The who concluded it was TM because person screaming was young (in his opinion)? I don't buy that for a second. You can't determine an age by voice alone. For instance, I sound very young and when people call they ask to talk to my parents.
From the beginning I recognized that it was a young person screaming. And yes, you can tell in some cases, the approximate age of the voice. I believed and believe it was a young person because you can hear the residual voice cracking in one moment of the vocalization that only young males have.
Trayvon was not done growing. That includes his larynx. In this article it state that the adolescent male voice does not fully settle until the mid-twenties:
http://www.vocalprocess.co.uk/resources/FAQ_Developing_Voice.pdf
I did not know that but I definitely heard the adolescent voice cracking in one of the screams.
Now, about other sounds. I listened to the police call of Zimmerman. When I first heard it, it sounded like either a g or c was placed before "oons". I never heard "punks". The "uh" sound and the "kuh" sound are quite different from the "oo" sound or the "ks" sound.
However, after listening to the CNN enhancement, I actually thought it could be either the racial epithet or "punks". Why? Well, in part because the "oo" sound and the "uh" sound are dependent on regional or ethnic accents, as are all vowel sounds. And hearing the word alone, it is not clear to me whether what I'm hearing is a hard "kuh" or, the sound of "puhnk". Also, the "puh" sound is a softer one and harder to hear in a whisper. So the sound "puhn kss" might be heard as "kns", without the "p" before it which is similar to the epithet sound.
But I have made a decision. I actually think now that Zimmerman uttered "punks".
I do believe he racially profiled Trayvon. Frankly, most people would racially profile a lone, young black male walking around at night, whether they are willing to admit so or not. Of course, most people wouldn't stalk, chase and then shoot to death such a person, but that's not my point. I think, based on who Zimmerman is or thought he was that night, who he wants people to believe he is, that he would not have uttered such an epithet, especially during a call to police.
I think Zimmerman is a man with intense feelings of emasculation and inadequacy. I believe those feelings are so strong that they have resulted in simmering rage. But it is a rage that must stay hidden.
Zimmerman was very, very calm in the call. He seemed calm to people who saw him right after the shooting. He seemed calm in the surveillance tape, to me. I think that's because he has practice hiding his emotions.
Yes, he may utter things his subconscious would not readily identify as problematic, but that actually do reveal his inner motivations, like "those guys always get away", but a racial epithet is something his subconscious would immediately know would blow his cover as the calm, law-abiding man who helps stop crime. He is tightly controlled, IMO and would not have uttered such a word at such time.
And for those who are interested, I base my conclusions about his emotional state on what has been reported about his background, his words and actions that night and after (voicemail to a friend), what those who know him have had to say, and the types of people in general who are overly involved in calls to police, vigiliantism, and controlling the conduct of those around them, with a self-perceived, inherent authority, or a reality-based authority. :moo:
lease: