CBS The Case of: JonBenét Ramsey enhancing audio and Daubert

Go down

CBS The Case of: JonBenét Ramsey  enhancing audio and Daubert Empty CBS The Case of: JonBenét Ramsey enhancing audio and Daubert

Post by redpill on Fri Apr 05, 2019 2:16 pm

Fri Apr 05, 2019 1:29 pm


Tricia Griffith

CBS The Case of: JonBenét Ramsey  enhancing audio and Daubert 08282010
CBS The Case of: JonBenét Ramsey  enhancing audio and Daubert Tricia10

Hey Everyone,

Notice Wood is not crowing about the "settlement". Even if a lawyer can't mention amounts of money when these cases are settled they certainly can discuss the money in a generic sense.

The fact that there is zero fanfare from Lin Wood shows me with an almost 100 percent certainty that zero money changed hands. Or if money did change hands it was a very small amount. I am assuming it was much less than what it would have cost for CBS to go to court.

Did CBS agree not to show the documentary again? If that were the case Wood would have been yelling from the roof of his law firm. Did CBS admit any guilt? No

What did Burke get out of this? ZERO that I can see.

I was hoping CBS would take this all the way to trial but hey, what can you do?

Don't look at this as being a big win for Lin Wood and the Ramseys. It's just the opposite in my opinion.

No admitted guilt,
Was money given to Wood? Don't know but my guess is no.
CBS can show the documentary again as far as I can tell. You would think if Lin Wood could have proven all the lies
he claimed was in the show he would have done his best to take this suit to court.

Notice how Lin Wood NEVER goes all the way to court to defend the Ramseys?
Just Sayin'

Tricia


Tricia Griffith

CBS The Case of: JonBenét Ramsey  enhancing audio and Daubert 08282010
CBS The Case of: JonBenét Ramsey  enhancing audio and Daubert Tricia10

continues to fail to show the most rudimentary understanding of the relevant forensics

and the importance of testing.

'Enhancing' forensic audio can mislead juries in criminal trials

Many criminal trials feature forensic evidence in the form of audio recordings, typically from bugging houses or cars, or intercepting phone calls.

Unfortunately, the audio is often of very poor quality, making it hard for the jury to discern what is said.

Here's a quick example (you might like to jot down what you hear before reading on).

When indistinct audio is admitted as evidence, Australian (and other) courts allow the jury to be given an "enhanced" version to assist their hearing.

You might now be eager to hear the enhanced version of the audio you just listened to. Sorry to disappoint, but that actually was the enhanced version.

naccurate transcripts influence juries' perception of indistinct audio.

What enhancing can and can't do

There are no general techniques that can reliably and objectively make unintelligible audio intelligible. But this does not mean enhancing is ineffectual.

What enhancing can do is make audio sound "clearer", in the sense of "less noisy". Making it "clearer" in the sense of "more intelligible" requires a transcript.

A segment from the 2016 film The Case of: JonBenét Ramsey shows how a transcript and enhancing work together. The film revisits the unsolved 1996 murder of a six-year-old beauty queen in the USA. The audio you listened to is one of several pieces of evidence purporting to show that the child's family was implicated in her murder.

Judging from public reaction, many viewers accept the four phrases were "revealed" by the "enhancing" – but is that really what happened?

A recently published experiment suggests not.

At Step 1 of the experiment, the audio was played "cold" – with no contextual information – to 78 participants. Half listened to the film's original and half to its enhanced version. No one in either group heard anything remotely like any of the phrases. Most didn't even hear human speech (did you?).

So how did the movie persuade so many viewers the enhancing had "revealed" the phrases?

It presented the enhancing with a transcript that "primes" listeners to hear these particular phrases.

This effect is demonstrated by Step 2 of the experiment, where participants were given a transcript. After failing to hear any of the four phrases while listening cold, nearly half now agreed they could hear at least one of them.


https://phys.org/news/2019-04-forensic-audio-juries-criminal-trials.html

the paper alluded to

‘Enhancing’ forensic audio: what if all that really gets enhanced is the credibility of a misleading transcript?
Helen Fraser

ABSTRACT

Many jurisdictions around the world allow an ‘enhanced’ version of indistinct audio to be admitted, along with a transcript, to assist the trier of fact in understanding the content of forensic recordings. Typically, ultimate evaluation of the effect of the ‘enhancing’ relies simply on the jury or other listeners’ impression as to whether the audio sounds ‘clearer’ than the original. A recent article reported results of two experiments showing that listeners’ subjective impressions give a surprisingly unreliable indication of the objective effects of ‘enhancing’. The current article reports a new experiment that adds weight and detail to previous demonstrations that enhancing can make audio ‘sound clearer’ without making it more reliably intelligible. It further demonstrates how ‘enhancing’ can interact with priming to make phrases suggested by a transcript seem more plausible than they do in the original, even when the suggestion is unreliable and misleading. It is recommended that courts should insist on far better regulation of the use of ‘enhanced’ audio.
ref https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00450618.2018.1561948?journalCode=tajf20

this paper conducted by actual research scientists used the Ramsey tape and tested it on volunteers

conclusion, enhancing the audio is unreliable, this is actual example of testing as required by forensic science and Daubert

there's no doubt if CBS went to trial with Burke, contrary to the lies of tricia grffith, CBS would lose badly on forensic science.

their claim the audio tape enhance shows Ramsey lying has been debunked by science. actual real science following actual scientific testing.

so on forumsforjustice and other forums you see threads like listen to the 911 tape, the Ramseys lied, refer them to this paper which debunks such nonsense.

RDI = scientific nonsense.

holdontoyourhat and jameson are right, the forensics and science is with intruder theorists. RDI rely on debunked nonsense.

i once offered SD the redpill, which is actual forensic science and how it leads to intruder theory. he took the blue pill, and uh had certain extracurricular activities that landed him in prison. i'm kinda sad for him cause i just read about Lord Momin and SD and what he did reminds me of Momin.


_________________
If you only knew the POWER of the Daubert side
redpill
redpill

Posts : 3661
Join date : 2012-12-08

Back to top Go down

CBS The Case of: JonBenét Ramsey  enhancing audio and Daubert Empty Re: CBS The Case of: JonBenét Ramsey enhancing audio and Daubert

Post by MurderMysteryReader on Fri Apr 05, 2019 3:38 pm

I never bought into that idiotic theory because you can't hear something that isn't there to begin with. It is too bad others bought into Burke's voice being on the 911 tape.

_________________
Bookworm
MurderMysteryReader
MurderMysteryReader

Posts : 207
Join date : 2015-10-19
Location : My room

Back to top Go down

CBS The Case of: JonBenét Ramsey  enhancing audio and Daubert Empty Re: CBS The Case of: JonBenét Ramsey enhancing audio and Daubert

Post by searchinGirl on Fri Apr 05, 2019 6:23 pm

MurderMysteryReader wrote:I never bought into that idiotic theory because you can't hear something that isn't there to begin with. It is too bad others bought into Burke's voice being on the 911 tape.

I agree with you. And didn’t the Secret Service test the tapes too and determine there is nothing there?

searchinGirl

Posts : 380
Join date : 2018-06-21

Back to top Go down

CBS The Case of: JonBenét Ramsey  enhancing audio and Daubert Empty Re: CBS The Case of: JonBenét Ramsey enhancing audio and Daubert

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum