 photo appears to be martin.... offered for... best photo for jury to consider if the one taken on medical examiners photo... don't know if this photo was right after a workout and was pumped up 21:45:25 I see no probative value to the photo... already in evidence... moment...... 21:45:40 they relied on chambers vs. miss... don't think purpose of that is to irradiate evidence code to allow in items subject to speculation... ask court to continue to grant states motion and deny this motion 21:46:11 ANY FURTHER ARGUMENT? 21:46:18 west: content of messages.. they are what they are... jury see them and give whatever weight based on what they mean... authentication, this issue is a mess on the discovery of this issue... rionda stood before court and said we gave defense everything... that wasn't true.... we finally got the report from brenton on June 4th... still haven't had chance to go through it... there is ongoing discovery issue... guy stood there silently when rionda said we gave them everything... we know that's just not true 21:47:45 can't get through this issue with time table..., no authentication issue, does the court think there is one is from states misconduct... COMING FROM SAME PHONE.... we did not have ability to... we were misled, given...... GO AHEAD... given a report at the same time as bin file, report was misleading, not the same information state had at this time... HE FOUND 600 ADDITIONAL PHOTOS THE STATE DID NOT KNOW ABOUT.. that's not true... testimony before this court.... SIDE ISSUE, MY POINT BEING IF YOU HAD 5 YEARS TO LOOK AT BIN FILE, STILL COMING FROM SAME PHONE, CORRECT? yes, data set is the data set. 21:49:22 INFORMATION YOU ARE SEEKING NOW, I DO HAVE AUTHENTICATION ISSUE... 90.901.A MOST COMMON METHOD FOR ELECTRONIC RECORD IS TESTIMONY OF THE PERSON WHO CREATED IT.... FOOTNOTE #3 GRIFFIN VS STATE.... ELECTRONIC DOCUMENT, TEXT, FACEBOOK... DIRECT TESTIMONY OF THE AUTHOR THAT IDENTIFY THE AUTHOR... EMAIL MESSAGES MARKED, SENDER CELL PHONE AND USER NAME AND PROFILE PICTURE... COULD BE GENERATED BY THIRD PARTY, NOT EQUATED OTHERS........2011 CASE, EVIDENCE OF ELECTRONIC MEDIA THAT BARES AUTHORS NAME IS NOT SUFFICIENT ENOUGH.... 21:52:01 MY POINT BEING THAT WHAT HAS BEEN PRESENTED, EXHIBIT 2, AND EXHIBIT 3... HAS NOTHING IDENTIFYING MR. MARTIN... DOESN'T SAY HEY THIS IS TRAYVON... GOING ON TO LEVANDRIA, COMING BACK IN FROM LEVANDRIA... ANYONE COULD HAVE SENT THESE MESSAGES... PEOPLE HAVE CHILDREN THAT PICK UP PHONE AND PLAY WITH THEM... NO IDENTIFYING MARKS THESE ARE CREATED OR SENT BY MARTIN... CONCERN ABOUT THAT 21:53:10 had double level of security... ANY SEVEN YEAR OLD CAN FIGURE OUT A PASSCODE... fdle couldn't do it for almost a year....ANOTHER PERSON MAY KNOW THAT PERSON... FDLE DIDN'T KNOW THE PASSWORD... 21:53:50 all of it came off his phone, thousands of pictures and texts... no indication someone else was using his phone..... Manuel vs. state.... suggest when the state didn't give us the information timely... WHAT ON THESE TEXTS SAY THEY ARE CREATED BY MARTIN... would've had time to find the witnesses on the other end.... caught them doing it, get on June 4th.... judge.... we asked for time, asked to delay case few days... what could we have done to further the issue under circumstances state is proprietor... not fair Zimmerman can't put on defense... now it's our fault to deny Zimmerman this right violates the Florida and US constitution 21:56:01 guy: I would offer him the opportunity to apologize to me for accusing me of standing by while rionda stated... NOT DOING THIS.... 21:56:14 COURT IN RECESS, SEE YOU AT 8 IN THE MORNING 21:56:26 COURT IS IN RECESS... SEE YOU AT 8 IN THE MORNING... DONNELLEY WHO MAY HAVE VIOLATED SEQUESTRATION... SECOND TIME THAT I'VE HEARD A VIOLATION BY WITNESSES, DONT WANT TO TAKE THAT UP AT 9 AND HAVE JURY WAIT... RECESS UNTIL 8.... omara: not able to prepare and get my witnesses together. west: can't keep up with this pace.... weekends a tonight.... (judge walking out as west continues to talk) COURT IN RECESS UNTIL 8 AM ================================== George Zimmerman's defense attorneys are flying through their case, and could finish as early as today. They plan to drive home their view that Zimmerman acted in self-defense when he shot and killed 17 year-old Trayvon Martin. On Monday, Zimmerman's lawyers called a string of witnesses who all identified the screams heard during a 9-1-1 call as those of Zimmerman. They also called Trayvon Martin's father Tracy to the stand to respond to testimony from the lead detective that Martin initially said the voice screaming was not Trayvon's. Martin said he never said it wasn't his son, just that he couldn't tell. After repeatedly listening to it, he says he became certain that was the last words of his son before he was killed.
Air France flight delayed in Gillot after engine problem
RFO
ZIMMERMAN TRIAL POOL 070913 P4
INT BROLL GEORGE ZIMMERMAN TRAYVON MARTIN TRIAL / SWITCHED POOL FEED NOTE: Do not use any pictures of the Trayvon Martin gunshot wound shown during this morning's court testimony.It was from his autopsy and was inadvertently broadcast. Under FL law autopsy photos are exempt from public record We cannot show the picture when it was displayed or when it was in the hands of the witness KATIE HUBER LOG **NOTE: JUDGE'S COMMENTS IN CAPS **NAMES OF WITNESSES IN RED **VISUAL DESCRIPTIONS IN (PARENTHESES) **GOOD STATEMENTS/VIDEO BOLD 8:31:06 PLEASE BE SEATED. GOOD MORNING.... (defense team is not present) 8:31:37 ON THE RECORD.... STATE VS. ZIMMERMAN 8:31:56 omara: issue of the animation, deposition last night that focused the inquiry, state still has issues... not so much admissibility but applicability to the facts 8:32:19 mantei: supplemented original issue.... daubert issue and early concerns.... part 3 of the witnesses deposition... now done from states perspective, move from witness creating exhibit that represented physical evidence and police reports and witness statements... changes from animation taken to fit to theory who has yet to testify to it... now a daubert issue, simple representation and physical items to create an essentially animated picture or theory that di maio discussed with witness Saturday after shoemaker was deposed twice but before di maio's deposition 8:34:04 because of what came out in that deposition, expand hearing to include daubert hearing... daubert-Frye-pierce hearing, all issues need to be flushed out... filed supplemental motion accordingly... witness had other still-pictures and a computer diagram, haven't gotten those physical things from the witness..... apologize for telling the court we want what was said we didn't want yesterday, but given yesterday I believe it is 8:36:53 (judge nelson reading the motion) 8:39:10 DEFENSE RESPONSE? 8:39:17 omara: factual response first, concern evidence by the state addressed one fact issue that is undisputed... dr. shiping bao and our medical examiner expert... gunshot entered at 90 degree angle, closet to a straight through shot... no dispute as to that fact... the state's concern, attended to making of the animations.... well aware of deposed and given copies of.... added to that fact, the potential of the distance from gun to body.. only distance he would give was 0.4 to 4 ft. other witness says 2-4 inches 8:41:09 states concern with that, fine with not using that still... not part of the animation, use in closing as demonstrative... withdrawn to make sure that was clear 8:41:34 underlying fact the state suggests concern with the positioning of the bodies when the shot was fired... gun and body at 90 degrees, not know and depicted in animation as probable positioning is what I guess is in issue... body and gun together........ only eye witness testimony when he saw it... left a few seconds before..... state can argue to the jury something different.... it happened, based upon evidence and shiping bao's testimony, animation that has bodies in that position, suggest what they want... don't believe and never seen evidence admissibility having some argument that it may have happened differently 8:43:30 I don't understand why that makes it a Frye or daubert admissibility concern.... it is specifically in line with facts of evidence and how things happened.... if we were to go through a daubert piece Frye standing...... not certain, I know they talked but didn't come up with anything different to john good's testimony 8:44:35 saying now it's just based upon what we talked about... no its based on 90 degree angle.. 8:44:54 what you'll see is it is more than animation, series of stills... response to states concerns in the past... took out animation and placed with a still.... movement of the arms.... SORRY TO INTERRUPT, JUST START WITH HEARING AND GIVE ARGUMENT AFTER THAT... DEFENSE HAS BURDEN, CALL FIRST WITNESS 8:46:37 (sworn in) 8:46:48 name? daniel shoemaker... address? California. name of company? contrast forensic... type of business? crime scene accident reconstruction.... I take reports and photos from the scene.... I take all of that and put into context for the recreation 8:47:40 how you got into this business? information graphics for fortune 500 companies. when that began? 26 years ago. who'd you work for? viewcom systems in Ohio... did corporate presentations for tire companies in Akron 8:48:25 the days before PowerPoint? days before desktop computers.... a lot of art graphic work, poster presentation? we had a sophisticated computer and it did slides. how long with them? 5 years. position? senior artist 8:49:01 you would take on a project, create the tools? work with the client on modifications... any formal education in this area? bachelor in fine arts. 8:49:38 advertising and marketing, corporate identity 8:49:48 graphic presentation to audience? yes, the best way... various ideas and procedures. 8:50:00 for 5 years? yes. and then? to California, same thing for a lot of companies in bay area 8:50:15 contract basis? worked for company, senior artist. which company? dolphin multimedia. same job description? similar job as in Ohio... being in bay area, more access to up to date software, more up to date technology 8:50:55 any difference in first five years to now? main difference is doing a lot of information graphics for governmental proposals.... information graphics for governmental proposals and information graphics of crime scene recreation for attorneys. how long in Cali? 13 years. 8:51:50 name changed? contrast design to contrast forensic. owner/sole proprietor... 8:52:07 type of work you focused on? initially started out by working with attorneys on designing their information, court room presentations were a bit below that..... gone from information graphics to attorneys like that to drawing crime scenes... progressed quite a lot to the point with the equipment I'm using now 8:52:59 what type of software or hardware was available to you when you started? mostly drawing out a scene.... scale and accurate, mostly 2-D.... from there it's gone to 3-D to the point where the reconstruction and the software got more sophisticated.... start with you going out to scene with tape roller and get a measurement? yeah 8:54:06 software I use, I have two kinds for using my total station data.......... aras 360.... 8:54:34 start with foundation point, total station.... bring us back to an idea when you walk onto a scene and what do you create? progressed from tape measure to robotic laser, set up on tripod and measure crime scene... series of points and 3-D space 8:55:25 used now by law enforcement? yes and road crews 8:55:38 set up that laser here, bounce off points in court room and have a data configuration of the entire outline of the court room? two types... type I have is point by point... I lay out 2-500 points in a scene... I walk around with a pocket computer and prism, everywhere I go hit the computer point where I am... laser follows me around... creates a point cloud of the whole scene..... 8:56:50 how does that compare to total station software? how does what compare........ total station gathers data and then export to aras 360....... 8:57:28 once you get that information, what you do to see if information is there? look at the data and examine it, another piece of software that I have... visual statement, between those two... 8:58:10 within context of aras 360, gathering environment digitally... motion capture suit for gathering....wireless, accelerometers... capture movement accurately and bring into the scene.... accuracy of the scene 8:59:16 give court examples for the motion capture suits... in other cases? use a few ways, I use it.... a month ago I had to go to impound lot, death in a vehicle... get into vehicle and it still sees the movement.... typical one has balls on the suit with high speed cameras following it, but the cameras won't follow behind the wall or into the vehicle..... my suit is I can take it, accelerometers to measure my movement 9:00:51 perfect for court because it gives you a running log of all the movements..... somebody hits something and cause damage.... do the same action from the accelerometers see how much force I used 9:01:24 what software exists behind those suits to interpret that and make it relevant to presentation? software that came with suit, engineers that developed it... not only used it for motion capture but also biometrics for physical therapy, monitor movement from day to day 9:02:07 put on those suits if I had range of motion problem and the suits will measure progress? yes, printout of all the movements 9:02:26 software the interprets the movement of the suits, criteria that can be put in to determine force, speed and effect of objects moving through space? yes, could do that in the reconstruction 9:02:56 how this suit gives data for recreation? put on the suit, still considered crime scene... didn't want to disrupt it... t vac suit to protect the scene, somebody opened the door tried to pull the person out.... he reached for a gun and shot him.... shot the person coming into the car? yes 9:03:49 very good use of the suit, had an attorney pull me out and record it in real time 9:04:06 what you were able to recreate? in the truck? yes..... 9:04:27 I had accurate measurements of the truck, recreated the truck, my movements fit well within the truck, exports motion file.... bring into 3D program... map their movements onto figure that matches the person involved... map onto the person's skeleton 9:05:11 how do you get size of person to be accurate? from police reports and coroners reports 9:05:23 does the software recreate body in proper proportion? doesn't do any simulation, I just have a figure that I size to the size that I need.... 9:05:50 can specify what height the person is... weight? weight is more the appearance from photos 9:06:05 helpful and do you have another sample of the car one? I have another sample 9:06:22 happened in a sams club parking lot........... 9:09:33 since it's just the court, approach the bench and you could see off the computer screen? FINE YOU MAY BRING IT UP HERE... COUNCIL APPROACH 9:10:15 this is a sample of a motion filed from the scene... how is the scene recreated for the background of event? in software. where did information come from? security camera, placed vehicles where they were in the video, better representation than the security camera 9:11:04 about to see the animations, how does the movement get placed into environment? import from motion capture software. 9:11:28 how does it get placed in right location? move figures around based on scene. come up with alternatives based on witnesses and evidence? yes, can't change movement, just the location of figures 9:12:28 graphic information from witnesses and evidence? yes 9:12:37 say that the movement of the person, how do you decide the speed? timed from security camera..... nothing further as far as that... OKAY THANK YOU 9:13:06 chance to look at that animation, anything different in the software you used in that representation than one in zimmerman case? zimmerman case was more total station data, data that was provided from DA's office 9:13:43 are there any course work or training programs you go through to enhance your abilities for this work? both in aras 360, classes through that and trained through that. only required to go through 1, but I've gone to 3 total station 9:14:24 software that law enforcement uses? total station is the piece of equipment 9:14:38 total station information available from law enforcement in this case? correct 9:14:52 who does the training for that? software companies train 9:15:03 most recent time you took training? training in those courses, a couple years... on my CV 9:15:22 aras 360 software, continually update my skills... webinar every Friday that I watch. any significant changes in program or still the same? still the same, maybe an update every 6 months 9:16:00 training and certification on using the software and using it with total station. 9:16:20 have current version of software? yes. up to date with that software? yes 9:16:34 creating computer graphic animations? luxology modo... whats that 3D software? creating 3d scenes, used for animation movies. 9:17:17 allow you to present environment or frame work? yes and create the scene 9:17:42 start putting in elements? yes. how are they accurate? measurements from total station data.... 9:17:59 bounce off points and import into program? yes..... also one part is I have a helicopter, didn't use in this case... just a drone, take photo of scene I have the data points from total station and it'll lay it on or drape it onto those points, accurate out door reconstruction of the scene 9:18:46 bird's eye view, more accurate data points? yes 9:19:02 opportunity to create animations and testify as expert? yes. what period of time you did that? ongoing for last 13 years... criminal and civil cases 9:19:30 first time you created animation in court case? 2009 9:19:46 tell the court, have you ever gotten to point where animations were utilized in court? yes. experience you had in civil and criminal settings with your testimony? I used motion capture suits for animation but to verify a person's position, did one a few months ago... in a vehicle, shot through window, show a couple more times... which were done in the car... verify his position when 3 shots were fired 9:20:48 explain how... name for motion suit? initial motion capture suit. IMCS 9:21:20 matched vehicle used and recorded movement getting out... in the figure that matched the victim, put in the rod to match bullet trajectory... looked at positions getting out of car to see which positions the trajectory should be 9:21:55 talk in context....? calibrate at beginning of recording. for accuracy? yes. 9:22:24 doing movement, but computer gathering data on 16 points that are moving? yes. computer may not know it's a body, just 16 points? in real time on computer, there's a mannequin 9:22:59 not the exact video of the driver moving his arms, but rather you decided how the body moves, how do you address that frailty? look at certain things you know from the discovery, bullet trajectory, opening of the door, physical characteristics of the truck... look at scenarios to find which one matches the scene and evidence and discovery you have 9:23:48 do an animation at the point you created is specific? Objection! 9:24:02 consideration based on evidence know to you at the time? yes. modify animation to match witnesses or other things you've heard? yes, whatever's more accurate 9:24:23 put on the suit, software allows you to change configuration of body for height? yes. how do you look at body size to accomplish that on the program? most done through photos from reports 9:25:06 take measurements of those photos, ratio comparisons and put on the mannequin? yes measurements from reports.... any measurements you can take. 9:25:35 also look at photographs? yes 9:25:52 I come in after the fact, have to rely on police photos taken from the scene.... don't have certain measurements, but you may have one measurement of an item in a photograph... 9:26:22 how does that assist you with measurements? one known object with measurement you can figure out other items 9:26:50 I can tell how far from the wall you are.......................... lay down a plane in the software if you know one measurement apply to the grid and extrapolate the evidence 9:27:26 don't know the algorithms or math behind it, has been certified to work? yes 9:27:42 this type software, does that have application in entertainment industry? yes. suit I have was used in avatar, iron man, x-man... used in creating characters... also used in madden football... record suits and apply the figures 9:28:27 iron man is placed on top of him in the movie? in the computer the 3D program 9:28:42 talking about your experience in testifying... how many times in court your animations were presented? need CV? yes. moment? YES 9:29:19 come back to your CV.... experience in testifying for the animations. use of suits and presentation in court? most work since I acquired the suit in 2008.... probably 20. 9:30:00 types of cases you worked on and what courts? also on my CV, list of the counties 9:31:35 type cases and court rooms you presented? 59 criminal trials, 21 civil trials... declaration or testified in 20 of those.... 9:32:15 trying to figure out shooting incidents, worked with department of justice and police officer related shootings, stabbings, it varies quite a bit. 9:32:36 in each of the 59 cases, take on data and graphic presentation? yes 9:32:49 are we now talking about spectrum of murder cases, know the charges or just the information? sometimes told more detail and give creation from the evidence 9:33:17 what percentage for defense and prosecution? 100% on the defense, has to do with defensive police officers and police officer involved shootings 9:33:43 if the department of Justice with a civil case against them or a shooting occurred, work with them on that and presentation of their material 9:34:13 presented testimony in court in any of the criminal cases? presented personally or... after being qualified, you personally? probably all 59 9:34:48 qualified as expert various counties.... 16 counties here... all in California? yes 9:35:20 are these counties in which the courts authorized you as an expert? all the courts where my information was presented, all qualified, never denied 9:36:00 (listing counties) 9:36:47 have you ever testified in Florida before? no. outside of California? no. how long have you had motion suits? since 2008 9:37:04 in those counties, which counties were you... did you testify in those counties or was the information you created presented? both... my information was through either as expert testimony or a declaration... sometimes my material can be testified to by another witness... 9:38:01 I just speak to the accuracy of the creation... 9:38:09 have you testified in court concerning accuracy and methods used to create? yes. 9:38:24 what counties and types of cases you've testified to? I don't have a listing ..... what cases have you testified to in court, what types of cases? all the ones I've testified in court have been criminal trials 9:39:06 what you testified to and the animations? plasa county, shooting reconstruction, position of shooter and victim, the order of shots.... testify? yes. expert in this area? yes. 9:39:58 another case? contracusta county, determine position of the person from the 3 shots... determine there was only 1 through window and the other 2 were outside vehicle. expert? yes. 9:40:34 one more from another case? a couple down in Marino valley, two of them actually... one was inside house, threatening suicide, police officers responded and they were waiting at corner of garage waiting for him to come out and another officer was looking out to the street and the other office was looking at doorway, determine who shot... which officer and the position of person in house.... in my reconstruction, person in house was on floor in kitchen... two counts of murder to police officer... in house the entire time. police said person came out with gun, fired 3 shots, partner turned around and shot the partner in elbow... which shots came first and position of door....... second series, position of the door... no way someone came through door when shots went off, tight space outside the door he would've been hit, had to be in the.... 9:43:08 accepted in the court? yes. give evidence to the jury in that case? yes 9:43:24 other cases where you've been attempted to qualify as expert? no. in all 59 then, by affidavit, declaration, give your testimony to what you created? declaration or testimony was 20 cases, never been disqualified 9:43:59 experience on civil side similar? mostly info designed for attorneys to present to jury 9:44:13 any civil that went to jury? not in civil trials 9:44:35 zimmerman case? first became involved toward end of April... initial conversation in august, but my first meeting with attorneys was end of April 9:44:58 in 2012? yes. went through medical condition that took you out of sorts for several months? yes. all resolved? well se 9:45:14 back to work, talked in April this year? yes. what information did you gather and review, what tasks given on behalf of this case? to do a reconstruction of the scene with the information we had and creation of an animated timeline... 9:45:50 inside your qualifications? yes. not a lot of opportunity to have live audio of the occurrence, different in this case 9:46:23 unique because we had audio evidence, real time available for your recreation? yes, helps with the timeline 9:46:39 similar to security camera makes its more accurate? yes. video surveillance not in this case? no 9:46:59 what information did you gather to assist you in the work? discovery from DA office, photos, reports, audio from 911 calls, questioning at PD of witnesses... depositions? yes. photos from scene and total station data 9:47:48 any information you needed to create animation that you did not have available? use of motion capture suit at the scene, not available to me... made two visits to the scene 9:48:16 came back to utilize motion capture suits? yes. when that was done? second week in may 9:48:40 explain what you do then, who did it, how you assure accuracy? good where I can interact with suits at the scene, 9:49:26 7 points that were labeled windows and they were not in position to be windows.... laser bounced off and was different than what it was? yes... laser pointed up to 2nd story window, went through tree and picked up branches... 6 points on one side and another point that are in the wrong location, not to use it 9:50:20 address that or fix it? I didn't manipulate the data, just didn't use them 9:50:41 any other measuring of the scene now that you're on scene? matter port scanner.... sets up on tripod, has a little computer and cameras.... one that takes photos and another one takes infrared for distance 9:51:19 iPad interface, twirl in 360 and scan around scanner, walk it through the scene... captures intricate parts of the scene as well as textramap of the photos 9:51:49 helpful to get the slope and positioning of buildings and sidewalk. more accurate that total station then? yes it added to the total station data, verified the scanner with the total station data so it all matched 9:52:31 did matter port allow for better graphic representation of the sloping? yes. total station had not done that? didn't measure very many points.... mainly measured the drains and sprinkler fix... didn't do measuring of slope 9:53:08 matter for even more accurate rendition of sloping of ground? yes 9:53:25 SHOEMAKER STANDING FOR AN HOUR NOW.... I THOUGHT IT WAS GOING TO BE SHORT, WOULD YOU LIKE TO TAKE A SEAT SIR? how much longer.... omara: drag him back down here in a moment, so I'll move it along 9:53:58 go to scene to start working on project? correct.... motion capture suit, who did them and frailty of others using it? a couple volunteers from your law office that put the suits on, timing for scenario where they were on the ground, used audio on the 911 call to time it with shot of the gun 9:54:46 also john good's statements and deposition testimony? yes. used for the positioning.... information from Ms. mora, saw zimmerman on top of martin after shot? yes. assist in your creation? yes 9:55:18 also have Lauer 911 audio, has a shot and matter of time before shot? yes. 9:55:36 what other information? Ms. Lauer's police report. she first heard altercation at the T? yes. and Jeremy's? yes 9:55:58 created poster graphics, stills of the scene based upon that testimony as well? yes. recently removed Jeremy's statements since he didn't testify? yes 9:56:24 modifying animation and the posters to come in mind with actual trial testimony? yes. as disclosed to you by me? yes to get most accurate representation of it 9:56:47 able to create animation based on info available to you? yes 9:56:57 sources of that information, seen discovery- witness, depositions, autopsy, reports.... also diagrams made by witnesses and other information in discovery? correct. 9:57:36 a lot of information from defense? yes. extraneous to recreation but to see if it was relevant? yes 9:58:03 conversations with me and others on my behalf for the creation? yes 9:58:13 sources of information? everything you mentioned. anything else? my going to the scene and scanning the scene during motion capture 9:58:41 anything you would have liked to have had in creating the posters that was not available to you? I believe I had everything I needed to create the scene 9:59:06 present the animation.................... 10:00:33 BRING UP TO THE BENCH AND I'LL LOOK AT IT UP HERE.... 10:01:40 (video playing on shoemaker's laptop, audio of 911 call.... no visual of the video) 10:02:47 there are posters that he created.... mantei: new ones? omara: some are new.... 10:03:22 advise the court what this is and how created? from 3d image of how it was created, to explain location of markers...... where'd you get the markings and put at that location? straight from total station data, also have a flat 2D illustration of the scene. incorporated as well? yes 10:04:15 basically the same thing, different view. 10:04:33 to show the slope.... 10:05:28 this is just to show photographs from discovery of what was at those markers 10:05:42 different parts of different items, where located and top left hand corner... imported and picture we gave you? yes. 10:06:12 IN THE MIDDLE? from the point of view from good. to the left is good head? his ear... taken with 50 mm lens in the software, closely resembles what a person will see 10:06:42 line going above the case, distance measurement? edge of porch to marker number a 10:06:58 what it looks like? 49.5 mm., rounded to 50 10:07:10 perspective one would see as humans looking at it? yes that's how they would appear 10:08:06 john goods to the left? yes 10:08:15 states what john good testified in trial regarding what he saw and the peoples descriptions? yes. yes 10:08:34 that is Ms. Mora's testimony in trial to what she saw from her column? yes. 10:08:52 what she would see from her location? yes 10:08:57 in these photos I didn't try to reconstruct the lighting, more important to see detail.....frailty of the posters, lighting was nothing for this evening? jury would have a hard time seeing detail 10:10:07 moment? YES 10:10:34 PROBLEM THEY'RE HAVING IS WITH THE APPLE COMPUTER, CHECK IT OUT OVER LUNCH... get his presentation on a PC. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? just briefly: have been doing this graphic information in court for 13 years? yes. has never been disqualified in court? correct. 10:11:20 awareness of industry and others who did this? only one in US with wireless motion capture suit.... older style ones available? reconstruction are using, but very rare to find one with motion capture suit, whether the balls or the wireless 10:12:21 used in video games and videos? yes 10:12:25 software you utilize, tell the court where that fits in to industry 10:12:56 how long? luxology around probably 4 years.... I believe 4.... started as version 201, now up to 701 10:13:16 ever attend seminars or conventions where others interact? yes.... 10:13:32 users group that gets together, presentations there. how often? just presented once 10:13:44 made up of people who use software on ongoing basis? yes.... 10:13:59 aras 360 gets together every Friday.... keep up on that part of the industry? yes 10:14:11 is this software accepted whether accident recreations or others? yes, highway patrol uses it... 3 basic software... visual statement, aras 360... another software called crime time or something like that.... Sanford police uses on there's 10:14:57 is the software you use the most up to date software for this work? yes,... industry standard for accident and crime scene reconstruction 10:15:18 use this type of software to do the work? mostly used in police departments 10:15:34 80% of aras 360 are police departments, others are accident or crime scene reconstructionist like myself.... user group meetings interaction? yes, get an answer at the end of the week 10:16:07 accident reconstructionist, type of software used in this industry? yes, mines cutting edge 10:16:24 more advanced, only one who uses new style of motion suits for your work? correct. are used in entertainment industry? correct and medical rehabilitation 10:16:50 limited based on expense? yes. nothing further CROSS 10:17:00 mantei: 5 minute break and the witness sit in stand? 10:17:10 COURT IN RECESS FOR 5 MINUTES ============================================ 10:24:29 PLEASE BE SEATED. IS SHOEMAKER HERE? he is. HOW MUCH LONGER IS THIS GOING TO TAKE.... JURY IN BACK SINCE 9, I STAYED LATE TO GET THIS ACCOMPLISHED....mantei: 45 minutes. NO. DO IT LATER... SHOEMAKER REMAIN OUTSIDE, CONTINUE HEARING AFTER COURT.... READY WITH NEXT WITNESS? READY TO BRING JURY IN? omara: approach VERY BRIEF (sidebar) 10:26:55 (zimmerman walking in, tan suit, white shirt, gray tie) 10:27:16 (omara talking to zimmerman) 10:30:53 (sidebar) 10:34:21 MR ZIMMERMAN, PLEASE STAND.... INFORMED BY COUNCIL THAT TESTIMONY OF DR. DI MAIO IS CARVED DOWN... DID YOU HAVE DISCUSSIONS WITH OMARA ABOUT DR DI MAIOS TESTIMONY? yes. AGREE WITH HIS REPRESENTATION NOT TO ASK CERTAIN AREAS, YOU AGREE WITH THAT? yes. HAS ANYBODY THREATENED YOU TO DO THAT? no. READY FOR JURY? west: not yet. HOW CLOSE ARE WE? need the physical evidence in the court. PLEASE OPEN LOCKER DOOR AND GET OUT WHAT YOU NEED...... 10:37:48 NOW READY FOR JURY? LET'S BRING THE JURY IN.... 10:39:59 PLEASE BE SEATED, WELCOME BACK... I APOLOGIZE FOR KEEPING YOU BACK THERE... QUESTIONS: DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE CASE? NO HANDS RAISED. READ OR LISTEN TO REPORTS ABOUT THE HOUSE? NO HANDS RAISED. USE ELECTRONIC DEVICE FOR RESEARCH? NO HANDS RAISED. READ OR CREATE SOCIAL MEDIA? NO HANDS RAISED. 10:40:53 west: call Vincent Di Maio 10:41:27 (sworn in) 10:41:54 west: good morning.... name? Dr. Vincent Di Maio 10:42:13 profession? physician, employed in private practice of forensic pathology.... degree? yes back in 1965 in NY 10:42:39 educational background? graduated med school 1965, 1 yr. internship in pathology, did a 3 year residency, 1 year fellowship in forensic pathology, specialty board exams 10:43:39 board certification? yes... it means you've successfully completed training in specialty... taken written and practical exam and certified and recognized as specialist 10:44:07 mentioned anatomical, pathology...? pathology is branch of medicine with death from disease..... examine tissue removed from someone.... mole, breast tissue... tells your physician the disease, and tells you the diagnosis... wont contact them, physician has contact 10:45:10 clinical pathologist is concerned with tests done... blood test, urine test... 10:45:23 forensic pathologist is concerned with application to medical science and the law... function as medical examiner, determine cause of death and manner of death... individuals thought to have died of violence, accidents suicides or homicides..... exact course of death is not known... autopsy..... based on circumstances, the findings and tests done make determination on cause and manner 10:46:25 professional positions following training? having trouble hearing you..... 10:47:09 following training you've outlined, idea of the professional position you held? after training, went into army for 2 years... armed forces institute in pathology.... chief of medical legal section, then wound ballistic section... moved to Dallas, TX medical examiner there summer 1972- Feb. 1981.... became chief medical examiner for Bexar county Texas.... san Antonio...... from march 1981-until I retired Dec. 2006. 10:48:40 for 16 of the years I was there, I was in charge of crime lab... retired and went into complete private practice, doing since then... also the editor of the American journal of forensic pathology.... chairmen of Texas crime labs....... 10:49:30 director of crime lab for 16 years, role? police had crime lab, county took over when I came..... basic documentation, established DNA Lab.... usually things, drug ID, DNA, trace evidence 10:50:11 work include knowing how to package evidence that may have biological or DNA evidence? yes. but you teach the forensic pathologists, they know that even if not in the lab.... technique to packaging... 10:50:50 certain requirements when packing biological samples, wet fluids? yes, dry out material... package each in paper... if you don't let it dry and put in plastic, the bacteria love that... multiply... mold... stinks and everything deteriorates 10:51:35 well known for a while? yeah I'd say... 30 years that I know of 10:51:45 back you've done with group that monitors labs? Texas forensic science commission... yeah what does that involve? government agency.... problem with labs reported and investigated and issued a report... want tests to be done proper.... labs reporting themselves 10:52:50 in addition to professional positions, also had academic appointments? University of Texas system.. assistant professor, associate professor and full professors before I retired. what subject? pathology 10:53:21 have you in addition to your day to day work as medical examiner and work at the University as professor, published any books or articles? 88 articles and 13 book chapters and then I've published 4 books.... first was gunshot wounds, wrote myself... published in English, French and Spanish... forensic pathology with my father, he's deceased now... third book was handbook of forensic pathology wrote with a colleague, 4th book is excited delirium syndrome... I'm the junior author of that book, wife is senior author.... 10:54:51 your work in gun shots.... first book you wrote, updated over time? 2 editions published and the 3rd edition is going to the publishers in another week or two.... 10:55:17 describe for jury the purpose of focus of that book? book starts out instructing about fire arms, wounds, riffles, hand guns, how to do an autopsy, collect evidence and what you can do with analysis 10:55:51 gunshot wounds, how a pathologist could learn things like the distance from the shot? right, contact, near, loose, distant... range, nature of wound 10:56:20 work you've been doing your entire career? yes, very strong interest in gunshot wounds 10:56:35 written 13 chapters, in others books? correct. how does that work? solicit me to write the chapter 10:56:55 are some of those books more comprehensive look than what you wrote? I don't think so... depends, chapters aren't always about gunshot wounds 10:57:23 how many of those chapters that you recall involve gunshot wounds? I think about 7 10:57:36 authored or participated in 88 peer review article? it's a scientific article submitted to journal... when the journal receives it, sends to others to see if it should be published and editor decides to publish. peers mean other pathologists? yes. published becomes available to other researches to use or educate themselves? it is.... central on computer with articles listed, review articles on the computer... essentially a library. 10:59:14 how many articles involved gunshot wounds? 35 or 37 10:59:28 over entire span of your career? these events, these writings were developed over time you worked? yes, over 40 years 10:59:52 worked in baxer county as medical examiner, perform autopsies? yes, about 9,000 and then I reviewed autopsies that were done under my jurisdiction another 28,000..... 11:00:43 called by prosecutor, typically? yes 11:00:50 as medical examiner testified in court to the autopsies I did 11:01:08 staff that helped? 4 full time, 1 part time physicians... approved for program to train fellows.... 38 or 39 approved to train 11:01:42 how many autopsies would be done in the year? 1500 autopsies and another 1500 we would just do external exams 11:02:04 last autopsy I did was in October and retired in December 11:02:14 takes week or a month to complete an autopsy 11:02:23 since 1981 when you began work in baxer county, private consultant? yes. mostly civil, a few criminal cases.... outside baxer I could testify for the defense 11:02:58 don't do many private criminal cases such as now 11:03:09 working as consultant since 2007? right 11:03:26 private practice as consultant since then? yes 11:03:33 majority of work in connection with civil cases? yes. include gunshot injuries? yes.... alleged suicides, accidental discharge 11:04:05 mentioned you were in the military? yes that's when I started my firearm research... study mechanism of firearms and review gunshot wounds 11:04:43 when I was in charge of the wound section I had another study in Vietnam, photos of those injured or killed by different weapons, attempt to study those.... 50,000 slides of this 11:05:16 mentioned microphotography... what a picture of bullet leaving gun looks like? micro flash... only this flash is very quick, take photos of things moving through air, freeze them when the flash goes off 11:05:56 take moment the mechanics of what happens when bullet fired from gun? firepit hits the cartridge case...................... gun powder burns, converted to gas... gradual pressure to build up... bullet at front, fixed in.... push out of bullet into barrel, gripped by riffling, takes a while.... during this time some gas will get around the bullet... gas in front, the bullet, and then bulk of case... barrel filled with air, as bullet goes down, pushes the gas in front and behind... first thing you get is a little cloud of gas, not big, pretty soon after that get the bulk of the gas... in that, the bullet and unburned or burning grains of powder 11:08:13 can the gas that comes out first, combined with air in barrel? will to certain degree, mostly the larger cloud of gas... column of gas and air pushed straight ahead.... hold gun against clothing, this column of gas and air tears hole and then the bullet gets to clothing and the soot gets to the clothing.... that material after hole is made comes back to the other side.. 11:09:21 hole made by gas first, followed by bullet and then followed by soot? right...... blank cartridges are not dangerous, you can kill yourself with it.... the gas form will tear through skin and muscle in your lung... you don't need bullet to kill you with contact wounds 11:10:17 written articles about head trauma? yes... one peer reviewed article, one chapter 11:10:35 blunt force trauma to the head? right 11:10:42 served as editor of peer reviewed scientific journals? yes 11:10:55 does that work include whether or not to accept submission for publication? yes I have final say 11:11:20 work you've done specifically..... expertise in firearms and injuries, have you done work for united states government? yes about 2 years ago.... US attorney's office during hurricane Katrina, police officers shot and wounded a number and killed 1.... done 1 or two other cases 11:12:10 for the marines? war crimes... testified for marine corp 11:12:20 British government? the bloody Sunday massacre.... and another case going in 2 months in Britain with a concussion head injury 11:12:52 united nations? yes. 11:13:07 jurisdictions you've testified as expert? in most states of the union, state courts, federal courts... Canada, Columbia.... by video.... south Africa, Israel 11:13:44 I don't believe we've touched upon.... state and federal? yes 11:13:56 professional awards? yes, from my medical school master teacher award, outstanding service awards...... 11:14:32 professional background and all detailed in CV? yes they are 11:15:04 defendants MM? yes. your CV? yes it is 11:15:24 offer as exhibit... ANY OBJECTIONS? rionda: we object! May we approach? YES YOU MAY (sidebar) 11:18:11 COME IN AS DEFENSE EXHIBIT 23.... 11:18:42 turn to work in this case, describe the materials that you have received for review and if you have notes reflecting that, happy to do so..... 11:19:14 material I reviewed were scene photos, zimmerman photos, autopsy report, medical records, witness statement and transcribed conversation by good, 911 calls, reenactment tape, firearm, examiner reports, and deposition of dr. rao 11:20:14 talk with you about...... opportunity to review the video recording of zimmerman reenacting the events surrounding the shooting? yes., access to witness statements? yes. reviewed all witness statements? I haven't 11:20:54 more about determining whether evidence is consistent with his accounts of what he said happened.... witness statements are all around, vary greatly... easiest way to hear is examine physical evidence and compare to defendants statements and see if consistent.... say bullet came in front, and it came from the back inconsistent 11:21:46 look at what zimmerman said and the forensic evidence which includes the pictures from autopsy, include looking at report from firearm expert who analyzed clothing? correct. two most important are the autopsy report and the reports by the firearms examiner.... secondary, scene photos... looking at autopsy and detailed report by firearms examiner.. 11:22:49 reach opinion as to the distance? yes 11:22:57 opinion from end of barrel to clothing? yes 11:23:03 what affect if any the clothing had on appearance on the skin? yes 11:23:16 well talk about those details in a moment, also talk with you about is your opinion of how long martin may have been alive, how long martin may have been conscious.....? they are different opinions because you can be alive and unconscious.... 11:23:57 the injury zimmerman sustained, reflected in photos from Sanford PD, review them? yes 11:24:12 talk with you a little about the injuries that you observed through photos sustained by martin from gunshot wound 11:24:34 general frame work for today.... talk about gunshot itself and the mechanics involved in that...... 11:25:08 evidence in this case, describe for jury what you saw when you looked at photos from the clothing and the wound to his skin, the gun shot or tattooing referenced in autopsy report, put it all together? photos show contact discharge of weapon against clothing, agree 100% with firearms examiner, at time of discharge, against clothing, tore clothing, soot all around, know the muzzle was in contact with clothing.... firearms examiner said it 11:26:29 look at the wound in the chest, different picture.... circular punched out wound, lay in area of powder tattooing 2x2.... marks on skin due to powder that comes out of the muzzle of gun... not powder burns, means whole bunch of things 11:27:14 when bullet comes out, mark and reaction, reddish..... marks are called powder tattoo marks... stippling. indicates that grain of powder hit skin and person was alive at the time, don't get that in dead people... distribution 2x2... certain density in the tattoo marks, not against the skin.... more than an inch away. based on concentration and the size of pattern, muzzle of gun was 2-4 inches away from the skin.... the barrel of gun was against the clothing but clothing had to be 2-4 inches away from body. 11:28:52 states 96... photo taken at medical examiner's office, showing entrance wound.... ? if you look, you'll see the hole from the bullet, punched out entrance, all around the entrance you see these little marks like ant bites..... powder tattoo marks.... redding brown the person was alive.... this indicates he was alive at time he was shot... muzzle was not in contact but had to be back... first time you see powder tattoo marks is when muzzle of 1/2 inch away, less.. you won't see.... area of tattoo gets bigger and bigger... increases in range, density will decrease.... this is very heavy density.... decreases until tattoo marks disappear..... 11:31:17 opinion to distance based on training and research? yeah, a lot of research....firearm examiners use heavy white paper and fire the gun, hole, and marks around it.... based on size and pattern give opinion from the range..... problem was it doesn't really reflect what happens on the skin..... did experiments, living animals... yes its valid.... to determine size of pattern by shooting against white paper is valid to at least 18 inches..... hand guns to rifles and shot guns and how it extends, how different types....... denser pattern, actually go out further bull powder because its stated in the report 11:33:11 exhibit is now on the screen, this is the 2 inch by inch tattooing pattern? yes sir 11:33:33 helps you to be precise with distance from 1/2 inch to 18 inches? less than 1/2 inch a hole with dense soot, no powder tattoo marks..... 11:34:11 how does pattern get broader? like a hose, the cone shape, farther you get away the bigger the spray pattern 11:34:34 water droplets just fall off, same with powder.. loses velocity and falls away 11:34:50 would the clothing, not disputed in this case.... clothing in between muzzle and skin, what affect if any would clothing have on the appearance of wounded skin? in this case none, clothing wasn't between powder and skin at time of discharge 11:35:38 hole there produced by gas and bullet.... if you had gun 6 inches away from clothing, clothing will filter out powder to a degree... in this case, clothing didn't filter that, you had a hole there and muzzle against the body.... everything coming out of muzzle was going into the hole 11:36:35 if pressed in his chest, what would you see differently? hole like that, surrounded by a halo of black soot and maybe on the skin, a grain or two of powder, but not powder tattooing... disperses the shoot, not the powder.... powder would be inside the body 11:37:11 medical examiner standpoint, hard call for you? no... this is basic 101 11:37:52 trajectory, photos of examine? no... x ray 11:38:06 reference the x ray if you wish, you know the path of the bullet through the right ventricle into lower right lung? right.... bullet hole in left chest, goes through the fifth intercostal space, space between 5th and 6th rib, went through there, hit sac surrounding heart, went through right ventricle and into the right lung.... you can see the led core of the bullet, see the jacket fragments.... bullet went front to back, left to his right because it went into the right lung, but it started on the left side 11:39:34 based on your review, must've been a slight left to right trajectory? yes. there's some, I can't quantitate it. not radical... bullet was go from his left to his right.... martins left to martins right? correct 11:40:09 standard way of describing wounds, talk left to right, deceased's view point 11:40:36 not precisely straight on? does not appear so 11:40:49 mechanics of that shot, putting together the defect on the clothing... result of contact on the muzzle, distance between clothing was 2-4 inches, not a contact.... you're understanding of Zimmerman's statement because of video, work essentially was to determine whether medical evidence was consistent with what he said happened? that's correct 11:41:39 aware zimmerman said martin was straddling him and leaning over him? yes. and zimmerman had gun in right hand? yes... describe what you know of that sequence of events? the medical evidence is consistent with his opinion/statement. reason it is, simplest thing is his gun was in his right hand.... shoot someone with right hand, natural to twist your hand, go from deceased left to right.... nature of defect in clothing and the tattoo.... lean over someone, clothing falls away from the chest... if lying on your back and someone shoots you, clothing against your chest... so the fact we know clothing was 2-4 inches away is consistent with someone leaning over the person doing the shooting and clothing is 2-4 inches away from person firing 11:43:38 clothing was wet, described as being damped.... the responding officers found an unopened can of a beverage in the front pouch of this sweatshirt.... find those facts consistent with what you saw? tend to reinforce.... clothing falls away from the body is gravity, have wet clothing, its heavier... pulling the shirt down, tends to pull away from body 11:45:03 wound itself by gap, tattooing and the face of the contact of the clothing, consistent with Zimmerman's account that martin was over him leaning 11:45:41 talk about martin's mechanics.... effect of him receiving that shot, how long he survived and how long he may have been conscious... what if anything he could do voluntarily at time of consciousness? #1 is the ability to move.... that is determined by amount of oxygen in your brain, you have a reserve of 10-15 seconds.... if right now I grabbed your heart and ripped it out, you could stand there and talk to me or walk over to me 10-15 seconds, brain controlling you.... that's minimum, assumes no blood is going to brain.... if more blood going to brain could be longer.... depends on blood pressure and how severe your wound 11:47:32 answer getting complicated, some get shot and immediately collapse and some get shot and don't know they got shot... 11:48:02 cardiac, in this case you have a through and through hole of right ventricle and at least one if not two into right lung.... losing blood, every time the heart contracts it pumps blood out the two holes in ventricle and at least one hole in the blood...... engage in struggle, heart rate increases... martin was healthy young man, if he's in struggle heart going/ beating more than 100 times a minute.... 11:49:08 every time heart beats, out comes the blood... say he's only beating 100, slow... loses a tablespoon of blood every time heart beats.... that's not much, 15 CCs, heart beating 100... losing 1500 CCs in a minute... quarter of blood supply.... second minute, lose another 1500.... lost more than 50% of blood supply.... 11:50:16 he's not pumping sufficient blood to anywhere, reached point where he's going to die.... assuming these conditions and all probability, nothings 100%... he's going to be dead within 1-3 minutes after being shot in this case.... heart effectively pumping blood, still get electrical activity, but not pumping.... how long as he conscious, significantly shorter than time necessary to die wouldn't have sufficient blood to brain 11:51:23 best you can give in estimates 11:51:33 in training and experience, familiar with incidents where individuals received similar or more serious and could still talk, move, voluntary actions for 10-15 seconds? yes, 12 gauge shot gun at point black range... heart was shredded, rain 65 ft. before he collapse 11:52:33 being shot in heart itself, quickly losing blood? nothing else than that..... not same as being shot in head? right. swat team immediately immobilize someone is to shoot in head 11:53:18 15 seconds capable of movement? potential for 10-15 seconds. moving arms from outstretch to underneath? Objection! SUSTAINED 11:53:49 could that include moving arms from outstretch to underneath in those 10-15 seconds? yes 11:54:10 lose consciousness, lose ability for voluntary movement? oh yeah... not feeling pain? correct 11:54:38 talk about the injury to martin's knuckle, remember in the photos an abrasion on left hand 4th finger? 1/4 by 1/8 scrap. agree its abrasion type? it appears to be 11:55:08 consistent with coming in contact with hard surface or impacting another surface? impacting another surface. concrete qualify? yes 11:55:35 would you expect to see bruising on knuckles if punching were going on? depends on what part of body you punch, softer portion you may not see it... may have been bruising that we didn't know about, doesn't make a difference.... too variable 11:56:29 take blood pressure to get bruising? yes. once blood pressure goes, then you don't have bruising.... can't bruise a dead body 11:56:52 in this instance, martin lost blood pressure very quickly? yes 11:57:02 dr. bao looking for bruising, better course would be to take a look internally? right 11:57:17 that was not done in this case? correct 11:57:31 move to the injuries that zimmerman sustained........ provided photos from the scene of his bloody nose? yes.... and photo taken of the back of his head showing streaming blood? yes 11:58:00 also provided photos taken later that night by Sanford PD? yes 11:58:15 talk about head trauma, mechanism of blood force injury to head? yes. what happens when hit in head by fist or concrete? well, ok.... what happened is the head wound...... say the heads fixed, made to move or is moving and stops suddenly, brain will shift... brain like gelatin, move back and forth inside cranium... as it moves, 3 possibilities, bruising by impacting the inside or you get bleeding, intracranial hemorrhage sufficient it could kill you, other type is brain cell injury..... connected through fibers which activates.... when brain moves back and forth from impact the axons will be stretched, within limited motion the way we are walking around and such.... no big deal.... if movement is violent, stretches the axons, causes injury to the wall if the movement is mild, the injury is prepared by axon... gradual increase in force like running into something and head goes forward and hits panel, so great it will injure axons and they won't be able to prepare and they die..... lot of brain cells and a lot of connections, can lose a good number and still be alright... at some point you'll have impairment and die 12:02:11 impacts like concrete, worry about intracranial bleeding and the axonal injury.... more bleeding than axon injury... always dangerous... if you hit your head here on the floor, carpet it absorbs.... if your head hits concrete, dangerous... but to kill somebody sure if you banged them hard enough.... didn't impact brain significant, still have stunning effect..... football players with concussions is just axon injury... could get mild concussion.... fall and hit your head, don't lose consciousness, appear stunned..... 12:03:45 stunning goes to concussion to injury..... stunned from the impact... better than concussion 12:04:07 progression depending on how hard the impact? yes and how many times, how much force is used.... if you get head hit against concrete with sufficient force to tear the scalp, you're going to be stunned..... not that common... hair cropped or bald removes the cushion... lacerations there's some trauma 12:05:08 talking about lacerations to the scalp, zimmerman had 2 lacerations to the back of his head, states 76..... identified as the photo taken of zimmerman that night, Jonathan manalo... evidence bleeding to head? yes two sites on the head 12:06:24 later saw pictures where blood was wiped away? right 12:06:42 take a look at 74.... what do you see in this picture? bruise on left side, not a good photograph 12:07:56 do you see in this photo what looks like 2 separate areas of swelling? yes... injury here and here, represent lacerations since it looks like clouded blood.... valley, impact site is swollen and then this is swollen here... this is not swollen, two separate impacts two different lacerations with area in between not swollen.... bleeding under the scalp 12:09:19 lump they get after hitting head is blood as opposed to another fluid? yes its blood.... 12:09:36 talk about curvature of the head, why its two separate impacts? real simple, unyielding surface, circular area hits it.... flatten on contact, you can see if it was one impact it would be swollen between the two 12:10:22 commented earlier, not easy to get laceration from flat object? yeah because it takes a force... everyone bangs their head, you don't get laceration 12:10:47 mechanism where laceration occurred? one is if direct impact, crush the skin and as you crush it and push inside the impact, get a tail... if you hit it at an angle so you slide, the surface holds it, and the rest of it pulls against that... so you tear, laceration is nothing but a tear.... 12:11:45 exhibit 57.... anything here that shows what you're talking about? see the swelling here and a little valley here, swollen here and swollen here... laceration here and a blood clot over the lacerations..... one of them is almost an inch and the other is 1/5 of an inch 12:12:33 laceration significant? in this case.... marker of force, real bad laceration rarely rarely.... people bled to death.... not this type of laceration.... indicates you had severe force, not just a bump 12:13:11 possible to have head struck on something hard enough to ring the bell, stun you and not leave mark? oh sure, see that in abused children.... not a mark on their head, but skull fracture 12:13:50 the presence of the injury on the outside, doesn't mean there wasn't additional impact or the impact was minor? you can get severe head trauma without any marks, or you can get marks and have head trauma.... more commonly you have trauma, but can get it without mark 12:14:30 amount of force necessary to cause those injuries, enough to cause stunning effect? oh yes. don't need to have a laceration or big bruise to..... get stunned.... medically referred to ultra-mild concussion... experience that when you hit your head 12:15:19 if you sustained a stunning blow like this and continued to receive additional blows to the head, would the additional blows continue to cause stunning effect? yeah. 12:15:46 short period of time, get multiple other concussions, people have died..... recognized syndrome 12:16:06 could be accumulative just that night into multiple stunning effects leading to concussion? oh yeah..... I'm using stunning because it's just a mild concussion.... not incapacitated, not knocked out.... hit head hard is stunning 12:16:55 there has been some discussion in testimony about punctate abrasions.... punctate in this photo? right here.... reddish markings, indicates impact with a flat surface that was not smooth 12:17:46 would concrete from every day sidewalk have that surface? yes 12:17:58 consistent with his head impacting a sidewalk? yes 12:18:17 punctate abrasion is around the temple? right, it's not smooth.... area here and here and here and here 12:18:36 noticeable lump higher up? right over here.... consequence of impact? yes.... a knot... hematoma 12:18:58 associated with the impact that caused punctate abrasions? yes sir 12:19:08 could that then be caused by 1 or more impacts with the sidewalk? yes sir. 12:19:22 let me show you states 70, a view of the right side of Zimmerman's head, see anything here that would suggest impact with a fist or sidewalk? start to see punctate and adhesion over here 12:19:55 another photo of same side, 71.... ? injury here, reddish areas 12:20:15 other side of the head, 73.... approach the witness? oh I can see its not problem 12:20:38 in this photo with blunt force trauma? marks here too, assume a print photo would show better, some punctate marks here. approach witness briefly? YES YOU MAY. 12:21:20 right here, you see an arch of punctate of abrasion, pile here and another arch.... hematoma anywhere? suggested, but not as distinct as other side 12:21:58 this area above the ear? swollen in that area, hard to say definitely 12:22:14 consistent with swelling as blunt force trauma? yes 12:22:25 this general area here? right 12:22:53 have seen exhibit 79... first photo taken at scene? yes. what signs of trauma do you see? have to look at original, this appears bruised... look at outline... swelling and abrasion there.... 12:23:39 if you look at this, see the congestion in nose and the abrasion, outline here is smooth and here it bulges out and comes back... compare to another photo, this is consistent with possible fracture.... next photo a few hours later, this swelling is not as prominent... that's what ENS thought he had a fractured nose 12:24:42 injury consistent with being punched in nose? yes sir. 12:24:53 exhibit 48.... take several hours later..... point out what you were referring too? swelling appears to be gone, it can't be gone if just blood... suggestive of fact he had displaced fracture here, when examined by ENS they just pushed it back in either consciously or not... held there by muscle 12:25:47 if displaced or not or even fractured, does trauma consistently show being struck in the face? right and of course another blow here 12:26:15 states 72.... part of forehead you were talking about? right.... vaguely see this line here, and another... when you look at the prints they're redding markings..... those are redding areas, not consistent with concrete, more like a punch than concrete 12:27:16 skin is intact, injury underneath skin.... something that doesn't wash out? oh no it doesn't wash out... underneath the skin 12:27:36 would it likely be a different impact than the one that caused injury? yes too far down, not the same thing 12:27:52 more to the right, see evidence there of some sort? right. mark like this and then mark here.... photograph myself.... 12:28:29 separate red mark on forehead? this and this are same impact.... I think you have 6 ID injuries, 2 lacerations on back, impacts on temple, that's 4, nose is 5 and the forehead is 6..... 12:29:12 may there also have been impacts that for one reason or another, land but didn't manifest in injury? Objection! Speculation! SUSTAINED 12:29:34 in a fight situation where someone may be resisting attack, expect them as being pushed to concrete to resist by trying to sit up? I would assume so 12:29:59 possible there may be other impacts, not as pronounced, some ability to resist? Objection! Speculation! OVERRULED 12:30:19 the head wasn't clean in some photos, definite evidence of 6... doesn't mean only 6, but the 6 I can say. moment? YES YOU MAY 12:30:53 (sidebar) 12:31:51 LADIES AND GENTLEMAN, RECESS FOR LUNCH. NO DISCUSSIONS. NO REPORTS. NO ELECTRONIC DEVICE. NO SOCIAL MEDIA. NOTEPADS FACE DOWN... RECESS UNTIL 1:30 12:32:53 FREE TO TAKE LUNCH BREAK, BE BACK AT 1:30, DONT DISCUSS TESTIMONY 12:33:08 COURT IN RECESS UNTIL 1:30 ======================================== 13:30:00 PLEASE BE SEATED, BACK ON RECORD. DR. DI MAIO OUTSIDE? 13:30:58 HAVE THE JURY COME IN..... 13:31:48 omara: approach for a moment? YES (sidebar) 13:32:31 WELCOME BACK... QUESTIONS: DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE CASE? NO HANDS RAISED. READ OR LISTEN TO ANY REPORTS ABOUT THE CASE? NO HANDS RAISED. USE ELECTRONIC DEVICE FOR RESEARCH? NO HANDS RAISED. READ OR CREATE SOCIAL MEDIA? NO HANDS RAISED CROSS 13:33:24 rionda: afternoon.... 13:33:38 not saying or testifying as to who started? correct. whether who attacked who, can't say? correct 13:33:59 in fact you can't testify as to who threw first punch? correct. whether there was a first punch? correct 13:34:18 you can't say whether it was martin defending or Zimmerman defending himself? when it first started, correct 13:34:34 only focusing on time of actual shot? that's correct 13:34:42 not stating that everything Zimmerman said in the reenactment is the gospel truth? correct. just the nature of gunshot wound is consistent with his accounts 13:35:10 gave 5 statements prior to that one? mentioned that to me before. in your depo? yes 13:35:22 why only the reenactment and not the other statements? I know what the reenactment says, holding to that account being presented here 13:36:05 correct in stating the 1st statement is most accurate? 1st is usually more accurate when giving weeks or months later... get that in depositions 13:36:27 mentioned prior experience in san Antonio, go to Alamo and go down to water? about 2 levels down 13:36:48 mentioned when you worked there for 15-20 years? 25 years 13:36:58 important for you to make sure you understood all facts? depends on the case, sometimes you want all the information, personal 13:37:20 bring you a case, want to know what all witnesses said, not just one... make sure consistent? in most cases yes sir 13:37:37 in this case, focused on defendant's statement and good's statement? focused on defendants... all that I'm concentrating on.... went to see if his statement was consistent with what I found... the rest I can't say. weren't provided statements from other witnesses? have to disregard them in regards to gunshot wound; only Zimmerman was there 13:38:31 another person was there? a couple witnesses.... well the other person there is not here? right 13:38:50 aware the deceased/ victim was on phone with lady? yes. didn't review her statement? no 13:39:09 worked with medical examiner, find all info before opinion? depends on the case... often info from witnesses goes toward manner of death and not cause of death 13:39:35 suggesting all witness testimony should be disregarded? not for the jury, in my purposes not important in my opinion 13:40:08 not saying that should be disregarded? not what I'm doing, for the jury 13:40:26 west asked you hypotheticals; in order to give opinion.... has to be based on accurate and truth? no, just supposed this and this happened. speculating? just giving presentation and asking what it is 13:41:06 agree that at least 1 statement you relied on, the reenactment, Zimmerman has self-interest? yes 13:41:27 argue he has bias in not telling the truth? one could argue that but I think that's your argument 13:41:41 if his statement doesn't match evidence, it's not the truth? that's correct sir 13:41:53 I guess in your review, aware that only person armed was Zimmerman? yes 13:42:04 aware that he wasn't armed with firearm, but also armed with a flashlight? yes, photo of flashlight in scene photos 13:42:23 this right here? yes. could this do damage to someone? I thought it was one of those old steel heavy things, not a really dangerous weapon... hit hard like that? may cause bruising, not of significance 13:43:11 not provided with statement of surdyka who described Zimmerman on top of martin before the shooting? not provided that statement 13:43:29 not provided statement of bahador were you? no sir 13:43:38 provided john good statement? yes. aware he gave additional sworn statement, didn't hear this at all? no sir, I don't think so (smacked hands) 13:44:00 aware that he also stated he didn't hear anything hitting concrete at all? no sir (smacked the desk) 13:44:31 mention that... shooting animals, animals were alive? yes.... animals kept in federally approved area; vet present at time and the animals have to be anesthetized. how many times were they shot? I'd have to read the paper, determine if testing firearm was valid. found it was? yes. 13:45:27 testified all over the world? a couple places. criminal matters for government and state? yes 13:45:43 testified....... in your years? 6 going on 7 now 13:46:06 said over 50 times or so? no I don't think I said a number of times I testified... most are civil cases 13:46:26 drew Peterson case? criminal... testified for defense? yes. how much are you paid today? same thing I charge everybody $400 an hour. how much charged so far? up to yesterday $2400, not a complicated case forensically.... 13:47:11 mention that..... notes, to refresh your memory? if you get a whole bunch of papers, easier to put the facts down 13:47:41 prepared a 5 or 6 page notes you provided to me and west? uh yeah 5 pages, double spaced/double sided... closer to 10 or 8 13:48:09 weren't there, viewed autopsy report? yes. opinion comes from Dr. Bao's medical report? yes 13:48:25 shot to the heart? yes. no dispute about that? correct 13:48:35 did I understand you correctly that if you pulled my heart out I could sit and walk and talk for how long? 10-15 seconds 13:48:56 I could just keep talking and talking and talking without a heart? that's right.... it's between 10-15 seconds, dependent on oxygen supply to the head... that's why SWAT will shoot in the head 13:49:25 even though my heart is gone id still feel pain or not? oh you'd still feel pain 13:49:38 believe it was 10-15 seconds....? I said I can't said, minimum amount of time was between 10-15 seconds. maximum was 3 minutes? in all medical probability no cardiac function after 1-3 minutes 13:50:16 not here to testify as to while this was going on who was yelling for help? no sir... not testifying to that 13:50:29 can't testify as to the statements George said he pulled gun from holster and shot? right I can just say the injuries are consistent with how he shot him, but not how he got the gun 13:50:56 how he claims he got the gun while someone was straddling him, can't say that happened that way? can't tell that by scientific method.... but Zimmerman said it happened that way, means its true right? can't testify to that 13:51:27 physically impossible to do what he said happened? I would say it 13:51:37 not here to say that and how he took the holster? right, outside my ability to make conclusion on that 13:51:49 just to say how close it was to skin and clothes? right 13:51:59 is it not true that one possibility is martin was over Zimmerman and he was like this.....? he'd be someway over him, not sure of the angle 13:52:24 this angle? I can't tell you... if you put your hand out, since it rotates.... still get the path, consistent with him being over 13:52:44 also consistent he was standing up? problem with that is the shirt would be pulled down.... if you shot through the shirt in that area, when the shirt is let go and put back in position, defect in shirt would be over here if pulled this way.... moved it to where it over lined the gun shot to get away from the chest 13:53:38 saying martin had to physically be on top like this? saying that physical evidence is consistent with martin being over Zimmerman 13:53:56 not also consistent with martin pulling away from Zimmerman on the ground, same angle, and Zimmerman shooting at that time? yes 13:54:40 the other question I had.... possibilities, blunt trauma to Zimmerman's head, concrete as possibility or maybe a tree branch for any of those bruises? if you hit someone with a tree branch 13:55:10 if you bump in it? where in face or back of head... either one? well you would expect abrasions.... he had contusion up there... abrasion is scrap. did he have any? yes. small on right side of nose and impact abrasions on temples and in the back 13:55:55 struggling with you, I push you and you hit the tree, caused that way? well you'd have to have a tree branch there and I didn't see any 13:56:20 if you just bumped a head.... wood gives, police used to carry wooden batons, less dangerous than metal... hit someone hard enough on back of head you get a laceration 13:56:50 any gardening at all? no my wife does 13:56:56 I do gardening and I get a bald head, bruise from tree branch? yeah an abrasion, abrasions back here 13:57:15 not aware that there were trees out there.... defendant says struggle near trees? I thought you meant trees on ground 13:57:40 possibility then correct for some of the abrasions? you could have one from the tree 13:57:54 could be from rolling on concrete as they both struggle or fight? yeah... impact with concrete 13:58:15 curious what you mentioned about martin, described injury to left hand..... what did Dr. Bao call it...? he called it so I have to go to with it. you saw the photo though? not sure if I did or not 13:58:51 assuming that's an abrasion, may be additional injuries under knuckles? no. can't disagree with it as an abrasion, but if you punch someone will you get bruises on knuckles, yes or no... if they suspected something they should've cut into hand and saw underneath 13:59:36 if persons alive, just wait a day or so and see if you have hemorrhaging.... but you said sometimes you won't see it? yes....... if it's not there it's not important 14:00:05 can hit someone and not leave bruising on knuckles? correct. Zimmerman could've hit him and not had bruising on knuckles? correct 14:00:26 shown photos of Zimmerman's head, opinions to what they were? yes.... someone familiar with his head, doctor from the past would know what's existing and what's not? may or may not.... you don't really remember a patients shape of head, especially if seeing multiple patients 14:01:04 that would be the best person to see George alive the next day, what he had and didn't have? in theory, if done correctly, yes..... emergency room records and doctor records are lousy in describing injuries 14:01:36 fire rescue do an honorable job? yes, not incompetent, treat them.... not document injuries 14:02:03 fire rescue are interested in injuries? in treating a person.... mention two lacerations, don't say where they are 14:02:22 folgate measured for you? yeah, but didn't say which one was on which side.... 14:02:52 talking about same photograph? the one with blood... clouded 14:03:07 agree with treatment it didn't need stitches? I agree, but outside my area of expertise... its treatment 14:03:47 you did review fire rescue report? yes 14:03:56 patient has GCS 15? glascoe index thing. what does it mean? that he's perfectly fine 14:04:19 people that dealt with him right after his interaction? correct 14:04:28 did I understand correctly you're saying difference between photo at scene..... 14:04:57 blood on front taken by police, something wrong with nose? yes... if you look at the photo take 4 hours later that deviation is not there 14:05:29 your opinion is you believe fire rescue did it without noticing they did it? its consistent with a fracture, since no one.... ENS thought there was a fraction, if it's now replaced that would account for differences... agree his nose is perfect? not swollen to right side as deviated in first photo 14:06:18 possible not fractured at all? the swelling would still be there and it's not 14:06:57 one is smaller than this and ones about like that? correct. that he'd die from those? no, indicative of hard impact 14:07:15 or just tree limb or rolling around? indicative of hard impact. 14:07:26 don't know if someone hitting him or rolling around? hard impact, that's all 14:07:45 aware that he was offered medical care and he declined? yes sir 14:07:57 also I believe folgate and fire rescue didn't notice other injuries to top of head, missed it? no.... the bleeding continued after ENS, or didn't notice it because they didn't consider it significant 14:08:31 went the next day to facility and folgate treated him and she didn't note all the injuries? medical personnel don't describe injuries properly 14:09:06 other thing I want to ask is... the photo taken at the scene, got blood there.... put my hand over that, expect my hand to have what? blood 14:09:54 agree that photograph I just showed you, bleeding like that... blood will go down if standing? depends how profusely... laying on my back, blood will go inward? partial, some will go in and out 14:10:32 more difficult to swallow or say anything? depends on how profusely 14:10:43 blood will go into my mouth eventually? yes. harder to swallow or talk? yeah unless you start swallowing it 14:10:59 you did not view the video taken of Zimmerman when brought to police and could walk fine? I've seen it.... kept playing it on TV all the time... seemed to be walking fine? correct 14:11:28 recording you saw of his interview was after that? yes. but that evening, he was walking and talking fine? yes 14:11:52 agree there's no witness to the actual shooting except defendant and deceased? correct 14:12:09 regarding gunshot wound, it was up to 4 inches as max and 2 as minimum? right... 2 inches accounting for sweatshirt and hoody? no. the hole creates barrier? right.... between the skin and muzzle 14:12:45 ever worn one of those hoodies? not that type 14:12:52 seen others wear them? yes sir.... wear them big? yes. hang down? yes. something in it, wouldn't it hang down? Objection! OVERRULED. yes sir 14:13:22 make it a little tighter? yes 14:13:49 asked about DNA, head of lab in Texas? yes. asked about DNA and possible packaging or improper packaging? yes 14:14:07 surprised that same object or evidence..... plastic would cause mold and degrade DNA? no I said you're supposed to dry the blood, package separately so that one piece doesn't contaminate the other... don't put in plastic bag, plastic is air tight... wrap in paper, the paper breathes 14:15:03 put the clothing in a bag....? always get mold into it, but if it dries... that's why you dry to get mold. assuming you don't? you'll get mold.... DNA gone? yeah you can lose some.... surprised if DNA was found in area that was mispackaged? no 14:15:49 said you reviewed firearms report? yes. 14:15:56 agreed with that in the sense that the findings and range, stippling, soot, gun powder? right 14:16:31 safe to assume that your opinion is that somehow after George was punched, injury to his nose... you believe it may have fractured and displaced and someone put it back? sure he could've. would've been painful? yes. 14:17:09 anybody could've done it? yes. and nobody could've done it and it wasn't as bad as it thinks? well if just swelling wouldn't go down in 4 hours... deviated because it was fractured 14:17:44 when we bleed, its profuse? scalp bleeding is always profuse... more than other areas? yes. why? no idea, that's how its designed 14:18:14 so the bottom line, possibilities about how the gunshot wound occurred? to a degree, consistent with his account 14:18:33 not saying his account, just when he already had gun out and pointing it at martin? yes. at that point, don't know if martin was backing away or going toward? consistent with Zimmerman's account 14:19:10 also consistent with martin pulling back? I told you that too, yes sir 14:19:31 not here to testify about holster or how it works? no. nor about firearm either 14:20:08 sweatshirt with hoody.... still going to grab if big? yes sir.... 14:20:38 testified about your expertise is once body is dead, just trauma? trauma is pathology, will testify to that... don't testify to treatment at all 14:21:06 aware that out there at the complex, also sprinkler boxes? I didn't see any of those 14:21:43 moment? YES.... 14:21:52 know whether Zimmerman is right or left handed? right handed 14:22:10 thank you very much REDIRECT 14:22:38 notes you prepared, a summary of measurements that martin was 5'11 and weigh 158 lb.? right. BMI was 22 which would be normal range for a person his size? correct 14:23:07 indicated that the location of gun shot? Objection Leading! SUSTAINED 14:23:18 where the gunshot wound was on martin? yes 14:23:25 do you need your notes to form your opinions once you have facts before you? no 14:23:35 do notes include several pages of photos that were most pertinent in assessing trauma? yes, 4 pages are just photos... shown those here? yes sir 14:23:56 the scope of your work was to consider the statement made to police about how the shooting took place at moment shot was fired and for you to consider forensic evidence to determine whether or not Zimmerman's statement is consistent with physical evidence? Objection! Leading and Compound. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION? yes. yes 14:24:54 I have to interpret objective evidence, not basing opinions on witnesses... they're wrong all the time... 14:25:08 review witness statements that contradicted physical evidence? all the time... someone stood over man and shot him and two architects and a secretary saw that, bullet from gun didn't match... half a dozen of those cases 14:25:51 bahador and didn't claim to see the individuals at time shot fired? no. surdyka said she was looking at individuals some distance away and believes she was looking at the fired shot, described Zimmerman on top of martin? Objection! Mischaracterization! REPHRASE 14:26:52 surdyka said she was looking out window and believes she was looking at individuals when shot was fired... at that time, Zimmerman was on top and martin was faced down... is that possible given forensic evidence you know? no sir, not possible.. he was shot in the front 14:27:35 would her statement do you good? no sir... example of how an eye witness gets it wrong? yes sir 14:27:53 did consider john goods statement.... ? Objection! Leading SUSTAINED 14:28:07 john good testified he saw Zimmerman on his back on the ground and saw martin straddling him on his knees, striking Zimmerman in an MMA style and then went back inside, some seconds later shots were fired.... position he saw consistent with forensic evidence? yes sir 14:28:54 that statement is separate and apart from Zimmerman? right, but wouldn't use that to give my opinion, use the evidence in conjunction with Zimmerman's statement 14:29:27 you pointed out in your direct evidence, there were two lacerations on the back of Zimmerman's head.... testified you believed those two to be from separate impact? yes sir. could see valley in between? yes 14:29:52 two blows that created lacerations? yes, so separate you couldn't get the two from one impact 14:30:22 are the two lacerations on the back of his head, consistent with two separate impacts? yes 14:30:38 is it... trying to figure out how to ask about tree branches, any big branches on ground to use as club? only trunks on ground and I didn't see anything 14:31:14 to receive lacerations from tree trunk, what would have had to happen? upright sitting and go back violently against the trunk on two occasions... still blunt trauma to back of head, twice 14:31:42 or it could have been on the sidewalk? right Objection! OVERRULED 14:31:58 is that scenario more plausible? cement is more plausible especially from the side of the head 14:32:18 commented of course, different role professionals play in dealing with people injured? right. 14:32:35 their objective is to treat someone, mine is to document injuries and interpret the injuries... their job is different than my job 14:33:07 opportunity to review the physician assistant notes that folgate took next day? yes. notice that she documented what would be black eyes? yes. 14:33:27 consistent with showing up later from blow to nose? secondary blackened of the eye, shows up later... punch eyes directly it would be more immediate 14:33:56 not surprising to you that the blow to the nose from the photos... might be associated black eyes the next day? wouldn't be surprising at all 14:34:17 issue whether his nose was actually deviated or just swelling, is that significant whether or not he was punched in the face? still punched in the face.... swelling is gone 4 hours later, nose displaced and put into position 14:34:55 possible his nose wasn't deviated.... does that matter if he was punched? obviously hit in the face and forehead 14:35:22 the GCS 15 scale, reference to paramedic note? area on the form where a 15 means they're walking, talking, breathing, heart rate, not really bad.... most people come into ER are 15... to go down you to get into trouble 14:36:00 not claiming that Zimmerman wasn't able to walk or talk that evening not withstanding his injuries? correct... more a stunning injury, not significant concussion 14:36:37 something that happens after the actual impact? Objection! Leading. REPHRASE 14:36:47 consequences of blow, those that develop over time? concussions show up immediately, problem is they can be subtle... that's why sporting events like having doctors there.... lay people won't pick up on concussions 14:37:24 feeling it when getting hit like that? oh yes. if you get punched in the nose, you know it. continue to hurt for a while? yes. what about getting head hit on concrete? could... especially if lacerations 14:37:59 able to know what was happening to them was life threatening? no because they're stunned... cant interpret 14:38:17 even looking at them outside, could say they're alright and then die a few hours later... that's why police should've taken Zimmerman to hospital, if he died in station family would've sued 14:38:54 even if no evidence of not walking or? you don't play around... jails always lose the lawsuits 14:39:14 if someone is in the process of being hit and having head struck on cement, stunning affect and the pain associate with it... in the moment, not knowing when it'll stop... say I can take 3 more of these? Objection! Leading! SUSTAINED 14:40:07 these circumstances.... overwhelming person on receiving end? Objection! Leading Argumentative! OVERRULED TO BOTH.... yes 14:40:31 some questions about the packaging of evidence, if wet and bio material... testimony that the wet outer shirt was sealed in bag while wet and placed in paper bag outside of that... good evidence handling? no sir.... when bag was open it smelled of mold? its decomposing... air dry and put in paper bags, not plastic 14:41:22 accepted forensic practice subjecting evidence to that type of packaging... in that condition for a month.... that would promote degradation or the integrity of DNA? oh yes 14:41:55 rionda mentioned if martin put hand over Zimmerman's nose at this point in time there may have been transfer of blood? yes. Objection! SUSTAINED 14:42:25 if martin put hand over Zimmerman in this condition, testimony there may have been transfer of blood? yes 14:42:40 I take it you would have no additional information if his nose was bleeding at some point during the incident? correct... impact to nose, eventually bleed can't tell if you'll bleed immediately... depends on position your head is in? yes 14:43:24 if you find something important but if you don't, absence doesn't make it important? right... general fact that's understood... especially if you don't know the statistical probability... how often do you find something, how often it occurs 14:44:09 do you agree environmental conditions affect physical evidence? oh yeah 14:44:24 about 3 hours from the event until martins body was transported, during that time... covered by blanket...body and hands were exposed to elements? right, do you wrap it tightly or wrap it loosely... plastic tends to rub and be stiff 14:45:07 also consider that there's been testimony, the weather varied from light drizzle to heavy rain... could affect DNA evidence collected? true. or how the hands were handled... or how they were washed prior to photo? that's why pathologist is supposed to be with the body, should never leave the body even if you have assistants helping you 14:46:06 why you may trust your assistants to follow protocol, you would verify? right... examine clothing on body before you take it off and then stand there to make sure they're doing it appropriately.... 14:46:53 marked as states 28..... Object! Beyond Scope of Cross! I DONT KNOW WHAT IT IS 14:47:14 states 28 offered in evidence, picture of martins chest on scene.... states 95 in evidence, photo at time of autopsy, before cleaning or washing? Same Objection! PLEASE APPROACH (sidebar) 14:49:50 states 28 was taken at the scene, any blood present in photo? yes blood around nipple. 14:50:06 look at states 95, taken at time of autopsy before body was clean, any blood? no... in the original photo, stream of blood and its missing in this photo. been cleaned? Objection! Speculation SUSTAINED, OVERRULED TO ARGUMENTATIVE RE-CROSS 14:51:08 photos shown to you....? gunshot wound, one at the scene 14:51:22 show the sweatshirt is up? yeah been pulled up 14:51:30 at the scene and transporting the body, sweatshirt down absorb the blood? sure 14:51:49 expect the blood in the sweatshirt? right 14:52:00 asked questions by west, agree he is not evidence? right. use his words to form opinion? no the reports and my report 14:52:37 agree there was absence of x rays or proof of broken nose? correct 14:52:48 agree there was absence or documentation of brain injury? oh yes 14:53:00 absence of anything being washed off the body? can't say it was washed or not... if that shirt was lying and they pulled it off, could wipe off blood... not supposed to do that.... take photo of wound intact before cleaned it 14:53:39 at the scene, remove clothing or stay on? the clothing should remain on body so the photo at scene is proper, but at medical examiner's office.... shouldn't have undressed body would be wiping it, techniques weren't correct. but you did rely on his findings? I had no other choice. document what occurred? right 14:54:44 absence of evidence anything was washed by rain? it would have to be, have to know how much was raining.. needed observation. pure speculation? yeah unless you were there 14:55:16 there was a baseness of vomiting, no vomit out there? no 14:55:26 agree that a jury who heard john good should rely on what he said on the witness stand? interesting, if he has a good statement at first and then not as good on the stand... depends 14:56:00 rely on his statement? disregarded witness........ supported or validated statements. witnesses are all over the place... but isn't what George said, in effect a witness? yes, but that's why you don't believe him.... check the tests and the autopsies 14:56:58 relied on one of his statements, gun was out and was 2-4 inches? right RE-RE-DIRECT 14:57:14 absence of evidence notion..... if good didn't testify that he heard George's head hitting cement like this, mean that Zimmerman's head didn't get hit? no 14:57:42 if good didn't hear martin hit Zimmerman in head, mean he wasn't hit in head? no 14:57:58 MAY HE BE EXCUSED? yes. yes. CALL NEXT WITNESS.... 14:58:24 omara: one moment...... 14:59:26 (sworn in) 14:59:43 rionda: approach? YES (sidebar) 15:00:23 name? norton bonaparte jr. occupation? city manager. employed? 1 yr. and a half. when this happened? yes 15:00:51 event of playing the 911 call to martin family.... decisions made for that point, not important now.. just event 15:01:23 decision was made to play tape for martin family? to play a number of tapes 15:01:34 police evidence tape? 911 and non-emergency number 15:01:47 focus attention on one even though several were played.. 15:01:54 who took care of process of playing the tapes? mayor's office, myself and mayor 15:02:09 was there any conversation with law enforcement as to how to accomplish? not witnesses, they were parents 15:02:24 conversation with law enforcement as to how to play the tapes to these people? no 15:02:43 you just... decide on your own? make them public, wanted to play to family first as courtesy 15:03:07 when decision to play the tapes for family, your decision or mayors decision on how to occur? decision to just play them 15:03:27 to play them separately? no there was not 15:03:42 it occurred then from other testimony, tape was played with entire family present? yes. you the one playing? I don't recall who was playing we used a computer 15:04:03 who was doing what with the tapes? disk, laptops so they could hear. who was doing what? I don't recall either myself or mayor. who was present? me, mayor, family, attorneys 15:04:32 law enforcement present? no. decision you and mayor made? I asked family and they said they would rather not have law enforcement present. discuss with chief lee? just informed him and other officers to not be in the same room 15:05:05 how many times the tape was played? which tape... the 911 tape? no I do not. always there? in the vicinity, not always in the room 15:05:23 either you or mayor in room at all times? I do not recall 15:05:32 how many times was the tape played while you were in the room? I don't recall. more than one? the tape with screams, yes... anyone in particular? I don't recall.. just wanted to hear it again 15:06:00 did you record or take notes to any responses they had from that one tape? no. record the even in any form or fashion? no we did not. recorded by audio or video? no. court reporter there to document? no it was not 15:06:27 was any consideration given to you or mayor to record it for law enforcement? releasing to media that evening, wanted family to have courtesy to hear it first 15:06:50 any consideration to concept to record it in case law enforcement needed it when half a dozen family members listened for the first time? that's a no 15:07:32 attorneys present, were martin family attorneys? correct. CROSS 15:07:55 rionda: bottom line was that it was the decent thing to play for family before release? our intent. that's why it occurred the way it did? that is correct 15:08:17 MAY HE BE EXCUSED? CALL NEXT WITNESS omara: approach? unique way to appear witness (sidebar) 15:10:31 TAKE A 15 MINUTE RECESS, NOTEPADS FACE DOWN ON CHAIR, FOLLOW DEPUTY OUT OF COURTROOM 15:11:03 PLEASE BE SEATED. COURT IN RECESS FOR 15 MINUTES =============================================================== 15:25:20 (Zimmerman talking with attorney assistant) 15:30:42 PLEASE BE SEATED... BACK ON RECORD... omara: have the witness ready on ipad, waiting for that to get ready.... my client is ok with representing this witness in this fashion. IS THAT CORRECT MR. ZIMMERMAN? yes your honor 15:37:25 (setting up the witness) omara: this will probably be my last witness and then begin proffer.... should be done tomorrow 15:39:17 PLEASE BE SEATED... defense calls eloise dillegard 15:39:29 (sworn in via FaceTime) 15:39:53 home sick, appreciate you spending time with us today. name? eloise dilligard. live at retreat at twin lakes? yes. how long? 2.5 years. moved out since then? yes 15:40:45 time you lived at retreat, knew George Zimmerman? I did. how long? ever since we moved in October 2009 15:41:06 friends? he was my neighbor, spoke on friendly basis... no problem with one another 15:41:15 knew of his involvement with watch program? yes 15:41:28 see him patrolling as part of the watch? no. knew him as friend or neighbor? friendly neighbor 15:41:41 focus attention on February 26th, the night martin was shot, remember? I do 15:41:55 tell the jury what first brought your attention to the event you came to find out was the shooting? I was coming from Wal-Mart, down Rinehart to go to Oregon and make left, police approached me from rear, he wanted to go around me.... coming up Oregon I noticed police were pulling into neighborhood... I looked down from mail station to left and saw crime scene tape.... I didn't want to go directly down, came around right hand side to go around back way, asked a couple guys.. they didn't know but another police was coming.... 15:43:10 weather like at that time? it was very rainy that night 15:43:19 at some point as you got closer to the crime scene, notice any familiar vehicle? yes. which? George's truck. describe? gray Honda ridgeline 15:43:49 where you noticed the truck? because of the way our street is, it was nearing the curb down by the crime scene which I believe was on retreat view circle 15:44:14 know the area as the T intersection? yes. 15:44:21 may not have known names then, a woman who lives on end section jenna lauer, know her? no 15:44:40 she was living in that first townhome just past at the intersection of the T, know what I'm talking about? yes 15:45:10 presume jennas was first in that row of houses, where was the truck parked in reference to that? truck would've been looking toward the east... slightly south of where her condo would be 15:45:36 walk out her front door, looking right at the truck? look to the right from her condo 15:45:52 that would put the truck on the curb to the right of that street from her condo? correct 15:46:07 retreat view circle, the one that circles around as perimeter? it does 15:46:16 is lauer on street that comes off of retreat view circle? her condo would be facing retreat view circle, yes 15:46:36 straight out her front door, into the clubhouse? no down the street to the west 15:46:52 saw it in the area of the crime scene? yes 15:47:00 may come back to map.... came up to the area describe what you saw? a few people standing on the sidewalk, people who were down by the yellow tape, I looked around to see if I saw George because I saw his truck, after I didn't see him I recognized a lady from HOA and asked her... she said Objection! Hearsay! SUSTAINED 15:48:12 omara: your honor.... did you know the person's name who you spoke to? I don't, she's from Pembroke pines 15:48:30 conversation with her about the events? I asked what was going on 15:48:39 at some point then, did you speak to any law enforcement officers? after I could not find George, I attempted to talk to some of other witnesses that were there and after I felt like well I'm not in harm's way, I was walking away and police came up and said you don't want to talk to me.... and I said I wasn't here when anything happened. 15:49:26 he said? we're trying to find someone who knows the people involved in shooting. further conversation? he was going to take a picture and bring to us. 15:49:55 did that officer identify to you by name? he did not... I'm usually pretty perceptive to look at name badge, but I don't remember 15:50:13 did he show you a picture or two of people involved? came back with an iPhone with two pictures.... 15:50:35 identify either by name or description the others who were present? young Caucasian man, either Jeremy or Jonathan.... and a couple there, married but I didn't get their names 15:51:01 present when the pictures were shown? they were. able to identify anyone in the two pictures? George Zimmerman my neighbor 15:51:20 seen those pictures here quite a bit in the court room, was that a picture where Zimmerman had a bloody nose? he did have a bloody nose, yes 15:51:41 describe the difference you saw between the picture that night and Zimmerman you knew before? nose was bloody and to me it looked disfigured, it was somewhat to the left or right, not the way I knew him.... 15:52:16 did it take you a minute or two to figure out that was the same person? his face still looked the same, only difference was disfigurement and the blood... advise police his name? yes. did anyone else identify the person as well? Objection! Hearsay! SUSTAINED 15:52:59 after identified George, shown a second picture? I was. identified that person? I didn't know his name, seen him in passing probably earlier that day, didn't know who he was. know now that was trayvon martin? yes 15:53:32 after you identified Zimmerman, who did you talk to about that event? that night..... if I can remember correctly, where his wife was.... I knew he was married and I didn't see her... looked to be heart, where's his wife 15:54:19 after that? nothing else I could do at that point, I was no longer in harm's way... went to my house, parked in my driveway, went up to George's house to see if Shellie was there, nobody came... shortly after Shellie pulled up.... perpendicular to the driveway and she asked me... Objection! Hearsay! SUSTAINED. omara: offered to be heard. NO SPEAKING RESPONSES. PLEASE APPROACH (Sidebar) 15:59:27 talking about conversation with Shellie Zimmerman? yes. brief. what did she do after that? once I completed my conversation she sped off to the crime scene 15:59:53 there with police... did you go back to the area that night at all? yes I did go back down there to make sure she was ok.... 16:00:13 present during, questioned by law enforcement, present during any other witnesses discussions? yes, the young man there alone and the other couple spoke to policeman about what they knew 16:00:46 were you there when those people gave statements to law enforcement? there for verbal, not written 16:01:00 be more precise... one might have been Jeremy and another Jonathan? that's what I think I remember, not sure 16:01:18 do you recall were there more than 3 that gave statements in your presence? in my presence, a couple and a gentleman by himself 16:01:43 did you give any verbal or written statements to police that night? no... he asked me my name and I gave it to him and my phone number 16:02:07 back to the time where you left the area and ran into Zimmerman and went back to look for her didn't find her and left? correct 16:02:28 give statements to law enforcement regarding what you heard? yes.... request that I called him, so I called.... he and another agent came to my house and interviewed me 16:02:53 gave statement about whatever information they gave you? correct 16:03:04 opportunity to listen to the lauer 911 tape? yes 16:03:25 tell me circumstances of the setting? first time I heard was when it was played on local news channel. by yourself or with others? I don't remember... how many times? besides that time, maybe 2 or 3 times 16:04:02 did you hear a voice screaming for help that you were able to recognize? heard the voice screaming in background and of the two I only heard George talk 16:04:26 who was screaming for help? based on fact I've only heard George's voice I would say that it was his... his who? George Zimmerman 16:04:44 when you say you heard him talk, how long you've known him? by that time 2.5 years. speak to you and speak to others in your presence? yes. ever hear him yell for his dog or laugh at a joke? never heard him yell at the dog, commands were like a regular voice... has a white male voice.... 16:05:36 states exhibit 1... can you identify the picture and walk us through a location you may have seen his truck...... 16:06:29 I'm going to move it a little bit to an area, can you describe what is barely on the screen on this point...? a blue line, a little bit of grass... 16:07:01 see the pool in the center of the photo? I can 16:07:26 (west and omara discussing the photo) 16:07:43 mirror images so ill move on.... 16:07:49 try and do it verbally.... familiar with complex? I am 16:07:58 gave us a drive through of how you entered into complex, which one? I came in the entrance that is in front of the elementary school 16:08:18 have the clubhouse in front of you and to the right? that is correct 16:08:30 from that point, coming in Oregon... took a back route to your complex, right on retreat view....? if you say back route, you're talking about Oregon that goes to.... 16:09:20 ok.. sorry about that, I think I confused my question a moment ago... first came in to subdivision and saw crime scene tape? correct. which way was crime scene from where you were driving in? to the left or east 16:10:00 normal way you would go to the left? no I would go to the right 16:10:10 start at the Oregon main entrance with clubhouse on the right, walk or drive us to the area where you did drive up to get better view of crime scene? if I were to drive in to the entrance, I would've made a left to the crime scene 16:10:52 where on that scene would you have scene George's truck? not even 3/10 of a mile down 16:11:08 have a present memory today as to where the truck was? parked on retreat view circle.... the T 16:11:31 could the truck have been parked not on retreat view but the second street in? yes.... not your first left, but second left on twin trees lane? right 16:11:55 that the street you turned down and saw his truck? it could've been, all I know is it was on one of those cubs 16:12:10 directly in front of, touch to right of lauer's townhome? yes 16:12:23 lauer's townhome... look out front door and to the right for his truck? correct. moment? YES YOU MAY 16:13:10 no further questions.... CROSS 16:13:40 I remember you 16:13:53 rionda: bottom line is that day you came into contact with police, suspect and victim, recognized one photo as George... now know the other was trayvon? correct 16:14:13 seen him earlier that day, just walking around? right 16:14:22 asked about the voice, saw on TV? right. no point of reference knew Zimmerman's voice but not martins? that's right 16:14:58 MAY SHE BE EXCUSED? yes. yes. 16:15:18 WHEN FINISHED WITH THAT, APPROACH FOR MOMENT? (sidebar) 16:21:04 MORE MATTERS WE NEED TO TAKE CARE OF TONIGHT, YOU CAN GO HOME AT THIS TIME.... ADMONITIONS: NO DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE CASE. NOT TO READ OR LISTEN TO THE CASE. NO ELECTRONIC DEVICE FOR RESEARCH. NO SOCIAL MEDIA. ASSURANCES? yes... NOTEPADS FACE DOWN, FOLLOW JARVIS INTO JURY ROOM... JURY BACK TOMORROW AT 9 AM 16:22:25 PLEASE BE SEATED. 10 MINUTE RECESS AND THEN CONTINUE WITH ANIMATION ISSUE AND PROFFERING FOR CONNOR'S TESTIMONY... WE WILL BE HERE TOMORROW AT 8 AM FOR DONNELLEY'S...... 10 MINUTE RECESS ====================== 16:44:54 PLEASE BE SEATED.... BACK ON RECORD, SEE SHOEMAKER SITTING ON STAND, MANTEI READY... GO AHEAD 16:45:10 mantei: going through your CV, graphic design degree in 1985? yes. additional degrees? always ongoing education. nothing in terms of post grad work with degree? no 16:45:44 not held as engineer or physicist? correct 16:45:56 take computer software and draw things or create things? that's one version. what's another? a lot of different types 16:46:16 as far as your prior experience testifying, other appearances? declarations and testified. how many times you were present in front of a jury? 17 16:46:43 how many of those were your testimonies objected to? you mean challenged.... 16:47:04 how many times did they object to you? whenever I testify in court, pretrial hearing 16:47:22 17 times, how many of those were animations created with motion suits? probably a dozen. title of the last one? people vs. green in Placerville 16:47:58 create these animations based on surveillance footage, how many of these involved situation like this one where you had nothing... just inserting figures? very rare that I had film to match animation, so pretty much the only one where I matched onto security camera 16:48:40 how many were figures in mid-lay or fight, in front of the jury? twice... that includes this one 16:49:01 most of them are... they're not person on person fights, most are shootings.... mostly just shootings 16:49:16 most of what you did, take bullet trajectories and place them? essentially, yes 16:49:35 taking raw data and drawing lines or putting figures in places they could've been but not like this case where it was an ongoing fluid situation like this one? some were multiple gunshots, sequence of events 16:50:07 but not physical between the two, just measuring trajectories? correct 16:50:19 what was the only time you testified in court, using the suit, involving physical fight to capture fluid situation? Greensburg 16:50:43 tell me about that one? an ex-police officer came up to vehicle and shot the person in vehicle, had to determine position of each of them... positioning when shot and their movements 16:51:11 involved distance between the two and a shooting? close approximation to each other.,... within open door of truck 16:51:30 not as in this case where you're trying to describe ongoing struggle like this one? one I'm currently working on now that is the same as that 16:51:50 for the moment, things where your testimony has been accepted for court purposes in front of jury in criminal case, sounds like this is the first time? ummm.... the suit I've used has been accepted in court in other cases 16:52:20 all the variables we just mentioned, using suit, inserting figures in court in criminal case in front of jury? with this close contact, yes 16:52:39 I think you said, only company in country using wireless motion capture for reconstruction? correct. 16:52:59 no issue if your peers are doing the same thing? correct. limited number that the company makes the suit 16:53:21 use the software, don't know the interworking, algorithms? correct 16:53:34 if the program were not working properly, unless shut down completely or giving you crazy results, wouldn't know that? I can verify if its working correctly... calibrate it 16:54:02 got raw data from station, did mapping on scene and put two people in suits? correct. out there at the scene, you told them what do to do? according to, yes 16:54:25 who were those people? two males. how big? relative size to martin and Zimmerman 16:54:38 how tall? Zimmerman was 5'8.... martin was 5'11 or 6 ft... not really that important for the person wearing the suit to be the exact size for the person doing the movement 16:55:15 did you measure these people? 5'11. how do you know... I'm 6 ft., approximately the same size... eyeball estimate? that's all that was necessary. how much did they weigh? not relevant. do you know or not? similar stature to the people I was representing. 16:55:55 how long were arms and legs? average size. did not measure them? I didn't measure their arms 16:56:09 got into poses.... suits give off pulses of energy that are documented by cameras? no that's not the way mine works... tell me how? 16 accelerometers, move your iPhone and it recognizes it.... those signals transfer to my laptop, apply to figure represented on laptop 16:56:58 they meaning what? the antennas that come in... applied to characters 16:57:11 pulses given off by accelerometers? go to two transmitters, send signal to laptop 16:57:29 each accelerometer has its own code? yes. antennas differentiate among each? yes 16:57:46 have green light to see if functioning properly.... 16:58:01 the version of this animation, final version now? yes 16:58:10 how many prior versions have there been? 2 prior versions, adjusted for more accuracy according to the witnesses 16:58:30 you adjusted based on witnesses, haven't actually read or listened to the actual testimony from witnesses? police reports... court room testimony? no 16:58:51 you changed them based upon what Zimmerman's attorneys told you people said in court? yes 16:59:03 that actually apparently was different enough from original you changed it twice? just to be more accurate, yes 16:59:20 the... understand that most of what you do to reconstruct crime scene, things mapped and known and static in their positioning.... and that is reconstructing crime scene, but adding figures and animation what are you doing? also reconstructing crime scene..... my gathering of data and put into context, sometimes when a jury receives coronary report, bullet trajectory angle, don't know how its relevant or how it applies to the scene... I take all different aspects and put into context 17:00:46 which pieces of evidence... which testimony did you incorporate into this animation? Jeremy wineberg. did he testify in court?..... 17:01:18 what actual court room testimony was incorporated? Jennifer lauer, john good, and Sonja mora.... 17:01:38 you show in this animation an initial contact by two figures, whose testimony did you use to depict that encounter? part of it is from the discovery that you gave us 17:02:05 whose testimony did you use? omara: trial or pretrial? TESTIMONY PRESENTED AT TRIAL....omara: all of Zimmerman's statements are in trial. 17:02:33 IT HAS TO BE TRIAL TESTIMONY OR EVIDENCE.... WHICH DID YOU USE IN YOUR ANIMATION? for initial contact it was Jennifer lauer's statement 17:02:59 she saw that occur? she didn't see it occur, she heard it occur 17:03:08 you are depicting it visually? correct. she didn't testify she could depict visually? just pin pointed the initial contact, in the T to the left of her condo 17:03:34 ever say it must have started there? PLEASE SHUT OFF YOUR PHONE..... IT WAS ON VIBRATE AND ITS NOT NOW 17:04:02 your indication is that she testified it must've started there? I have a question.... so for evidence which the judge was asking, police reports too? no, evidence or testimony I mean something in this court room during trial, outside of court is not evidence for now 17:04:50 omara: have to identify what's in trial.... DONT WANT YOU TO INFER.... IT WOULD BE ANYTHING HEARD BY THE JURY IN THIS COURTROOM BY WAY OF TESTIMONY OR EVIDENCE INTRODUCED... I was not allowed to watch the trial 17:05:31 if I were to ask you if this animation accurately show what's