CNN: Zimmerman's Lawyers Say He Said "Punks;" Audio Expert Backs Him Up

Actually, it's too bad he committed to this, as a report on CNN suggested the word was "cold" (as in "it's f'n' cold out" -- which it was on that night).

Still, you read it here first, thanks to Idea Catchers (with @rdbrewer4 posting it).

But an expert says the word is "punks." (I mean another expert-- our own expert weighed in, and nailed it.)

George Zimmerman told his lawyers that he whispered "punks," not a racial slur, in the moments before he shot Trayvon Martin, his attorneys told CNN on Thursday.

..

Zimmerman attorneys Hal Ulrig and Craig Sonner told CNN their client told them that he said, "F---ing punks."

Forensic audio expert Tom Owen, who analyzed 911 recordings, agreed the garbled word that raised controversy was "punks," not the racial slur some people said they heard

When Owen, chairman emeritus of the American Board of Recorded Evidence, used a computer application to remove cell phone interference, the word became clearer, he said. After discussions with linguists, he said he became convinced that Zimmerman said "punks."

Now, watch CNN dodge a correction, like every other media organization refusing to own up to its mistakes in this case:

CNN also enhanced the sound of the 911 call, and several members of CNN's editorial staff repeatedly reviewed the tape but could reach no consensus on whether Zimmerman used a slur.

They couldn't reach a consensus? That's funny, when I watched it, CNN's reporter and sound "expert" were both pretty damn sure he said "coons."

Now, that's what made it to the TV.

Is CNN now telling us that behind-the-scenes they could reach no "consensus," and yet permitted a defamatory report to run anyway?

Hey CNN -- that's not a good position to stake out for yourselves in a defamation lawsuit. If you ran this report, ginning up the "racial hatred" storyline while behind the scenes you doubted it, that is pretty much "malice" right there.

You are permitted to get away with mistakes if made with the good-faith belief you were right, even if you turn out to be wrong.

If you're saying you actually doubted this report was accurate, but ran it anyway?

That's a problem, CNN.

Maybe you should abandon this claim and just correct the record. Might be cheaper for you.

posted by Ace at 03:51 PM

| Access Comments