I've just heard CNN play the tape over and over as a journalist and an audio tech try to determine what Zimmerman is muttering.

They agreed it *could* be "fucking coons." The journalist said he wouldn't be able to swear to it, and the tech seemed to agree. So CNN has not been able to confirm what Zimmerman said.

Point One. If a sound expert and a careful listener can't tell what's being said while standing right next to the speakers as the sound is being "cleaned" and enhanced, you're not going be able to tell by listening to the sound of a raw tape (or even the enhanced tape) played through your radio or TV set.

Point Two. I certainly couldn't tell what the words were through my speakers. I'm not even sure he said "fucking," though he may have. CNN, however, was pretty sure that he did.

Point Three. It might help to know what Zimmerman ordinarily sounds like. Being familiar with his accent (and, yes, everybody has one) is necessary. Was he drunk? Was he high? That could influence the sound of his words - not to mention the precise charges to be brought.

Point Four. I've spent many hours transcribing poor-quality tapes. You'd be amazed at how deceptive they can be. What sounds (sort of) clear as day one minute can sound like gibberish the next. And vice versa. Try the threads on James M. Carpenter's sea shanty recordings and you'll see just how inconsistent transcriptions can be.

Point Four: On a bad recording, unless you've had training you will often hear the words you expect to hear.

Point Five. CNN has extremely sophisticated equipment. Maybe somebody has something better. The only people qualified to determine for sure what was said would be a combination of audio experts and specialists in articulatory phonetics, In other words, experts. And a jury may have to decide whose experts are more likely to be right.

I wouldn't advise convicting someone on the basis of a barely audible recording. (Which has nothing to do with the bigger question of whether Zimmerman caused a wrongful death.)