Trump’s Body Language and Delivery Wins in Third Debate Despite Insulting Questions As Rubio and Cruz Impresses

  1. Screen Shot 2015-10-28 at 7.48.47 PM

When Donald Trump was asked the most ugly and disrespectful question by  cnbc’s John Harwood, who publicly called him a narcissist and then further insulted Trump by calling him a cartoon character, Trump appropriately responded that ‘ it was not a nicely stated question.” He then went on to respond in a calm and collected manner. He was also the most real  and genuine in terms of his demeanor and what he said. For instance  he was the only candidate who gave an honest and open answer to  the question regarding his flaw ( that he was too trusting and he doesn’t forgive).

He was the only candidate who answered the question openly and honestly. The others all went into a rehearsed rhetoric  that had nothing to do with addressing their flaw. Instead they used that time to address what they felt was important in their campaign.This turned many people off.

Screen Shot 2015-10-28 at 8.08.15 PM

One of the biggest turnoffs was when Huckabee said he didn’t have any flaws and then went on to say to ask his wife. He did not gain any Presidential points for that. He was also rehearsed and made body language gestures which were contrived. His facial language did not reflect that he was being genuine.

Screen Shot 2015-10-28 at 8.35.14 PM

Carla Fiorino had the worst body language throughout the evening which made her appear annoying. Her cocked head made her seem insecure and her tone was very defensive. When she said that he flaw was that she didn’t smile and then went off topic it was a turn off. The tone of her voice needs a lot of work. A while back  Donald Trump made reference to her looks as he asked how people could look at her for four years. I say, how can anyone listen to that voice for 4 years as it is so annoying and off putting. She loses the message she is trying to send because  of it. Also annoying, are the extraneous movements she makes when she speaks. One could also see a glimpse into her character as she mentions her former boss  as an endorsement and claims he said that in retrospect she did things right. Then when the character  flaw of her boss is brought up, she immediately throws him under the bus and distances herself from him and says that is why they didn’t get along. To me it showed a lack of loyalty as she was willing to turn on a dime if it would make her look good. To many that was a turn off.

Screen Shot 2015-10-28 at 8.21.16 PM

And someone who has an equally annoying vocal tone is Ben Carson. His voice with his monotonous drone that dies off at the end of when he speaks  puts  one to sleep. He too loses his message because of his voice. His voice lacks energy and passion.  His mono-faced expression also lacks enthusiasm and confuses his message.

Screen Shot 2015-10-28 at 8.01.49 PM

While his gestures were a bit contrived at times and his voice  and delivery stilted Marco Rubio came across as very level headed and in control. He came across as a peacemaker who wouldn’t take the bait when he was insulted. This was evident in his retort to Jeb Bush, who came across as weak and whiney. Rubio took the high road which made him sound like a leader. While he was bashed by Bush, Rubio responded in an opposite manner as he said he had respect for Bush. He also said he was not in competition with anyone on the stage and refused to say negative things about them. This gave Rubio points while the bashing and whining Bush lost many points.

Screen Shot 2015-10-28 at 8.37.45 PMWhile his pitch is a bit too high and his voice is whiney Ted Cruz said the best thing of the evening. He was real and genuine and said what was on the mind of many viewers. He called the panel on their ugly questions and what many felt was unprofessional behavior.

” The questions that have been asked so far in this debate illustrate why the American people don’t trust the media,’ Cruz said. He then went on to say,  ‘This is not a cage match. And, you look at the questions — “Donald Trump, are you a comic-book villain?” “Ben Carson, can you do math?” “John Kasich, will you insult two people over here?” “Marco Rubio, why don’t you resign?” “Jeb Bush, why have your numbers fallen?”‘How about talking about the substantive issues the people care about?’

CNBC host John Harwood didn’t like that so he tried to go to another candidate and discuss  another issue, but Cruz wouldn’t let him. He called Harwood on his toxic behavior and asked  ‘You don’t want to hear my answer?’
to which Harwood sharply responded, in a nasty tone ‘You spent your time on something else.’

Cruz clearly got points for this as he showed that he was direct and called it like it is.

So the winners of the evening in terms of their body language, facial language an delivery were Trump, Rubio, and Cruz. The loser of the evening was the nasty CNBC panel who were out to be provocative in an attempt to garner a name for themselves and increase ratings. But unfortunately for them, their attempts backfired.

Trump, Christe Show Genuine Body Language Fiorina’s Voice Annoys While Jeb’s is Monotone During Debates

Screen Shot 2015-09-16 at 7.46.49 PM aScreen Shot 2015-09-16 at 8.12.10 PM

Donald Trump emerged as  winner again in terms of his body language and delivery  as did Chris Christie. Both were genuine and spoke directly to the people. They weren’t rehearsed and they both showed a lot of energy. They got their message across with passion and conviction

  1. Screen Shot 2015-09-16 at 9.08.21 PM

Another candidate who did very well in the debates was Marco Rubio. he was well spoken and articulate and his gestures matched what he was conveying verbally.

Screen Shot 2015-09-16 at 8.40.54 PM

While  Carla Fiorina’s looks may not the issue and Trump did apologize to her in his own way by telling her she looked lovely,  her voice pattern left a lot to be desired. It was creaky,  labored and staccato, monotone  and she often sounded rehearsed, especially when giving a speech about Lady Liberty. Her voice pattern in my view is annoying. There is no doubt that she needs some serious voice coaching if she is to be heard and if she wants to get her message across.

Screen Shot 2015-09-16 at 9.13.55 PM

Also needing vocal help is Jeb Bush. Trump is right in that he lacks energy and enthusiasm when he speaks and sounds very boring and monotone.

Screen Shot 2015-09-16 at 8.57.42 PM

Rand Paul not only sounded monotoned but was monofaced. He looked haggard and angry throughout the debate. His voice pattern also sounded nasal and did not resonate well.

Screen Shot 2015-09-16 at 7.45.40 PM

The same holds true for Dr. Ben Carson. He too is monotone and his tones are lack luster.  He sounds boring. His face is also monotoned in terms of  exhibiting facial animation. Perhaps his best exchange was with Trump when he said that Trump was an OK doctor.

Screen Shot 2015-09-16 at 8.08.26 PM

Scott Walker  often phumphered  and stammered  during the debates which made him seem unsure of himself.

Screen Shot 2015-09-16 at 9.05.20 PM

Ted Cruz’s voice sound high pitched and nasal which is off putting. Instead of talking to the audience or to the moderators like the other candidates did, he looked into the camera. This  seemed contrived, as he shared an obviously rehearsed message.

Screen Shot 2015-09-16 at 8.00.49 PM

Huckabee  also sounded rehearsed and contrived . In addition,  his gestures were rehearsed and mechanical and did not match the content of what he was saying. His looking directly into the camera when she spoke which did not make him appear genuine.

Screen Shot 2015-09-16 at 9.25.40 PM

While Lindsey Graham’s Southern accent may be charming, he often sounds monotone and his gestures do not match what he is saying.  Many of his gestures made no sense in relationship to what he was saying as you can see in the photo above.

With the exception of Trump, Christie and Rubio, the rest of the candidates could use some serious vocal and body language coaching to improve the way they come across during the debates.

Once again this is NOT a political piece. This is merely a blog about the way these candidate’s presented themselves in front of millions of people during the debates.

Dr. Lillian Glass Worked to Feminize Caitlyn Jenner Voice and Body Language


I had the opportunity to work with Caitlyn Jenner to try to help her feminize her voice, speech patterns and body language. Our session was filmed for her reality show I’m Cait. Unfortunately it will not be shown this season. But my management team at Sirena Media received this  very nice email from the show’s producer:

Hi Karin!
Unfortunately, that scene did not make it into the series. We had to make some tough cuts because we filmed for 12 weeks but only ended up with eight 42 minute episodes. We so appreciate Lilian working with Cait and all the help she offered and maybe we can have her back next season.
Best of luck to you both and thank you again!

Andrea Metz
Executive Producer

So there is a possibility I may be on her show next season. Because I am bound by a confidentiality agreement I signed with Bunim Murray, Caitlyn’s production company I can’t go into detail as to what specific work I did with Caitlyn and what we specifically discussed during our time together.

Screen Shot 2015-08-15 at 10.40.07 PM

I will say that she was a lovely and I thoroughly enjoyed working with her and let her know that I am totally there for her.

Screen Shot 2015-08-15 at 9.23.56 PM

I will say that I used the same techniques that I used to teach Dustin Hoffman how to sound like a woman for the film in which he won an Academy Award- Tootsie

We addressed vocal pitch, using more inflection, drawing out vowels so the tones are more flowing, slowing down the speech, using more feminine gestures from sitting, to standing, to head posture, to facial language as well as gesturing,  like gesturing towards the body as opposed to away from the body like I am showing here when I Dustin played the Dorothy Michael’s character.

Screen Shot 2015-08-15 at 9.26.11 PM

While it takes more than the three hour session I had with Caitlyn while we filmed the show, I was able to give Caitlyn a copy of my best selling book He Says She Says Closing the Communication Gap Between the Sexes. The book contains all the information you will ever need to know about how men and  women communicate. It discusses differences in voice, body language, speech, and behavior, what is said and how it is said.

Screen Shot 2015-08-15 at 9.39.12 PM

In fact it has just been released on  Amazon  for kindle

There is also an audio version on my website at

This book can not only be of benefit to the transgender community but can help anyone who wants to have better communication with the opposite sex in business, in their social life, and in their intimate life.

Having worked with many people in the transgender community, perhaps the most difficult aspect of their transition is to sound   like the opposite sex. To sound like a  woman (for those undergoing male to female transition as Caitlyn is doing), or to sound like a man (for those undergoing female to male transition) it takes time and a lot of hard work. It takes the knowledge of knowing exactly what to do and what the differences are for the specific sex one is transitioning to. It also takes a lot of practice and a lot of patience.

Screen Shot 2015-08-15 at 10.46.45 PM

I read in Caitlyn’s blog  several weeks ago that when she watched the video of herself  speaking at the ESPY Awards, she said that she still felt like she had a man’s voice. It is understandable for her to feel that way  as you can’t learn how to sound like a woman and have it become a part of your daily life in just one session. It takes time and a lot of practice.

I was able to assure Caitlyn that what she was feeling was not out of the ordinary and to be patient.  I communicated to her that she not be hard on herself because working on feminizing your voice is a process and cannot be done in only one session as we did for the show.

I  encouraged her to not focus on  what she thought she did wrong, but instead, focus on the many things she did right during her ESPY Speech  such as:

1. flowing out her tones

3. using her inflection ( going up several notes)

4 not having a choppy speech pattern

5. opening her jaw when you spoke

6. not speaking so fast

7. not having a creaky sound at the end of sentences (glottal fry)

8. using many feminine gestures.

9. not attacking her initial sounds when she spoke

I clearly let her know that I was very proud of her. I also reiterated specific things she needed to work on in the future regarding the way she spoke so that she would be more satisfied and not see or hear herself as sounding like a man.

Working with Caitlyn was a very rewarding experience for me as I shared with  Caitlyn’s  my knowledge  of what it takes to sound like her genuine self- a woman.  I found her to be a lovely, elegant, and beautiful  woman who was very eager to incorporate all that we discussed.

She is truly an inspiration not only to the transgender community, but to so many others who are motivated by her  personal  decision to live an authentic and honest life and to be true to herself. At age 65, she decided to live out her dream, which goes to prove that it is never too late in life to do what you really want to do with your life. I have the utmost respect for anyone who is true to themselves, regardless of what anyone else may say.

Hillary Clinton In Desperate Need of Voice and Body Language Makeover As Evidenced In Her Kickoff Campaign Speech

Screen Shot 2015-06-15 at 4.32.35 AM

As I said countless times, I am not political and this is not a political blog. I write about newsmakers and  Presidential Candidate Hillary Clinton certainly falls into that category. As someone who has coached  A List Academy Award Winning actors an actresses, top sports figures, corporate leaders, and politicians I feel very qualified to weigh in on the fact that Hillary Clinton is in desperate need of voice and body language coaching as evidenced in her performance on her Kickoff Campaign Speech on Roosevelt Island.

She has surrounded herself with the top advisors in the world like her campaign manager Leonard Podesta,Robby Mook and Communications Director Jennifer Palmieri .  They no doubt have the best speech writers in the world. They  all have presented her image quite well. They have monitored the content of what she says quite well.

But they have neglected to monitor  how she says it. This is essential in her campaign as no matter how beautifully a speech is crafted if you don;t deliver it well, people  (voters tune out) That is where I come in. I would love to coach  Hillary with her delivery.

Studies show that the way a person speaks is more important than how they look. Research also shows that if a person does not deliver their message well in terms of the tone of their voice, the way they speak, and their body language, they will not be as effective in getting their message across.

Here is what to Hil;ary needs to  do in order for voters to  really hear her message .

1. She needs to stop sound so staccato and choppy in her delivery. It is off putting. Instead she needs to develop a flow to her speech pattern whereby she draws out her vowels and flows the into one another.

2. She needs to stop going down in inflection at the end of her statements.

3. She needs to lose the monotone and provide more inflection so that the meaning and emphasis of what she is trying to say doesn’t get lost. In fact, if I was working with her I would choreograph her speech as I have done with so many to help them speak pubically. I would arrange for her where to go up and where to go down in terms of her inflectiona nd which specific words to emphasize as she speaks. All of this would be written down for her and she could see it as she read her speech on the teleprompter or by hand. She needs to emphasize key words and phrases.

4. She needs to stop for a second or two after delivering crucial information or when making an important  point so that the listener can better process what she has just said.

5. She needs to stop  being so stiff and staccato in her gestures and definitely needs to avoid making this  particular measured

gesture as you see here below with her hands at either side and thumbs pointing upwards. It is like a karate chop movement that is out of place in terms of the content she was discussing- her grandparents.

Screen Shot 2015-06-15 at 4.48.15 AM .

6. She then makes a fist like angry gesture when speaking about her father. It was no congruent with what she was saying. Fist like gestures need to be avoided at all times unless you are speaking about something that really makes you furious like ISIS or acts of terrorism.

Screen Shot 2015-06-15 at 5.01.33 AM

7.Then she speaks of her beloved mother. Even though you could tell that she really loved and adored her mother greatly he tones were too choppy and staccato. he tone didn’t fit the lovely message. And then she does something that is a HIGE non- no when giving a speech- she points. That is a hostile gesture. Never point unless you are upset or angry. This was not the case here so never point for  emphasis as it is off putting and sends a confusing message > here she talks about her mother;s saying that kindness is what got her through yet her gestures say the opposite.
Screen Shot 2015-06-15 at 4.59.56 AM

8. The story about her mother was beautiful. It could have been more impactful with the right delivery. As she told of how poor her mother was while growing up, she need to pause more for effect and  then inflect on  key emotional words. She also spoke a little too fast. She needed to stop so that the audience could better process this very great story which shed a positive light on Hillary.

  1. Screen Shot 2015-06-15 at 5.16.47 AMIn  fact Hillary kept pointing thoughout her speech. She needs to stop this and ONLY point when ther eis something to point about like something that his horrible or where she would be giving a warning about something. But to point throughout the speech is confusing.
  2. She also needed to smile when talking about her beloved mother instead.

Screen Shot 2015-06-15 at 4.56.35 AM

Personally I think her image is great. It is authentic. I love that she has made  monochrome pantsuits her style. She looks good in them and they are practical and professional looking. Maybe that will be the new trend. By the way I also loved it when she wore headbands as the First Lady and hope she brings them back. She is true to her style and I love that.

Screen Shot 2015-06-15 at 3.55.25 AM

I reallyI like that she isn’t plastic surgeried and face lifted or botoxed up  and shows every one of her well earned wrinkles. I like that she isn’t dieting to death and stressing herself out about looking a certain way but instead, eating real meals and  keeping it healthy. Her weight is appropriate and she doesn’t look obese.

  • Screen Shot 2015-06-15 at 5.12.05 AM

I love how she lights up around her daughter Chelsea and how proud she is to be a grandma. I am also impressed that she stuck by Bill and worked it out  between them, even during the most humiliating of  times in her life with all of his philandering. Yes, she stuck by her man and she worked it out andas a result they can both grow o together as a couple and as a family. This provides a great role model to people who just want to throw in the towel and  not work things through.

Screen Shot 2015-06-15 at 5.13.38 AM

Seeing how Bill embraced her and how she leaned her head on his shoulder showed their genuine love and affection towards one another which was moving and uplifting for everyone to see.

Seeing  her in action and as she delivered her speech, to me there doesn’t  seem to be any overt health concerns as rumors would have you believe. Even if there were concerns, it doesn’t matter because she no doubt has the best doctors  in the world at her service should  she need them.

What does matter is her message and how voters perceive her message, if they can;t get past her monotones and her body language is off putting then the message is lost.

I wish I could have just one session with Hillary to coach her  put her on the right path vocally and body language wise as it would complete her image, In the meantime, I hope that her advisors pay close attention to the points n this blog which can help her tremendously as she goes out on the campaign trail.

Did Officer Darren Wilson’s Vocal Tone and Words Inflame Anger and Actions of Michael Brown Causing His Fatal Shooting?

Screen Shot 2014-11-28 at 7.28.00 PM

Before I begin I want to state that I have no agenda here and I am not taking sides. This post has no racial or political undertones. As a body language expert and communication expert, I pose questions which in my view, may give us some insight as to another underlying factor  that has not yet been discussed in the press until this blog post.

We all know that The Grand Jury has spoken after scrutinizing the evidence which lead to Michael Brown being shot and killed by Officer Wilson and Officer Wilson not being charged with murder or manslaughter.

In  reporting my observations about Officer Darren Wilson’s body language and tone of voice and speech content and facial language  during the ABC interview , I found it to be as  disturbing as when I watched Michael Brown’s body language in the surveillance video.

In examining Officer Wilson’s account of the events, he did appear to be telling the truth about what happened as I did not see any outward signals of deception. However, I was particularly struck by Officer Wilson’s  robotic and monotone vocal tone and command  terms  when relaying the exact words he used to Michael Brown. Thus, it  made me question  if Wilson’s tone and words may have possibly been a contributing factor to this disaster.


Screen Shot 2014-11-28 at 7.45.42 PM

As we all saw on the video, Michael Brown robbed a store where he took some cigarillos. Brown then bullied and roughed up the store clerk as we can see in the screen shot above, leaving the clerk with a fearful body language. . While I have all the sympathy in the world for Michael Brown’s mother in losing a son, after her public comment that her son  would never do anything wrong, she needs to carefully examine the video with regard to her son’s entitled and bullying behavior. That said, many  teens have robbed and bullied and have not been shot dead.

No doubt when Michael Brown left the store feeling empowered that he was able to intimidate the clerk just by his size and  get away with taking whatever he wanted. Most likely, as Brown walked in the middle of street,  which was reported, he may have continued that feeling of empowerment and entitlement, especially when Officer Wilson approached him.

Reports say that when Officer Wilson saw him and a friend walking in the middle of the street. Wilson said he told Michael Brown to “get out of the middle of the street”.  But the question here is,  how did Officer Wilson tell Michael Brown to get out of the  middle of the street? What tones did he use and what exact words did Officer Wilson say to Brown?

The reason I bring this up is that even though Darren Wilson was doing his job as he repeatedly said, I wonder if perhaps it may have been Wilson’s tone or  the specific words he used that helped spark the fire that ignited an already entitled and empowered Michael Brown’s anger, which in turn escalated to the event that lead to Brown’s being shot to death.

Research has shown that the tone of a person’s voice and the words they use can either inflame or diffuse a situation. This is one of the things I continuously emphasize in my lectures to Police Departments across the country on body language and communication skills. Sometimes a simple “Please” before a command can change an entire attitude for all parties involved. Oftentimes a “please” doesn’t make the request sound like a threat. Perhaps Brown interpreted the command as a hostile threat and reacted as he did. So often things can escalate and get out of hand due to tones and words.

As a side note, throughout the years,  the Beverly Hills Police Department has been very aware of this very factor. One of the things that has been observed by many who have been stopped by a BHPD officer is that they are conscious of being very respectful and polite when they engage a person. In fact a friend of mine who is a retired Beverly Hills officer shared  with me that being respectful and polite was always drummed into all the officers.

In the Ferguson Police situation,  If Brown did attack Officer Wilson, Brown’s judgment was clearly impaired at that moment as any 17 or 18 year old high school student has to know that attacking a police officer will end badly. For Brown to return and attempt to tackle Officer Wilson, there was clearly something which enraged Brown which may very well have been a vocal and verbal stimulus from Wilson.

Also  as a side thought, why did the officer have to shoot Brown in the head as he charged towards him? Couldn’t Wilson have shot Brown in the legs or in the feet so he would fall down. It seems to me that shooting Brown in the head was excessive and  “overkill” to excuse the pun.

The first thing which struck me about Officer Wilson’s demenor on his ABC interview was his lack of facial animation and his tone of voice where there was a lack of vocal inflection and animation. He appeared detached in terms of emotion and robotic in his tones . This may be in keeping of the type of police officer he is – a “by the book” officer. As he described his actions of the night, this was quite evident. But his facial expression showed no sadness or distress when relaying how Brown died.

Since nothing happens in a vacuum and there is always a cause and affect, after listening to Wilson’s tones I wondered what it was that ultimately caused things to escalate to Michael Brown’s death. What caused this young man to react so angrily to Officer Wilson to led him to engage in a physical attack on the officer and the officer subsequently shooting him to death?

Was it the officer’s tone of voice when he first approached Michael? Did he speak in harsh hostile robotic and angry tones when he told him to get out of the middle of the street where Michael was walking with a friend?  Based on his account it is doubtful that Wilson used terms of politeness or respect  like “Can you please not walk out in the middle of the street?”  BAsed on the other harsh command terms he relayed, it is most likely that he  gave  Michael a harsh command? That may have made a huge difference  in what may have set the tone for what unfortunately followed.

Could all of this have been avoided if the officer would have used different words or different tones with this young man? What would have happened if he engaged Michael Brown and was polite and respectful, at least until his backup unit came by?

When Officer Wilson described the incident on ABC News , Wilson did reveal that he used the command terms “Get back or I’ll shoot you.” This resulted in Brown replying “You’re too much of a pu**y to shoot me.” In essence, an angry Brown was testing Wilson and reacting to what he perceived  as a threat.  But what if Wilson said “ Please get back. I don’t want to have to fire at  you? Would that have made a difference or was the dye already cast? Only Brown and Wilson will ever know the answer to this.

Screen Shot 2014-11-26 at 9.55.26 AM

Another thing which disturbed me the most in the interview was Wilson’s detached vocal coldness, when asked by  ABC interviewer George Stassinopoulos about Wilson’s conscience. When Wilson  said he had a “clear conscience”, it sent off a red flag to me. If someone is shot and killed,  no matter the circumstances, their conscience should not have been  clear in my view.

Many officers have shot in the line of duty, in  fear of their lives,  or to save the lives of others.  For the majority of officers, their conscience is not clear but as a human being it is disturbed for taking a human life. No matter how trained they are, taking a human life does and should have an emotional effect on a person.

Look what has happened to Veterans in so many wars,  who have been trained to kill the enemy. Even though they are doing their job, it still often  affects their conscience, so much so that they get post traumatic stress syndrome, which  has ruined  so many Veteran’s lives. PTSD is an epidemic among Veterans as it has been since World War II where it was referred to as “shell shock.” Vietnam Vets were the first to put a face on this disorder.

Just like Veterans, police officers who have killed someone in the line of duty, can and have easily suffered from PSTD . Oftentimes their consciences are so disturbed that they often undergo extensive psychotherapy to deal with the implications of taking a life . They are  often  counseled right after the incident and many remain in treatment for a long period of time.

In listening to Darren Brown speak, his robotic and detached tones spoke volumes to me . Darren Wilson is not a warm nor engaging  or even a personable type of policeman based on his observed demeanor. I wonder if he had been such a police officer if would Michael Brown still be alive today?

With No Voice Analysis on 911 Tape Allowed Things Look Very Bleak for Zimmerman



Things are not looking good for George Zimmerman in his trial. The fact that there are all women on the jury may stimulate innate feelings of motherhood and protection for those who have kids of their own. Whether they try to be impartial or not, it is “there by the grace of God go I” thinking”  in terms  that they  could have possibly lost their own child in a situation like this.

The fact that Treyvon’s fighting and thug past, poor behavior in school, and alleged drug use,  will not be allowed as evidence to show his  character also does not play well for Zimmerman. Showing the innocent  clean faced non gold- toothed photo of Treyvon in court will surely elicit a sympathetic response from these women like it did with President Obama who once said that if he “had a son he would look like Treyvon.”

Now the final blow to Zimmerman’s case is that the judge has not allowed into evidence the famous 911 tape where there was screaming. I am appalled at this decision because George Zimmerman cannot get a fair trial with this lack of crucial evidence. 

This 911 tape in my view is the deciding evidence. There are  clear ways to tease out who’s voice was on the tape and who was screaming. While they  They can can’t compare a smaple of Treyvon’s scream to the scream on the tape becuase he is dead, they can certainly do it with Zimmerman since he is alive. They can look at pitch and intensity  and voice quality. .  The pitch of the scream can be analyzed both  perceptively and objectively and compared with the 911 tape in question. There should alos be a double blind study done where people are asked to compare the two scream samples of Zimmerman, since he is the one on trial. 

I have used a similiar approach with a defendant who was accused of armed robbery. There was a tape of him saying  to the victim “I’m gonna blow your fxxxing head off.” The victim also described the suspect’s voice as being low in pitch and very clear and resonant with no hint of an accent .  I  then had the attorney go to the jail and record a  voice sample of the defendant saying the same words he allegedly said on the tap., it was completely different. The suspect’s voice was high pitched and he had a very distinct accent and a breathy quality to the voice.

I then did a vocal line up with the victim who could not discern the alleged suspect’s voice. In addition. As it turned out the suspect was not he armed robber who threatened murder.

Forensic voice analysis is key to this case. There are ways to  perceptually and technically dissect the voice pattern and scream from this tape. Both sides need to present their respective experts so that a jury can hear and see the results for themselves and then decide.

In my view, not presenting this evidence should result in a mistrial because the jury needs to make up their own mind as to who’s voice is yelling and who’s voice is screaming  on the crucial tape without the help of experts to guide them.

I believe that justice needs to be served but it cannot be served if we don’t have all of the evidence materials including the 911 tape.

The screams are crucial pieces of evidence because they could determine who the aggressor was in the confrontation before Zimmerman  shot unarmed  Treyvon Martin . While Martin’s family swears it was Treyvon screaming, Zimmerman’s father is certain it was his son. Only a jury can decide this. 

Audio experts from both sides testified at different times during the hearing, which stretched over three weeks. Voice experts were hired by lawyers and news organizations to analyze the calls, which were made during the confrontation between the two. The experts arrived at mixed conclusions.

 In deciding whether to admit the voice-recognition technology used by prosecution audio experts Tom Owen and Alan Reich, the judge had to determine whether it is too novel or whether it has been accepted by the scientific community at-large and found that there is no evidence to establish that their scientific techniques have been tested and found reliable,” the judge said in her ruling.

 Tom Owen was hired by the Orlando Sentinel last year to compare a voice sample of Zimmerman with screams for help captured on 911 calls made by neighbors. He said Zimmerman’s voice doesn’t match the screams.  But in my strong opinion,  Owen’s  work is flawed since he only compared Zimmerman’s voice to the 911 calls  and because he didn’t have a voice sample for Martin at the time. 

Since screaming is the focus of the voice sample, he obviously needed to get a sample of Zimmerman’s scream since he is still alive and since he is the one on trial. The voice sample of the 911 tape is irrelevant without a scream sample to compare with the scream sample on the 911 tape. 

 Owen  says that “The screams don’t match at all,”as he  testified during the hearing. “That’s what tells me the screams aren’t George Zimmerman.” But Own didn’t get a scream sample from Zimmerman and compare the two. What he did  here in my view was compare apples to oranges- speaking voice to a screaming voice. 

Had he testified about what he had done,  the defense could rip holes in his testimony based on the lack of comparing of two scream samples from the same person. 

 The other “expert” Alan Reich testified in a report for prosecutors that the screams on the 911 tapes were from Martin. How would he know they were from Martin if he doesn’t have a scream sample from Martin since Martin is deceased. 

  A  British audio expert  Peter French testified for the defense that it would be extremely difficult to analyze voices by comparing screaming to a normal voice said the right thing and this is even more evidence for why a scream sample is needed from Zimmerman.

 A second audio expert for the defense, George Doddington, also criticized prosecution experts who said Friday that screams and pleas on a 911 recording likely belonged to Martin.

Once again you can’t tell if it is Zimmerman’s scream unless you get a sample of him screaming. While there may be differences due to circumstances and not being able to replicate the scream exactly, you can record Zimmerman’s  scream as he calls into a number that records  the scream and you can record the scream as he attempts to renact what happened that night while he was on the ground with Treyvon, as keep some of the variables consistant. The  pitch level and other aspects of the voice pattern could be teased out. While it is not the best scenario, it is better than anything else that  has emerged thus far in terms of analyzing the scream and not the speech.