The following is a LIVE, ongoing rundown of the day's testimony in the George Zimmerman trial for the shooting death of Trayvon Martin.
The most recent updates from the courtroom Monday are on top.
———————————————
Witness: Chris Serino - Investigator
6:00 p.m.
Court is in recess until 9 a.m.
5:58 p.m.
O’Mara asks about Serino telling Zimmerman Martin would videotape a lot of what he was doing and he believed the event was on video.
“It’s more a bluff,” Serino says.
Serino says Zimmerman said “Thank God,” and hoped someone videotaped it.
“Either he was telling the truth or a complete pathological liar, one of the two,” Serino says.
Serino says he thinks Zimmerman was telling the truth.
Judge Nelson dismisses the jury and gives them instructions for avoiding reports about the case and researching it.
5:52 p.m.
O’Mara asks about Zimmerman saying he had been hit 20 to 30 times and the lack of injuries.
Serino says it could’ve been a panic thing.
O’Mara asks if Serino saw pictures of Zimmerman’s injuries taken at SPD. He says yes.
Serino says there were injuries, but he’s seen worse working in the major crimes unit and didn’t consider them life-threatening.
O’Mara asks Serino if there were injuries. Serino says yes.
O’Mara asks if there need to be injuries. Serino says no.
O’Mara asks about the questions about following Martin.
O’Mara asks about Zimmerman’s answer about why he didn’t identify himself
Serinio says it was a concern for him because Zimmerman mentioned he mentored African American children.
O’Mara asks about the questioning of the timing and Zimmerman going back to his vehicle.
Serino says he questioned him about the time it took him. “It seemed there was a pause in there somewhere,” Serino says.
5:45 p.m.
O’Mara asks if Officer Singleton was helpful in her connection with Zimmerman over religion, pointing out the techniques law enforcement use to figure out what happened.
Serino says he was “gentle” in questioning Zimmerman because he wasn’t quite ready to “challenge” him.
“There was a lot of information I didn’t have to challenge him,” Serino says.
Serino says he is looking for omissions and admissions in questioning.
O’Mara points out Serino saying he would have to speak for Zimmerman and he would be under a lot of scrutiny.
“In this particular case he could’ve been considered a victim, also,” Serino says, adding that he kept an open mind for that.
Serino says there were external concerns and he needed to get it clarified.
5:36 p.m.
O’Mara asks Serino about what other actions he was taking as the investigating officer.
Serino says he spent several hours attempting to identify Martin, most of the night he adds.
He then had to make arrangements to have him released.
Serino says he had to compare the interview with the statement and they realized that the only person that saw what happened and how it initiated was going to be Zimmerman due to lack of witnesses.
Serino says no one could be located that saw Zimmerman and Martin come together.
Seriono says the lack of remembering the streets was suspicious and other oddities were all he had to confront Zimmerman initially.
O’Mara asks if Serino was under pressure to move the case forward. Serino says yes.
O’Mara asks about what he calls the “challenge interview,” with the purpose to break the person’s story.
Serino says it is to discover the truth.
5:29 p.m.
Judge Nelson asks the jury how late they want to stay. The jury says staying until 6 p.m. is not an issued.
5:27 p.m.
The court reporter reads back from the record part of O’Mara’s questioning.
Judge Nelson says she thinks O’Mara is getting close the motion in limiting ruled on by the court. He is allowed to finish his question.
O’Mara asks if they should stop now for the day or continue.
Judge Nelson says she will ask the jury if they want to go to 6 o’clock. The jury is brought back in.
5:19 p.m.
O’Mara asks if Serino expected some differences.
“I’m a professional skeptic,” Serino says in answer to what he think to someone that repeats the same story three times over the course of three weeks with three separate interviews.
O’Mara asks if anything caused him concern.
Serino says nothing he can “articulate.”
Serino agrees there were about a dozen witness statements available to him.
O’Mara asks if there was specific evidence that Zimmerman was acting in self-defense.
Serino says he had some.
O’Mara points out the injuries and witness statements that fit.
De la Rionda objects to the line of questioning and ask to approach.
5:13 p.m.
Serino says he doesn’t remember Singleton telling him about the conversation with Zimmerman about Martin passing and him asking about her religion.
O’Mara asks if a transcript of the interview would help him.
O’Mara asks if anything was specifically contradicted by evidence available at that point.
Serino says no.
Serino says his next contact with Zimmerman was over the phone.
Serino says Zimmerman was a little more animated in the video for the reenactment.
O’Mara asks if he noticed inconsistencies from the reenactment and what was said the night before.
Serino says at that point he was focused on trying to identify Martin.
Serino says he can't remember inconsistencies off the top of his head.
5:05 p.m.
O’Mara asks is Serino acknowledged the injuries on Zimmerman. He shows the pictures of Zimmerman from that night to Serino.
O’Mara asks if it seemed Zimmerman was uncaring. Serino says he didn’t know him prior, and it would be included in his concerns, but “other things might’ve been going on.”
O’Mara asks if Zimmerman seeming cavalier or uncaring. Not necessarily, Serino says.
Serino says other than the next day needing to go to class, he seemed to not be making reasons to be unavailable.
Serino says it appeared odd he had that on his mind based on what happened and struck him as being different.
O’Mara asks if it was concerning to say he had to work in the morning. Serino says it was a little concerning.
4:58 p.m.
O’Mara asks if Serino was concerned by Zimmerman’s flat response. He says somewhat.
O’Mara asks if Serino has had to draw his weapon and shot someone, killing them. Serino says no.
De la Rionda objects to relevance.
O’Mara asks if Zimmerman was cleaned up before seeing him. O’Mara shows him the bloody photo taken from the back of a patrol car.
De la Rionda asks to approach.
4:51 p.m.
O’Mara asks about the walk-through the next day and Zimmerman being read his rights again.
O’Mara asks if Zimmerman ever showed anger or disdain toward Martin.
He says no.
Serino says he can’t remember if Singleton ever said Zimmerman wasn’t aware Martin had died.
O’Mara asks about police technique in getting to the person of interest as soon as possible.
Serino says it is referred to as “locking in” a statement to “keep it pristine.”
O’Mara asks about the interview from Jon Good.
De la Rionda asks to approach for a side bar.
4:45 p.m.
O’Mara asks Serino about his position as the chief investigating officer for the case. He confirms.
O’Mara asks about tasks assigned to other officers, like gathering evidence and interviewing witnesses.
He asks if Serino talked about it with the team of officers, including the chief of police and members of the state attorney’s office.
O’Mara asks for the timing in which Serino talked to Zimmerman. Serino says it was 12:05 a.m.
O’Mara asks about the interview with Jon Good, calling him the “eye-witness.” Serino says he talked to Good before talking to Zimmerman.
O’Mara asks if it fair to say he had more information that Officer Singleton had. Serino says yes.
Serino says he didn’t listen to Zimmerman’s non-emergency call before initially talking to him.
4:36 p.m.
Serino says he showed a picture of Martin to Zimmerman trying to show how skinny he was.
De la Rionda finishes questioning.
O'Mara rises for cross-examination.
4:30 p.m.
De la Rionda asks Serino about the photos shown to Zimmerman during his interview.
He asks about one photo in particular. O’Mara objects to publishing it to the jury.
4:29 p.m.
A juror asks about hearing the video. Judge Nelson says it is evidence and they can review it again.
De la Rionda questions Serino about the three streets in the housing complex.
4:08 p.m.
Serino question him about the smothering. Singleton says the screaming would’ve stopped from someone being smothered.
Serino asks if Martin could’ve seen his gun.
De la Rionda asks about 52 minutes into the recording when he asks if Zimmerman was hearing himself and Zimmerman said it doesn’t sound like him.
Serino says he showed Zimmerman photographs of Martin.
Court is in recess for 15 minutes.
Judge Nelson asks counsel to approach for a sidebar.
4:03 p.m.
Serino says Zimmerman stopped at the T based on the seconds to walk 30 feet. He points out that it is raining.
Zimmerman says he was walking through, but had light where he was.
Singleton asks Zimmerman about following Martin and getting concerned about “walking past the guy when he’s already been chasing him.”
“It sounds like you’re looking for him,” Serino says.
Serino asks if Zimmerman can clarify anything.
“I was frustrated that I couldn’t think of the street name,” Zimmerman told them.
Singleton point’s out Zimmerman’s request to have an officer call him, saying it means he might not be at his car.
Serino says if anything needs to be changed, “This is it.” He plays the 911 call with screams heard in the background. He asks about what point Zimmerman says Martin smothered him. He plays the call again.
3:55 p.m.
Serino asks Zimmerman to describe the type of running Martin did.
Zimmerman says he can’t remember. Serino says it sounds like Martin was running to try to get away from Zimmerman.
Serino points out the moment heard of Zimmerman getting out of the car.
Serino asks what went through Zimmerman’s mind when the dispatcher asked if he was following Martin. Zimmerman says he still wanted to get an address.
Zimmerman says to Serino he wasn’t following Martin, he was just going in the same direction. Serino replies that is following.
3:50 p.m.
Serino says he wants to try assisted memory recall. He asks Zimmerman to close his eye and put himself back in the moment.
De la Rionda stops the interview. Serino says they were heading to his desk to play the 911 calls. The rest of the interview is audio only.
A few other officers were present.
Serino plays Zimmerman’s call. He asks Zimmerman about what the suspicious part was about this person.
Serino asks him why he said the guy looked like he was on drugs. Zimmerman replies he kept looking around and shifting.
Singleton asks Zimmerman about where he saw Martin and what point he moved.
She asks where he was when he tells the operator Martin was coming toward him.
As they play the call, the continue to ask him where he was at different points. Zimmerman answers that he can't remember.
He tells Serino he was behind Martin.
3:43 p.m.
Singleton asks Zimmerman about having the opportunity to tell Martin he was with neighborhood watch when he says Martin asked him if he had a problem.
Singleton asks Zimmerman if he thinks Martin was scared. She mentions Martin ran and Zimmerman put up his car window.
“I didn’t have the opportunity,” Zimmerman says.
Singleton says when Martin circled his car, Zimmerman could’ve told him.
Zimmerman says Martin didn’t circle his whole car.
Zimmerman mentions a previous incident two-three weeks previous when he called about suspicious people and didn’t go outside.
Serino returns and asks if Zimmerman had anything in his hand. Zimmerman says he was holding his flashlight.
3:36 p.m.
Serino questions Zimmerman about the gun.
Zimmerman says Martin had pressure on his nose and mouth and reached down his side and told him he was going to die tonight.
“I just remember not wanting to hit my own hand that was holding him,” Zimmerman says to Serino in the recorded interview.
Zimmerman mentions the operator telling him they didn’t need him to follow Martin.
Zimmerman describes thinking the Martin was trying to look tough.
Serino says Zimmerman sounded frustrated in the phone conversation.
Zimmerman says he walked past where Martin went through and didn’t see him, and as he went back he told the dispatcher he’d still like to meet an officer.
Parts of the interview are still hard to hear.
3:30 p.m.
Some of the interview is hard to hear as the audio is still over-modulated.
Zimmerman is heard telling Serino that Martin reached to his waistband when he approached his car.
Serino suggests he might’ve been grabbing his iced tea.
Zimmerman tells Serino and Singleton he walked to look for a street sign.
He says he shut his truck off.
Zimmerman tells Serino he has a "bad memory" when asked about why he didn't know the street address.
3:19 p.m.
Serino is heard asking Zimmerman about prior training law enforcement and what to look for in identifying suspicious people.
Zimmerman mentions the neighborhood watch.
Zimmerman sits at an interview table across from Singleton, with Serino on the end.
3:15 p.m.
Investigator Singleton is seen sitting across from Zimmerman and opening the door to the room.
[Editor’s note: The audio is badly over-modulated and difficult to understand.]
3:08 p.m.
Serino says he interviewed Zimmerman on Feb. 29. De la Rionda says he is going to play the recording from the interview, which is 45 minutes long.
The jury says they do not need a break at the moment.
Judge Nelson reads redaction instructions to the jury.
De la Rionda plays the interview video.
De la Rionda points out parts of the video are audio only.
2:49 p.m.
De la Rionda shows the photos taken of Zimmerman at the police station.
Serino says he didn’t have any problems speaking to Zimmerman and considered the injuries minor.
De la Rionda asks about the arrangements to meet to go over what happened.
Serino says he became aware of a missing person report and went back to the complex.
De la Rionda shows a diagram of the housing complex and points it out where it was.
He asks if Serino showed Tracy Martin a photograph and identified his son. Serino says yes.
He was there as Zimmerman went over what happened for officers.
De la Rionda asks the court to read instructions about redaction before playing video of the reenactment.
He plays the video.
2:43 p.m.
De la Rionda asks Serino about mentioning a photograph shown to Zimmerman of Martin. He shows it to the jury.
2:36 p.m.
De la Rionda questions him about the crime scene.
Zimmerman was not still at the scene when he arrived.
Serino says he met with officers when he arrived. The body of Martin was not identified. He says officers tried facial recognition, canvassing the area, used a Lifescan device to check his fingerprints.
Serino says he went to the police station around midnight and made contact with Zimmerman. Serino points him out in courtroom.
Serino says he had a brief recorded interview with Zimmerman around 12:05 a.m.
De la Rionda plays the recording.
2:31 p.m.
The state calls Officer Chris Serino. He has been a member of the Sanford Police Department for 16 years.
Witness: Doris Singleton - Investigator
2:30 p.m.
Singleton is excused by subject to recall. The state calls Officer Chris Serino.
2:29 p.m.
De la Rionda asks about Singleton thinking Zimmerman didn’t realize Martin was dead.
De la Rionda asks why Zimmerman would holster his gun back if he thought Martin wasn’t dead.
Singleton says she didn’t use the word suspect to Zimmerman
De la Rionda asks about her use of the word suspect for someone she believes committed a crime.
He asks her about Zimmerman’s use of suspect and if it was speculation.
“You don’t know what was in his heart of his mind when he sought out, or to use his words followed this 17-year-old unarmed boy,” De la Rionda asks.
Singleton says she only knew what he told her.
De la Rionda asks about the screaming and if Zimmerman had to have known that someone was screaming.
O’Mara redirects.
He says he wasn’t asking Singleton to speculate but if there was any evidence that Zimmerman acted in her presence with ill-will, spite, hatred or animosity.
She says she thought that was what he was asking.
O’Mara asks about if she were in a shooting situation and her re-holstering her weapon.
“I would re-holster when the threat was no longer,” she says.
De la Rionda redirects.
He asks about the time she interviewed him.
De la Rionda finishes.
O’Mara asks to approach before they decide to excuse Singleton.
2:21 p.m.
O’Mara asks about Zimmerman not being sure of where Martin came from.
Singleton says she didn’t think it was significant because Zimmerman said it was dark out there.
O’Mara submits photos as exhibits and shows them to Singleton.
They are of the scene taken the next day.
She points out the bushes near an air condition on one end of a building.
A wider shot of the scene shows the row of home and she points out the bushes.
She points out that Martin was pretty tall and they tried to figure out which bushes.
O’Mara finishes questioning. De la Rionda begins re-direct.
De la Rionda asks if she agrees what or isn’t significant is up to the jury. She says yes.
2:15 p.m.
She believes Serino asked her to get a written statement.
She says she didn’t notice any significant differences in the statement. She says most people don’t tell the same exact story twice.
O’Mara asks about the interview given to Investigator Serino.
She remembers some differences, but not significant ones.
Singleton says she assumed Martin had come in and out of view at least twice.
She says she knows there are no street signs where Zimmerman said he parked.
O’Mara asks if any changes caused her concern.
“Not significantly, no,” she says.
O’Mara asks about Zimmerman telling her he got on top of Martin to spread his hands and if that caused her concern. She says no.
O’Mara asks about Zimmerman calling Martin a suspect and if either of them knew his name.
She says she didn’t read it at the time, but today doesn’t think it’s unusual.
O'Mara asks about De la Rionda using the word "claim" and if that's how Zimmerman spoke.
Singleton says he didn't say it that way.
2:07 p.m.
O’Mara asks about possible previous information Singleton might’ve had.
O’Mara asks about the Catholic question from Zimmerman.
Singleton says she assumed he was Catholic.
She says she told him she didn’t think God meant you couldn’t save your life.
O’Mara asks about the conversation about the victim’s identity.
She says he gave her a blank stare and asked what she meant about not knowing the victim, and then he asked if she meant he was dead. She says she told him she thought he knew that and then he sunk his head down.
O’Mara asks about his concern for medical care.
O’Mara asks if he had any type of bad attitude, ill-will, or anger toward Martin.
“He seemed affected by that,” she says.
She believes she talked to him initially around 9 p.m.
1:57 p.m.
O’Mara asks Singleton about a witness that may have seen the incident.
De la Rionda objects and the attorneys approach Judge Nelson for a sidebar.
1:55 p.m.
O’Mara asks about her history. She served in the military before attending college at the University of Central Florida.
“I wanted to be able to help people,” she says as one of the reasons she considered law enforcement.
She says most suspects will actually speak at will.
O’Mara asks about people that can change their mind in agreeing to speak with police.
He mentions the reenactment video and Zimmerman voluntarily doing it.
O’Mara asks about the request from Sgt. Santiago about the video surveillance number. He asks about her knowing today about an eye-witness, a 911 call with screams on it and number witnesses that heard something.
He asks if Zimmerman knew of evidence of a 911 call with screaming.
Singleton says Zimmerman mentioned a person in the door window.
Singleton says during the interview someone possibly heard something.
O’Mara points out Zimmerman told her he had been screaming.
O’Mara asks about Singleton becoming aware of Officer Tim Smith being told by Zimmerman that he was screaming.
“Yes, I learned that,” Singleton says.
1:46 p.m.
De la Rionda submits into evidence a Miranda rights document. He asks Singleton if they would’ve been the same ones she read to Zimmerman. She says yes.
De la Rionda finishes questioning.
Defense attorney Mark O’Mara begins cross-examination.
1:44 p.m.
De la Rionda introduces into evidence the DNA sample from the defendant. Singleton says she was present when it was taken.
He asks her about a conversation mentioning a cross she was wearing. She says she was in the interview with him and it could be seen and
Zimmerman asked her if she was Catholic because he noticed the cross.
She asked why it mattered and he responded that because in his religion it is wrong to kill someone. She responded that if what he said was true, than it was not what God meant and that he couldn’t save his life.
De la Rionda asks her about a conversation about the victim’s age.
She says she mentioned that they had not been able to identify the victim and Zimmerman responded “He’s dead?” Singleton says responded to him asking that she thought he knew that.
1:36 p.m.
De la Rionda asks if Singleton was present when a DNA sample was taken the next day. She says she was in the same room.
De la Rionda mentions video taken of the process. He shows it to the court.
1:34 p.m.
De la Rionda asks Singleton about a first coming in contact with Zimmerman and blood seen on his face.
He shows photos taken of him at the police station.
Recess for lunch
1:32 p.m.
The jury is reseated and Judge Nelson checks to make sure no one saw reports about the case or did research on it.
12:31 p.m.
Court is in recess for lunch until 1:30 p.m.
Witness: Doris Singleton - Investigator
12:28 p.m.
De la Rionda moves on to page three. He points out the use of the word suspect and asks Singleton if she used the word. She says no.
She reads more of the statement, which says the suspect told him to ‘shut the [expletive] up. Zimmerman describes his head feeling like it was going to explode after being “slammed into the side walk.” He writes that the suspect reached for his “now exposed firearm,” and said an expletive.
Singleton moves on to page four.
Zimmerman writes that he fired one shot into Martin’s torso and the “suspect” sat up and said “you got me.”
An onlooker peered, Zimmerman wrote, and asked if he was OK and said he was going to call 911. He wrote he asked the person to help him restrain Martin.
De la Rionda asks about the reference to Martin as a suspect.
De la Rionda asks if police use the term suspect to refer to people. Singleton says it is used for people they think commited a crime.
12:21 p.m.
Singleton is asked to read the statement.
“In August 2011, my neighbor’s house was broken into while she was home with her infant son. The intruders attempted to attack her and her child; however, SPD reported to the scene of the crims and the robbers fled, My wife saw the intruders running from the home and became scared of the rising crime within the neighborhood. “
Zimmerman writes that he and his neighbors formed a neighborhood watch program.
That night he writes he was on the way to the grocery store when he saw a male walking in the rain and looking into houses.
De la Rionda asks about Zimmerman using the word “suspect.”
He moves on to page two.
Zimmerman writes the "suspect" circled his vehicle as he was looking for an exact location for the dispatcher.
12:16 p.m.
Singleton says she had Zimmerman fill out a statement form and left the room.
She says she had him sign it and she didn’t read them.
De la Rionda shows her the statement as evidence. It is four pages.
He shows the statement on a screen for the courtroom.
12:13 p.m.
De la Rionda asks about an “X,” which Singleton says indicates the point Zimmerman first notices Martin.
The line shows the direction Zimmerman took.
An “X” with lines is the point where Singleton believes Zimmerman made the call to police.
De la Rionda points out the two lines extending further: one is for Martin where Zimmerman says he looked into his car, the other is where Martin leaves him and Zimmerman loses sight of him.
Another marking further down the street, indicates where Zimmerman initially wrote that he stopped, according to Singleton, but scribbled it out and moved it further down.
The circle means that’s where Zimmerman says Martin circled his car, Singleton says.
Singleton says Zimmerman said he didn’t know which way Martin went, but he got out of his vehicle to get an address to tell dispatch.
“He says he goes all the way across the ‘T’ to the other side,” Singleton says.
He says he discusses with dispatch whether police should come to the scene, Singleton says, and then says he is going back to his vehicle when
Martin approached him and isn’t sure exactly where he came from.
Singleton says she tried to locate bushes on Google that Zimmerman was talking about.
12:05 p.m.
De la Rionda hands Singleton the Google map mentioned in the interview. He submits it for evidence. De la Rionda shows the Google map on a screen for the courtroom. He points out the markings.
11:55 a.m.
De la Rionda asks about Zimmerman drawing a diagram of the location, which was supplemented with a Google map.
De la Rionda plays the interview that included the Google map. She says as he would tell her what happened she had him make markings to what he was referring to.
11:48 a.m.
As the interview recording discusses bumps on Zimmermans head, De la Rionda asks if she was examining Zimmerman's head. Singleton says she stood up on his side of the table to examine them.
More of the interview recording is played.
11:34 a.m.
De la Rionda asks her about her saying she hasn’t been out there. She says it was about the crime scene.
He plays more of the interview.
She says she was asked during the interview if Zimmerman had any contact numbers for tracking down surveillance video from the complex gate.
De la Rionda plays more of the interview.
She says she was getting the information for Sgt. Santiago, assuming Zimmerman would know who to contact for that information. She says she went out of the room to get Zimmerman's cell phone for him to look for it.
She says "43" is a code for information.
More of the interview recording is played.
11:26 a.m.
She says she asked if Zimmerman understood his rights and he responded he did and agreed to talk to her.
She says she never promised him anything to get his statement. She says he spoke clearly.
She says she briefly discussed the injuries she saw on him, but he later expressed that he was unsure about needing medical treatment.
De la Rionda asks if he complained of an injury.
She says no and would have made it happen if he asked to go to the hospital.
She guesses she first came in contact around him around 8 or 9 p.m.
He was using tissues to clean up blood and had crusted blood on his nose.
De la Rionda submits the interview CD as evidence.
He asks if the interview is her asking the questions. She says yes.
“I essentially knew nothing going in to speak with him,” Singleton says.
De la Rionda begins playing the interview.
He points out the wrong date spoken by Singleton in the recording.
11:20 a.m.
Singleton will have been with the police department for 9 years in December.
She is part of the neighborhood response unit.
In February 2012, she was off-duty, but was called to assist in investigating the shooting. She said Sgt. Santiago called her. She was assigned to assist Investigator Chris Serino.
She says she never went to the crime scene, but went straight to the police department.
Singleton points out George Zimmerman, who stands.
She says he was in an interview room being observed through a two-way mirror by two officers.
She talked to him that night, which was recorded, but it was not videotaped because she didn’t know how to activate it.
She informed him of the recording and placed the recorder within view.
De la Rionda hands her the Miranda warning card, signed by Zimmerman.
11:15 a.m.
The state calls Doris Singleton, a police officer with the Sanford Police Department.
11:13 a.m.
De la Rionda asks for jury instructions for certain items that will come up. De la Rionda says redactions have been agreed to for some recordings and interviews.
The jury is brought back in.
Witness: Dr. Hirotaka Nakasone - Voice Expert
10:56 a.m.
Nakasone says his lab uses a hybrid approach, meaning the examiner conducts the examination independently from computers, extracting some features humans can that computers can’t.
He says a computer can’t tell if the voice was happy, sad, or under duress and the two components must go hand-in-hand at the FBI.
West asks if any methodology software approach would be suitable for analyzing the screams.
None, Nakasone says.
Mantei redirects, asking about the suitable methodology being used scientifically.
“That would not preclude familiar voice recognition by the individuals familiar with the voice,” Nakasone adds.
The court takes a recess for 15 minutes.
10:51 a.m.
Mantei questions him about familiar voice listening. He asks about the duration of samples, and then examiner bias.
“Do you think that law enforcement techniques or practices of that nature should mirror what goes on in a laboratory?”
Nakasone says he doesn’t have any say in what they do.
Mantei asks about the potential for bias and having two people familiar with a voice listening together.
Nakasone says there’s always a chance for bias. He says the chance for bias is less the more different the voices.
Mantei asks about familiar voice identification,
Nakasone says there’s no way for a computer to contain all the features of the voice.
West re-cross examines.
10:43 a.m.
West asks if Nakasone would urge caution to the jury with lay witness’s opinions.
Mantei objects.
West finishes. Mantei redirects.
10:39 a.m.
They assess if a sample is normal or deviates from normal range, Nakasone says.
He says the screaming heard is in an extreme emotional state, in response to West’s question about the speaking being in a life-threatening situation.
Nakasone says he talked to Tampa FBI agents and recommended they not attempt to record an enacted screaming voice for this case.
West asks if voice comparison is analyzed with comparison to a known sample of the person’s voice.
He asks about the decision to not have a voice reenactment done.
“We believe it would be extremely difficult to recreate the same situation,” Nakasone says, adding that scientists believe there are physiological differences under different conditions.
West asks about the impact of a life-threatening situation and determining age. Nakasone says he doesn’t think it would be possible to determine age from the screams of that voice.
“Under similar circumstance, it’s very very challenging,” Nakasone says and he didn’t attempt it.
West asks if to do so would be a “fool’s errand.”
Naksone says his opinion is that is the consensus among the scientific group.
"Unfortunately, that is correct," Nakasone says in answer to West's question that science cannot help determine whose voice is heard.
Nakasone says it is his opinion that familiar listerns could best determine the voice identity.
10:28 a.m.
West asks Nakasone about voice samples suitable for analysis and his decision for this case. Nakasone says his opinion is supported by colleagues in the scientific community.
West asks about the sample with screaming and the 45 second portion of it, the 18 seconds broken down further, and then the 2.3 seconds “suitable” for analysis. Nakasone says the 2.3 seconds is the “cleanest area.”
West asks about “phonetically balanced” speech.
Nakasone describe phonemes and their use in speaking. He says reasonable speech durations are needed and varies on the vocabulary of the individual, but by doing studies they determined they need around 30 seconds of conversational speech.
He says if someone yells for 30 seconds, it can still count as one word, or three phonemes, for example, making for a much shorter sample for analysis.
10:23 a.m.
West continues questioning Nakasone about a group listening to a recording for speaker identification.
West adds Nakasone’s CV as evidence.
10:13 a.m.
West asks to be heard at the bench for a constitutional argument. Mantei says the question is beyond the scope and a law enforcement officer should be asked the question.
10:12 a.m.
Nakasone says the FBI counsel allowed him to testify for this case, but there are limits to what he can talk about.
Nakasone’s lab is a forensic lab. West asks him to explain it for the jury.
“Forensics simply means the analysis that is being conducted for the investigative guidance,” Nakasone adds as part of a broader definition that what West explained.
Nakasone says no single examiner can issue a report, a second examiner must also analyze as part of a mandate.
West asks if that includes “blind panel testing.”
Nakasone says when they are afraid listener bias is a factor, they use a blind panel, not telling the listener what they are going to hear.
“Exposing the other examiners with preliminary judgment made by a primary examiner would lead to guaranteed bias,” Nakasone says. He says there is always danger of bias in others.
Mantei objects to a question.
West asks if he can be called as his own witness.
He asks who Nakasone works for. The FBI, Nakasone says. West asks about him working for law enforcement before that.
He asks if Nakasone participates in training. “Personally, I really, I haven’t really guided other law enforcement how to do it except when I am being asked by special agents,” Nakasone says.
West asks about listener bias for people listening to a recording at the same time.
Mantei objects.
10:01 a.m.
West asks about Nakasone’s group work bringing him in contact with other world-known scientists.
Nakasone says lately he has been contacted by email from scientists in the U.S., agreeing with him that the recording cannot be analyzed.
Nakasone says he helped coordinated the working group and get funding.
West asks him about NIST, the National Institute of Standards and Technology.
Nakasone says NIST’s function is for speaker recognition is promotion of the science.
West asks him about a methodology for speaker identification being submitted for testing of the performance and evaluation from NIST.
He asks if Nakasone is current on what’s happening in the speaker identification community.
He says yes.
Nakasone says NIST has not addressed extreme voice samples.
9:53 a.m.
West has a document marked. He hands a copy to Nakasone. It is his curriculum vitae.
West asks him about his working group. Nakasone says the concept was born in 2009 at an inter-agency symposium where they realized there was a lack of consensus in establishing common operating procedures.
He lists the missions and goals of the working group. Nakasone is the elected chairperson, with four sub-committees.
9:48 a.m.
Nakasone says there are two types of listening – familiar and unfamiliar recognition. Familiar is when you recognize voices of coworkers talking around the corner. Unfamiliar is listening to phone calls of a salesman you don’t know.
In forensic circumstances, Nakasone says they are given a voice from an incriminating recording and also a voice of the suspect. He says when he attempts to compare the two unfamiliar voices it is very difficult because the examiner doesn’t have any stored information about the speech features of the voices being listened to.
He says mathematical models in computer software must be used to help examiners.
Mantei asks about having people familiar to the voices listen to the recordling. Nakasone says in this case, it is better for familiar voice recognition. He says when we listen to a person’s voice, we store their features in our brain and can use them when confronted to compare.
“For this particular case, best approach would be familiar voice recognition from people who heard him in all aspects of life,” Nakasone says.
Mantei finishes questioning. Defense attorney Don West rises to question.
9:41 a.m.
Nakasone says signal to noise ratio was also a problem with the recording.
He says it is common belief in the scientific community an attempt to guess the age of a recorded person is complicated. They can approximate, but people make mistakes, adding that people can sound young but turn out to be older.
“Guessing age is a little complicated,” Nakasone says.
Nakasone says defines pitch. He says small children will have high pitch. He describes situations of extreme emotional states and says pitch is known to get higher.
Mantei asks if Nakasone has ever done age testing. He says it occurred to him, but it was not possible to do in this case. He has done it before in the past, he says.
Mantei asks about complicating factors, like the recording quality, for determining age. Nakasone says accuracy of determining someone’s age is about the same as listening to live voice.
9:31 a.m.
Mantei asks about the samples from the case. Nakasone was given samples from the case to analyze in March 2012. He says eight recordings were delivered in a CD.
Mantei asks about the recording with screaming and yelling heard in a 911 call. Nakasone says he listened to entire recording, as part of standard operating procedures. He lists the duration of each portion of the call – the screaming, conversation between the dispatcher and woman, gunshot audio event. He says with those areas discounted, there was about 2.3 seconds of screaming. He says other voices overlapped about 16 seconds of the rest of the screaming portion.
Nakasone says he concluded the sample was not fit for the purpose of voice comparison based on research and common sense understanding in the scientific community.
9:24 a.m.
Mantei asks him about the difference between the aural and automatic approach. Nakasone says the computer technology still must be supervised by trained examiners.
Mantei asks him about conducting and analysis and what is looked for. Nakasone says they first evaluate the suitability of the data and to check the speech sample for issues like “unnatural voicing.”
He says the when the speech is determined to be natural, they check the data. It must be 30 seconds. When a speech sample is 10 seconds, the analyst determines it is not good enough
Nakasone says they use two samples – the recording and the suspect voice.
Mantei asks about the way the speech is expressed and other environmental factors.
Nakasone says the effects of distance to the voice are regarded as something to be careful of. He says when a person is in the far end of a room, captured on a recording, it is called far-field voice with a weak signal and other noise mixed with it.
9:16 a.m.
After a few questions about his credentials, Mantei tenders Nakasone as an expert in the field of speaker recognition. There is no objection from Zimmerman’s defense attorneys.
9:08 a.m.
Prosecutor Richard Mantei questions Dr. Nakasone. He is assigned to the FBI as a senior scientist for research and development of speaker recognition systems.
9:04 a.m.
Audio expert Dr. Hirotaka Nakasone is called to the stand. The attorneys enter a sidebar with Judge Nelson.
Before court
9:02 a.m.
The jury is brought in and seated.
8:28 a.m.
Attorneys say they do not need time before the judge. Court will resume at 9 a.m.
8:05 a.m.
Attorneys make take up any evidence issues with Judge Debra Nelson at 8:30 a.m. Witness testimony will resume at 9 a.m.