I wonder how legitimate ESPN believes the tape is...

[liljoe]

Based on this interview:

http://www.9wsyr.com/sports/content...-Fine-tape-wasn-t/I0Bn-4AKZU2tyosOS8_57g.cspx

As I read it, I get the sense that ESPN aired the tape only when they learned the police had the tape. And yes, I know they had a voice recognition expert confirm that it was Laurie Fine. That leads be to believe that ESPN may have the sense that the tape is doctored, with a perhaps different phone calls pieced together.

Crazy? Yes. On par with crazy with everything else so far? Yes.

 

[cliftonparksufan]

Based on this interview:

http://www.9wsyr.com/sports/content...-Fine-tape-wasn-t/I0Bn-4AKZU2tyosOS8_57g.cspx

As I read it, I get the sense that ESPN aired the tape only when they learned the police had the tape. And yes, I know they had a voice recognition expert confirm that it was Laurie Fine. That leads be to believe that ESPN may have the sense that the tape is doctored, with a perhaps different phone calls pieced together.

Crazy? Yes. On par with crazy with everything else so far? Yes.

Nothing can be ruled out at this point, however do we really have any reason to believe that Davis is lying and that Laurie Fine didn't know about her husband's activities.

 

[orangenirvana]

It sounds like it could have been doctored.

If you listen to it closely you can hear the background noise change periodically when Laurie speaks.

 

[Col. Bleep]

It sounds like it could have been doctored.

If you listen to it closely you can hear the background noise change periodically when Laurie speaks.

I have no doubt that the tape I heard on ESPN contained unedited excerpts from the phone conversation. Listen to the way they interact and interrupt each other. Listen to the audio tape distortion.
It seems the original recording was made on a cassette.

To have altered the conversation back in 2002 and make it sound this good, someone would have had to go to a top professional expert.
And even then I don't think something like this could be produced.
I don't believe the commonly available digital editing devices were as simple and sophisticated as they are now.

ESPN did the right thing in having the tape analyzed.
But then, why wasn't a soundbite from the audio expert included in their story?
ESPN made a number of missteps in reporting this.
This is another one.
But it doesn't undercut the basics of the story.

Anyone who is still in denial about the underlying story needs to face the unpleasant reality.

 

[BlackKnight76]

I think the phone bill points to this being a legitimate tape.

 

[swish7]

Based on this interview:

http://www.9wsyr.com/sports/content...-Fine-tape-wasn-t/I0Bn-4AKZU2tyosOS8_57g.cspx

As I read it, I get the sense that ESPN aired the tape only when they learned the police had the tape. And yes, I know they had a voice recognition expert confirm that it was Laurie Fine. That leads be to believe that ESPN may have the sense that the tape is doctored, with a perhaps different phone calls pieced together.

Crazy? Yes. On par with crazy with everything else so far? Yes.

IMO, the tape is doctored. Even in the segments aired on ESPN, at one point, Laurie Fine refers to a prior conversation with Davis. "I told Fine we talked.." It was before the "I think he thinks we all think he's above the law piece".

 

[Louie&Bouie]

Nothing in that tape suggests to me that it is doctored. Period.

 

[rrlbees]

I don't know if it is doctored but if it is, I am sure there is technology available today that professionals can use to tell if a recording is spliced.

 

[Moontan]

Hopefully we'll have access to the full content at some point. The Post Standard transcript and ESPN segments contain different parts of the conversation.

Read the transcript. In it, Laurie mentions a concern about her conversations being recorded and that she is careful in what she says.

 

[Millhouse]

this thread reminds me a little of dave chappelle testifying about michael jackson

 

[swish7]

I don't know if it is doctored but if it is, I am sure there is technology available today that professionals can use to tell if a recording is spliced.

agree

 

[CarltonCuse]

I have no doubt that the tape I heard on ESPN contained unedited excerpts from the phone conversation. Listen to the way they interact and interrupt each other. Listen to the audio tape distortion.
It seems the original recording was made on a cassette.

To have altered the conversation back in 2002 and make it sound this good, someone would have had to go to a top professional expert.
And even then I don't think something like this could be produced.
I don't believe the commonly available digital editing devices were as simple and sophisticated as they are now.

I don't have an opinion on the authenticity of the tape or whether editing is involved (as I don't have access to the original tape), but if one wanted to doctor the audio taken from a cassette (I'm guessing) tape it wouldn't be that difficult for an average person.

I've been editing audio since reel-to-reel formats and in the mid-nineties, it became a TON easier with the advent of home user software. Like I said, I dont have the original tape to analyze. I'm not a top professional expert. But I've edited a lot of audio, including phone conversations (for entertainment purposes) sourced from cassettes, mini cassettes, reel to reel, and digital recordings, and if someone wants to do it, its not that hard. It's especially easy if you know what you are trying to accomplish before the recording is made.

 

[TinyManInside]

I'm pretty sure that the tape won't be admissible in court, but the point is that the tape facilitated the justification of the rest of the investigation. It probably aided in obtaining the search warrant, and lends some credibility to new accusers.

 

[CarltonCuse]

Of course, I should add, I'm talking about editing for context, not word-for-word piecemeal editing. That is MUCH more difficult and easily identified, obviously.

 

[kingtidge]

If the tape was doctored, why would JB do a complete 180 on his past statements and wash his hands clean of Bernie?

 

[CarltonCuse]

If the tape was doctored, why would JB do a complete 180 on his past statements and wash his hands clean of Bernie?

Legitimate question. Maybe because the stories are about to get even more scandalous?

 

[JOC44]

this thread reminds me a little of dave chappelle testifying about michael jackson

+1

Any Chappelle's Show reference always makes me laugh. "Robert Blake? Oh, that MFer's guilty!"

 

[CarltonCuse]

+1

Any Chappelle's Show reference always makes me laugh. "Robert Blake? Oh, that MFer's guilty!"

FIF!

 

[All4SU]

Nothing can be ruled out at this point, however do we really have any reason to believe that Davis is lying and that Laurie Fine didn't know about her husband's activities.

Well, we still don't know the time period involved. How old was Davis when Bernie molested him? Laurie Fine she knows "everything." But just because she says she knows, doesn't make it so. She may not know what she doesn't know. We don't know how much of what Davis says is true. We don't know if Lange is telling the truth...on anything. We don't know if Tomaselli is telling the truth on anything. We don't know why Davis didn't reveal the tape to SUPD, or SU or BS&K or The Post Standard.

 

[OrangeTarheel]

I think the phone bill points to this being a legitimate tape.

I agree, it would be masterful to reproduce a tape with little distortion in background noise and flow of conversation for the exact amount of time listed on the phone bill. None of the accusers or Laurie seem anywhere close to "mastermind" status. Come back down to earth, the tape is real and without it we would continue to doubt anything the accusers had to say. Frankly, Davis is the only one who really looks believable at the moment.

 

[orangecuse]

I'm pretty sure that the tape won't be admissible in court, but the point is that the tape facilitated the justification of the rest of the investigation. It probably aided in obtaining the search warrant, and lends some credibility to new accusers.

The tape is 100% unadmissible in the court of law as it was neither done by the authorities nor with Bernie's wife's consent...

 

[baggerbob]

Its not a great surprise but i would imagine down at the big building at Ft Meade, NSA has some expertise in electronic technology. But my feeling now is bernie is guilty.

 

[Jeepers]

I've done some audio editing and didn't hear anything suspicious besides how disjointed and vague the convo is. When they cut each other off, that would take some imagination. An amateur would just splice it as sentence, sentence, sentence.

Now if there was some background noise variations (which my ear isn't very good at hearing), then that sounds like something to look into and should be fairly easy for an expert to discern.

 

[Chip]

Nothing in that tape suggests to me that it is doctored. Period.

You don't have to write "period" if you use a period.

 

[OrlandoCuse]

I don't think it was doctored at all.

That would have to take some masterful planning on Davis's part, to set up multiple conversations with just the right probing questions to illicit responses from Laurie that way.

How do you explain Laurie's answers about the $5,000 money?

How do you explain the "grab him or blow him" response?

How do you explain his "need for male companionship"?

There are countless others on the tape, almost too much information for it to be faked. There's one thing that definitively came out from that tape: Laurie Fine likes to talk and has no problem airing her husband's dirty laundry.

I think what people are hearing are just the normal fluctuations in audio recordings, and the subtle differences after ESPN edited the tape for airing. The audio guy may have "boosted" some segments of the tape that weren't as clear, to make it more presentable for the viewing audience.