About Those Audio Forensic Experts…

by Dan Linehan on April 3, 2012

in Editorial

Logo

Two experts in the field of forensic voice identification, Tom Owen and Ed Primeau, were hired by the Orlando Sentinel to review George Zimmerman’s call to police along with the 911 calls right before the shooting.

They both decided the voice screaming for help on the 911 calls was not George Zimmerman, and each expert arrived at that conclusion by independent methods.

Tom Owen is mentioned first in the article. He’s described as a forensic consultant for Owen Forensic Services, LLC.

Let’s take a closer look at the process he used.

After the Sentinel contacted Owen, he used software called Easy Voice Biometrics to compare Zimmerman’s voice to the 911 call screams.

“I took all of the screams and put those together, and cut out everything else,” Owen says.

The software compared that audio to Zimmerman’s voice. It returned a 48 percent match. Owen said to reach a positive match with audio of this quality, he’d expect higher than 90 percent.

“As a result of that, you can say with reasonable scientific certainty that it’s not Zimmerman,” Owen says, stressing that he cannot confirm the voice as Trayvon’s, because he didn’t have a sample of the teen’s voice to compare.

That raises some concerns. Tom Owen apparently compared Zimmerman’s normal speaking voice on a dispatch call, with high-pitched, terrified screaming that was recorded in the background of later 911 calls.

In our world, “that’s the home run,” Owen says.

I was pretty stunned that he could be so sure. After all, the computer program is looking for similarities in the vocal patterns. How many can it possibly find when pattern A is completely normal, laid back speech and pattern B is hysterical screaming?

I wanted to investigate this a bit further and looked into downloading the software Tom Owen used.

But this proved to be extremely difficult, a license for the software costs nearly $5,000.

Easy Voice Biometrics price

That’s a pretty hefty price to pay to test this software out…

After a few more minutes of research, I found out that the Easy Voice Biometrics web domain is actually owned by Tom Owen himself.

Easy Voice Domain

So what Tom Owen is actually doing here, is using his own home-grown software to attempt to determine the similarities in speech markers between two radically different types of voice patterns and claiming that it is accurate “beyond scientific certainty.”

Beyond scientific certainty is a pretty strong statement.

There doesn’t seem to be any disclosure in the Orlando Sentinel article that Tom Owen owns EasyVoiceBiometrics.com, nor any that he was using his own software package to do the analysis.

I’m not sure whether the Orlando Sentinel author realizes it, but that could easily be construed as a conflict of interest, particularly when the software is currently being sold for $5,000 per license. There’s an extremely transparent profit motive for Tom Owen to promote his product in any way that he can, especially at that price.

Since Tom Owen has staked his reputation on this, and has said point-blank that this software is so accurate that he knows “with reasonable scientific certainty” that it’s not Zimmerman on the 911 calls, the software must at least be extremely thoroughly tested, right?

I emailed Mr. Owen to double-check.

Tom Owen email

Doesn’t sound reassuring, does it?

It also says, on Easy Voice Biometric’s own web site, that the software is less than a month old.

This is especially strange, because the Orlando Sentinel article says:

As recently as January, Owen used the same technology to identify accused murderer Sheila Davalloo in a 911 call made almost a decade ago.

How could Owen have been using the same technology in that case when the web site says the software was only released three weeks ago?

It lists a launch date of March 7th, 2012 on the news section of the site:

Easy Voice March 7th

Since Owen referred me to TracerTek.com, I checked out that site as well.

TracerTek.com and EasyVoiceBiometrics.com appear to be using the same web site template, just with different information filled in.

It appears Jeff Klinedinst is involved with both. He is listed as the VP of Marketing on TracerTek and he did the YouTube demo videos for Easy Voice Biometrics.

Here’s a demo video Jeff put together for Easy Voice Biometrics.

The software appears to work fine if someone alters their voice slightly, or if there is light music playing in the background.

But there certainly isn’t anything in the demos about Easy Voice Biometrics offering “reasonable scientific certainty” when someone is screaming in panic on the background of a 911 call.

So where exactly is this “scientific certainty” coming from?

The second expert, Ed Primeau, doesn’t “believe” in Biometric Analysis, but doesn’t say why.

Not all experts rely on biometrics. Ed Primeau, a Michigan-based audio engineer and forensics expert, is not a believer in the technology’s use in courtroom settings.

Ed simply listened to the recordings. Then he decided the noises were Trayvon Martin because of the “tone of the voice” while reading Mother Jones.

“I believe that’s Trayvon Martin in the background, without a doubt,” Primeau says, stressing that the tone of the voice is a giveaway. “That’s a young man screaming.”

Nevermind that there was an eyewitness to the fight who clearly states it was George Zimmerman yelling out for help. Or that Zimmerman is cited in the original police report as saying he was yelling for help. Or that the yells much more accurately portray someone who is screaming during an assault, rather than someone begging for their life at gunpoint.

Both Primeau and Owen report that they are credentialed by the American College Forensic Examiners Institute.

Sadly, it turns out there is an entire suite of these “American Forensic Board” sites, on almost any topic you can think of, which all seem to be ran by the same person, a gentleman named Dr. O’Block who claims to have nearly a dozen degrees himself.

Forensic Blogging?  No?

Once again, most of these sites use the same basic template and only change cursory details, making it difficult to gauge how legitimate the boards are, if at all.

Tom Owen also lists things like this:

Instructor “New York Institute for Forensic Audio” 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998,
1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005,2006, 2007

As prestigious as the “New York Institute for Forensic Audio” sounds, there is no such brick and mortar institute. It is actually a “division” of Owen Investigations, LLC. Tom Owen is basically claiming he was an instructor at his own unaccredited university.

I’m sure we’ll hear more about this in the upcoming weeks, since both of these “experts” have sparked a lot of controversy with their statements and placed their reputations on the line.

See more crime scene maps here..

Post comment as twitter logo facebook logo
Sort: Newest | Oldest
MikadoCat 6 pts

Adding a few bits some google turned up, but I am not 100% this is the same Tom Owen or Owens. Some of it might be worth digging into further, this isn't the first time doing this type of case for Owens. Specifically I am curious about what his connection to the white house was.

 

http://www.aes.org/events/103/w2.html

W-8 Forensic Audio  Saturday, September 27, 2:00 pm  Chairman: Tom Owens, Owl Investigations  Panelists: Anthony Pellicano, Forensic Audio Labs; James Reams, JBR Technology (F.B.I., retired); Mark Schubin, Mark Schubin Associates; Lonnie Smrkovski, Smrkovski & Associates (Michigan State Police, retired)This workshop addresses the issues of the history of forensic audio from the Nixon tapes to the present day. Also included will be a discussion on the history, training, new methodology and equipment, and forensic audio for video tapes. Speakers will include the former head of the F.B.I. Audio Lab, former member of the Michigan State Police Audio Lab, chairman of the WG-12 Forensic Audio Work Group, private investigators, and Live from the Met video and audio experts.

 

He has a B.A. in History, Bellarmine College in Kentucky.

New York Public Library in charge of their Rogers and Hammerstein archive. Written extensively about the banjo and did a coloring book:Tom Owen, Scaling the Fretboard (Chappell Music 1973) Tom Owen, The Chord Coloring Book (Chappell Music 1974) Tom Owen, Tenor Banjo (Chappell Music 1975) Tom Owen, Lead Guitar (Chappell Music 1976) Tom Owen, The Classic Blues Singers (Chappell Music 1977)

 

Tom Owens was a assistant professor of computer forensics at Southern Oregon University, and in 2008 his contract was not renewed despite a good rating with students.

 

http://www.sou.edu/su/siskiyou/display.php?article=224

 

That article states he was able to attend with some students the Economic Crime Institute conference in New York in October of 2006 and 2007, due to personal connections at the White House, which also got them a tour of the west wing.

 

Some basics in the following thread, but I like verification when I see unknown sources. It has a run down I think I've seen before, Owens education is a BA in history, all of the boards he created and made himself chairman emeritus of run out of same weight loss clinic in Mo.

 

http://justoneminute.typepad.com/main/2012/04/this-is-the-expert-witness-the-orlando-sentinel-is-touting.html

RichardMcCarthy 11 pts

So glad to see much of what I've heard/read elsewhere put together here in reference to the Zimmerman case.  Wasn't sure anyone would know about the scandalous "forensic expert" thing tainting so many cases.

RichardMcCarthy 11 pts

Sure hope that the Defense does a better job with the evidence here than the prosecution did with the OJ Simpson case.  

RickyJimenez 323 pts

Even if Zimmerman cooperates, it may not be possible to get a sample from him that can be compared to the 9/11 call and be admissible as evidence.  The problem is that cell phone manufacturers compress the voice signal so much that much information is lost.  See the comments section of this article:

http://legalinsurrection.com/2012/04/audio-expert-in-martin-case-demanded-at-least-six-similar-voice-exemplars-in-prior-case/

 

The best chance is to go back to the condo and cellphone which originally recorded the screams and have Zimmerman go outside and scream Help! and whatever else was on the call.  

RickyJimenez 323 pts

Two very good articles on the voice comparison controversy:

http://dailycaller.com/2012/04/06/voice-forensics-experts-cast-doubt-on-orlando-sentinel-analysis-of-trayvon-martin-911-tape/

http://dailycaller.com/2012/04/06/voice-forensics-experts-cast-doubt-on-orlando-sentinel-analysis-of-trayvon-martin-911-tape/2/

 

From the first article:

Dr. James Wayman, a San Jose State University expert in the field of speech science, told The Daily Caller that he questions the grounds on which Owen based his analysis.

Wayman also said he would be willing to testify against the admissibility of Owen’s findings on the grounds that they don’t meet the criteria required for evidence in federal courts.

...

Reached for comment, Owen told TheDC that he has conducted his own study — “The Owen Study” — of more than 400 different pitches, screams, and voice disguises. The study is unpublished.

...

Wayman fired back in a later email exchange. “There is no accepted standard regarding metrics for voice comparisons,” he insisted, “either if done forensically or using automated comparison software.”

floyd.blevins 5 pts

I had an issue with Mr. Owen as well, but mine was regarding the racist slur Zimmerman made that was interpreted as "punks" instead of "c**ns" by Mr. Owen.

 

I sent him a link to my analysis which I've posted online, and all he had to say was "Sounds ok but a little too slow and the word is 'punks'".

 

In my analysis I used noise removal, equalization, normalization, stretching and compression filters to yield my result. Mr. Owen only used noise removal (and not very much at that). Mr. Owen's result was hardly different from the original, and anyone wanting to thoroughly examine an audio sample will first clean it up then slow it down (especially in analyzing the spoken word, so the enunciation can be made clear).

 

My question is, if he was wrong on the screaming, then was he wrong on the other as well (my analysis seems to prove this). If you'd like to hear the final result of my analysis you can go to http://download.hyperfileshare.com/download.php?code=f786dc44.

 

If you would like to download the sample to redistribute at your leisure (I THINK this will work), visit http://www.hyperfileshare.com/d/f786dc44 or possibly <a href="http://www.hyperfileshare.com/d/f786dc44"><img width="123" border="0" src="http://www.hyperfileshare.com/img/download_btm.gif"></a> if you would like to embed a link in an email or other.

goofey 1892 pts

From:

http://www.talkleft.com/story/2012/4/3/03733/45115

 

Main points for those who don't have time to check it out:

 

On his own website, Primeau cautions that his opinion is not for legal purposes.

 

2009 declassified FBI report on voice biometrics. The report notes investigatory voice biometrics may not be ready for courts --at least federal ones that use Daubert as the standard for admission of expert testimony:

The first agreement was on the meaning of the phrase - “investigatory voice biometrics”. The first word of this phrase, “investigatory”, was taken to encompass the use of speaker recognition technology in criminal and intelligence investigations and analysis.

In US Federal Courts, the admissibility of scientific evidence is determined by the presiding judge, who is guided by Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE) 104 [2] and 702 [3], among others. FRE 702 notes the Daubert Criteria, which states the following factors must be met: the technique has been tested and subjected to peer review and publication; has a known error rate and standards controlling its use; is generally accepted in the scientific community [4].

The Symposium committee members believe that automatic speaker recognition technology has not yet reached the maturity to satisfy the Daubert Criteria...Future research and evaluation are needed to advance speaker recognition technology to satisfy scientific-evidence admissibility requirements for the US Federal Courts.

 

In addition, there is a common consensus about the uncertainty of the error rates of the speaker recognition performance when operating under variations due to the speaker (e.g., stress) and variations not due to the speaker (e.g., channel distortion).

 

RickyJimenez 323 pts

 goofey Thanks for that link.  It is still a mystery why Owen thinks his software can compare speech to screams and conclude they came from different people.  I believe that Zimmerman may be required to supply a screaming exemplar to the court for a real comparison.

goofey 1892 pts

 RickyJimenez 

Well since the tech is not admissible I don't see them asking.

 

Besides don't you think asking him to have his head bashed in again so he is under the same stress that produced the screams  a little harsh. :^)

RickyJimenez 323 pts

 goofey It seems that most court cases, where there has been an audio comparison, admissible evidence is that two samples were from the same person.  I am not sure that there has been a case where evidence that they were different was admitted, The analogy with DNA testing is that they sample the DNA at several places and a single mismatch shows that they are different, but all must match to claim there is a real match between people.  You have to be really sure that the single mismatch is not some artifact of the way the test was done.  Just what has to match or not match between a scream and normal speech is unknown to me.  If a real scientist made a comparison of Zimmerman's studio screams with the tape and was able to show a much greater similarity than those of the screams of a random selection of other males, then that might be pretty strong evidence and could be admitted.  Of course he would have to give a descent scientific explanation of his testing parameters and why they were significant to differentiate screams, something I think is far beyond Owen or Primeau.

mistyofthehollow 5 pts

You write that Owen used the phrase "beyond scientific certainty." Where does he use that specific phrase? I can't find it.

SayItLikeItIs 735 pts

Zimmerman's attorney, Sonner, states what the Martin family has been saying since the beginning.  

 

He states "justice is not being served because all the facts of that night have not been brought out."

 

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2012/04/05/piers-morgan-craig-sonner-hal-uhrig-robert-zimmerman-laywers.cnn

 

Based upon that statement, the Martin family should not be vilified for requesting that the incident be more fully investigated.  

goofey 1892 pts

 SayItLikeItIs 

 



He is referring to the public's knowledge not the authorities knowledge.  

 

They lied with the intent to cause racial divide and civil unrest, all for personal gain.

 

Walks like a duck......

rrrrottenapples 6782 pts

 SayItLikeItIs yeah, its just another person full of conjecture, who saw NOTHING, who is ASSUMING what she heard for voices, this person sounds old because they have a deep voice, this person is young because it was a higher pitch voice. i hate to tell you but i have heard trey rapping, and heard zim's calls to 911, and guess what, zim has a higher pitched voice than trey, and ANYONE, big, small, old, young can scream like  little girl in the right situation, but, that person, saw NOTHING

This comment has been deleted
Den 255 pts

Using data from a Zimmerman call to police BEFORE the assault to compare with the voice on the 911 calls AFTER the assault in which Zimmerman's nose was broken is just a load of crap. The broken nose changes all sounds he might have made.

SayItLikeItIs 735 pts

 Den According to Zimmerman's brother who, during his interview, stated that George was "out of breath, barely conscious" when he shot Trayvon.  How then, was he screaming/yelling as heard on the 911 tape immediately prior to the gunshot if he was "barely conscious."

Terry Mann 1168 pts

 SayItLikeItIs  Den Screaming for almost a minute while trying to fight/wrestle with someone would certainly make you out of breath--particularly if you were a bit out of shape to begin with.

SayItLikeItIs 735 pts

 Terry Mann  Without a doubt.  However, being "barely conscious" would likely render someone unable to scream so robustly that it could be heard inside the surrounding homes and also be audible on the 911 tape.

pbunting 276 pts

Slam your head against concrete for 60 seconds and scream on the top of you lungs.  Tell me how much blood you see and tell me how you feel.

TRama 51 pts

 SayItLikeItIs I think that both Zimmerman's father and brother embellished their stories in order to paint as favorable a picture as possible for George. But they didn't exactly sync their stories. Once says their was a struggle for the gun after Martin saw it, the other makes the implausible claim that Martin saw the gun, but rather than going for it, just said he was gonna kill Zimmerman and "continued to beat him".

RickyJimenez 323 pts

 Den Some things to keep in mind. 

1. Screaming and ordinary speech use different registers of the voice instrument with screaming an octave or two higher.  Try it yourself with your own voice.  If you are a male you might convince yourself that your screams came from a much younger person.

2. Judging from what Primeau says on his website, he has had experience using 20 identical words, recorded under similar conditions, to confirm that two exemplars were the same voice speaking.  That doesn't mean that if he can't be sure of sameness, they must be from different voices; just that they are not the same beyond a reasonable doubt.

3.  There are apparently no accepted standards for determining when two samples come from different voices, especially if one is screaming while the other is speaking.

4.  Owen and Primeau are just shooting off their mouths in claiming that the two samples come from different voices.  There is absolutely no science behind their assertions and they never have testified in court about such a situation.  Neither would get through a Fry hearing to determine if their testimony is admissible.

RickyJimenez 323 pts

Interview of Ed Primeau. http://www.audioforensicexpert.com/2012/04/06/audio-authentication/ed-primeau-audio-interview-on-the-people-speak  After listening one time online to the screams on the audio recording he knew immediately knew that it was a boy who was going through puberty.  He said he wants to join the Martin legal team but hasn't been asked yet.  One of his conclusions is that Zimmerman could have shot Martin in the foot but decided to do it in the chest.  One thing I agreed with was that an exemplar should be made of Zimmerman screaming.  Roseanne Barr called in with some irrelevant comments.  I'll be nice and say nothing more.

RickyJimenez 323 pts

Here is the latest from Ed Primeau's blog.  http://www.audioforensicexpert.com/2012/04/03/audio-authentication/trayvon-martin-follow-up   As you can see, the posters are giving Ed the skepticism he analysis deserves.

This comment has been deleted
SayItLikeItIs 735 pts

 Andybinga And Andy knows because Andy is an expert because Andy read an article.  Love it!

This comment has been deleted
SayItLikeItIs 735 pts

 Andybinga No, they don't, and neither do your's, so there.

 

Ok, I'm an idiotic, silly, stupid, flame throwing, trolling simpleton.  Did I miss anything? Regardless, I'm entitled to my own opinion.  Had you bothered to pay attention to ALL of my posts (discounting the admittedly smart-ass comments here & there) before referring to me as a simpleton, you might actually know what my opinion is, and you might realize my overall opinion is partially in agreement with many who post here in support of Zimmerman.  Despite the name-calling and personal attacks, I'll continue to post without hesitation and as I please.  I fully expect you will do the same.  Now, carry on...

joesname 11 pts

Do they also have information on how well the software works when comparing before and after with a bloody, broken nose?

 

 

rrrrottenapples 6782 pts

 joesname doubtful, it is a very new software, barely months old, and had primarily been used to compare "like" samples, i.e. same tones, same speech types, in other words, using it in anyway to compare those screams to any sample also not a high stress scream is grasping at straws

SayItLikeItIs 735 pts

 joesname Dontcha know, not every broken nose bleeds?  Or so the experts here say....

crackercoastcom 28 pts

 SayItLikeItIs I have a  nasty scar accross the bridge of my Nose from walking into an Iron rail  there was no nose bleed from it at all and only local swelling .  was it broken?  IDK  but it did hurt like hell and if I had told my mother about it and she repeated the story she would have used the words broken .

 

 

Den 255 pts

 joesname  Regardless whether it was bloody, the broken nose changes the shape of the reverberation chamber so all sounds will be different.  Even Z lying on his back will change the sounds compared to what they would be when he is standing. If there is blood, that will change it some more.  You can confirm this by listening to someone with a  stuffy nose compared to no stuffy nose.  While it may be possible to compensate in a computer program for these changes, asssuredly the off-the-shelf software Owens used will not have done this. 

elso10019 11 pts

The Orlando Sentinel responded to my letter saying they were told that that standards on Owen's own website which he said "mirror the standards of the American Board of Recorded Evidence Standards" were not applicable to his "new" software, but did not elaborate further (sounded to me like Owen knew people would wonder about a scream vs a voice).  These standards include items such as " if the recording of the unknown speaker was a bomb threat made to a recorded telephone line then each of the suspects would repeat the threat, word for word, to a recorded telephone line. This will provide the examiner with not only the same speech sounds for comparison but also with valuable information about the way each speech sound completes the transition to the next sound."

trapellar 608 pts

In this television interview with CBS Miami, Trayvon's older brother Jahvaris Fulton says, " I'm not completely positive that's him on the tape."

http://globalgrind.com/news/Jahvaris-Fulton-Trayvon-Martin-Brother-Speaks-Video

Dan Linehan 399 pts moderator

 trapellar   I'm pretty impressed with him, it took a lot of courage to say that.

My latest conversation: George Zimmerman Said "Fucking Cold"

crackercoastcom 28 pts

 trapellar How many last names do these siblings have ?

skeptykal_uv_everthang 1138 pts

http://legalboom.org/

 

please support GZ by going here, and consider donating the expenses of George Zimmerman's legal expenses. Fully legit, and they are trying to be heard and help out.

Terry Mann 1168 pts

 skeptykal_uv_everthang Thanks for posting. I read the accompanying article on that site regarding the case, and they've identified some of the same legal statutes I found. It makes me feel a bit better about my armchair analysis of the legalities. I'll pass the link on to others, too, to see if they want to donate.

skeptykal_uv_everthang 1138 pts

 Terry Mann Thanks, I hope others will as well.

skeptykal_uv_everthang 1138 pts

I don't see Zimmerman's name anywhere on that document. Am I blind?

trapellar 608 pts

 skeptykal_uv_everthang Read the Daily Caller story, where the letter appears. It is his letter. www.dailycaller.com

trapellar 608 pts

This is just ironic: Daily Caller has obtained the letter that George Zimmerman distributed to the black community after the beating of black homeless man Sheldon Ware by the son of a police man.  In this letter Zimmerman talks about coverups, and a corrupt police department. The officers in the Ware case he is criticizing him are the same ones who cleared him in the Martin case. 

 

George Zimmerman's letter: http://www.scribd.com/doc/87840105/Zimmerman-Letter-to-Sanford-Churches

mfccfl 1780 pts

 trapellar 

[I]The officers in the Ware case he is criticizing him are the same ones who cleared him in the Martin case.[/i]

 

Now THAT's integrity...

The cops had absolutely NO reason to cover for GZ or give him any special treatment and had a very good reason to screw him over.

The fact that they didn't is a nod to their integrity.

rrrrottenapples 6782 pts

 mfccfl  trapellar exactly mfccfl, but you know the lib media, they will find a way to sin it somehow, should make everyone a bit sick to their stomache, me, i wish i had a dozen zims keeping an eye on my neighborhood, id sleep like a babe in mommas arms every nite

mfccfl 1780 pts

 rrrrottenapples  trapellar 

I had mentioned this before where I read that TM's mom had stated that the SPD was covering for GZ because he had reported crimes in the past. 

 

I had to laugh at that.  Even not knowing about the Ware incident, I know cops and I know they would never cover for a security grunt.  If anything, they would be harder on him...

rrrrottenapples 6782 pts

 mfccfl  trapellar exactly, they always look down upon the "wannabe" and treat them with less respect than a normal person, im sure they will still try to spin it, or even worse, not even acknowledge it, like it doesnt exist, because as we all know, if it doesnt exist to the lib media, then it is a lie, right? lol

Helen47 424 pts

 trapellar 

Sounds like they must have some respect for Zimmerman.

AriD2385 133 pts

 trapellar Where did this come from?  And it is not signed.  What is the original source?

pdiddly 7 pts

Can these media outlets be sued for inciting violence and fabricating racist implications of a person?  The reason I ask is because the mainstream media has been very lopsided in their reporting of this case.  So much so that NBC even admitted to editing the 911 audiotape implicating Zimmerman as a racist.

 

http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/news/2012/04/04/nbc-news-apologizes-for-editing-george-zimmerman-11-call/

mfccfl 1780 pts

 pdiddly 

I am fairly certain that GZ could likely sue, but he would have to prove malice.

A very high standard to meet.

GZ would have a better chance suing those CongressCritters who slandered him.

And, of course, Jackson and Sharpton.

Speaking of those two weasels, there hasn't been much in the media about them the last day or so.

Is it too much to hope for that they crawled back under the slime encrusted rock that they came from??

Previous post:

Next post: