I see. So “Diagnosis: nasal bones, closed fracture” doesn’t really mean that the diagnosis was “nasal bones, closed fracture”. Good luck with that argument to the jury.
First of all, it wasn’t a doctor who evaluated Zimmerman. It was a physician assistant.
Second of all, what makes you think all the jury will have to go on is Zimmerman’s medical report? I’m not sure about all the legal aspects of this, but if the state calls the PA to the stand, they will be asked to clarify the report they wrote. They will be asked to explain their diagnosis and what they meant when they said he “likely” had a broken nose. The juror will have more to go by than just some words on a page.
You mention a rational juror. Most rational people would go to the ER if beaten badly enough to fear for their lives, so Zimmerman’s failure to do that automatically puts him out of step with most rational people. Most rational people would not expect to see someone with a broken nose breathing out of their nose hours afterwards, either. When someone claims that they had two black eyes and swelling, a rational juror will also expect to see evidence of this in photos and videos.
So you are smoking the pipe if you think the prosecution has an uphill battle in convincing a rational juror that Zimmerman’s claims are bogus. Let’s hope the jury is rational, though.
What the actual fuck are you talking about? Are you actually blind? Both those photos show him with black eyes and damage to his nose and, in the second one, clear bruising to both sides of his forehead.
So, if you claim Martin didn’t inflict those wounds, and the broken nose he was diagnosed with, where did he get them?
And every word the jury hears is going to make it clear that when the medical report said “Diagnosis: Nasal bones, closed fracture” it meant a broken nose. And if some crackpot on the jury claims that, just because he was diagnosed with a broken nose, that doesn’t mean his nose was broken, the other jurors are going to laugh nervously and sit as far away from her as they can manage.
Agreed. If they are, I suspect you are going to be badly disappointed.
Regards,
Shodan
Good one!
What’s wrong with you? Has the strain of trying to twist reality to put an innocent man in jail finally caused you to crack?
Who you gonna believe? “you with the face” or your own lying eyes?
I don’t care about a picture.
Zimmerman says out of his own mouth that he had no bruises just two days after the fight.
He is on record saying he had no bruises.
I am still waiting for someone to explain how this can be. The only responses I’ve gotten is “Lookit da pictures! It’s obvious he had two black eyes!” and “It’s possible to not have black eyes after a broken nose!” Neither of these responses properly addresses the issue, though.
I posit that it is impossible for him to have two black eyes that magically cleared up in two days. Either Zimmerman did something “creative” to his eyes when he was seen by that PA and he forgot to keep up the ruse later on, or he’s a very dim person who gives unreliable answers to simple questions. If it’s the second, I wonder why Serino, upon hearing Zimmerman’s negative response about bruises, didn’t point out the obvious. You know, just to help the poor guy out.
Anyone have any first-hand experience with black eyes?
Yes. They look like Zimmerman in those pictures, and last between several days and a few weeks, depending on how bad they are. I’ve not had a broken nose, but I’ve seen people who have, and their bruising lasted weeks.
If, as you claim, Zimmerman is lying about not having bruises two days after the attack - as he certainly had them on the day of the attack, and the day after, what relevance do you think it has to anything? There’s no doubt that he was seriously injured* on the day he was attacked by Martin, and I’ve yet to see a credible theory that it wasn’t Martin who injured him.
*Yes, by any standards a broken nose and head trauma is serious injury, before anyone starts to claim otherwise.
If he indeed had black eyes (and I am not convinced that he did), then he is an idiot whose account can’t be trusted. Now, I know there is a difference between not believing an idiot’s account and actually proving he’s wrong (before Bricker scolds me), but people here are accepting Zimmerman’s word like it’s the gospel truth. That’s extremely bothersome to me.
If you are 100% absolutely certain that Zimmerman had two giant brusies on his face, then you should be wondering why the hell he would not tell Serino this when asked about his injuries. And you should also be a tad curious why Serino did not find this omission puzzling. He was harsh with Zimmerman in that audio recording, on multiple occasions. Why wouldn’t he have said, “Stop for a sec. Are you sure you don’t have bruises, buddy? What’s that all over your face?”
And if I were you, I would stop saying that Zimmerman was seriously injured. He had injuries, yes. But serious my ass. Serious injuries necessitate immediate medical treatment, by definition. He didn’t even get an x-ray. No one was even the least bit concerned over the possibility that he had sustained a concussion, including Zimmerman himself.
He wasn’t even seen by a doctor, but a physician’s assistant. And not because he was in pain, but because he needed a note to get out of work. The bandage everyone has talked about? Applied by his girlfried, who is in nursing school. The EMT didn’t even find it necessary to dress those wounds.
Furthermore, it doesn’t matter how injured Zimmerman was. His claim would be no different if he had come out of that situation completely unscathed. He didn’t kill Martin because he thought his head was about to explode. He killed Martin because Martin supposedly verbally threatened his life. So all this talk about serious injuries? It’s 100% irrelevant. A red herring that stinks to high heaven.
But discrepancies in his testimony? Very important.
These are pictures of people with black eyes.
And here is Zimmerman less than 24 hours after supposedly having his nose broken.
I don’t even have to say anything else, and neither will the prosecution.
http://cfnews13.com/content/dam/news/images/2012/06/george-zimmerman-re-enactment-4-0621.jpg
I see black eyes. Your biases seem to be blinding you.
Be honest.
If you did not know that he supposedly had two black eyes, would you think this guy had two black eyes?
In that picture - no. In the picture I linked to - definitely. Broken nose does not in all cases lead to immediate black eyes. Sometimes they show up later.
The medical report that is released documents Zimmerman’s broken nose and black eyes. Unless you claim that Zimmerman did it to himself…
He had a broken nose (Terr has repeatedly linked to the medical report that proves this, even if some people refuse to believe it). That’s a serious injury. Any broken bone is.
You’re claiming that because Martin threatened to kill him, the fact that he was also beating him is irrelevant? As I said to ywtf earlier, what the actual fuck? Why are you people putting arguments directly against your point out there?
If he had reason to fear death, that supersedes the fear of serious injury. If he reasonably feared death, he was entitled to kill Martin. Even if you disbelieve his story here, we have physical evidence that he received serious injury, and witness evidence that he was being attacked by Martin at the time he shot him. It’s not unreasonable to deduce from that that Zimmerman would have been in reasonable fear of serious injury.
Yep. I’ll stick with believing the physical and witness evidence were it contradicts his statement. So, I’ll continue to believe he had a broken nose, two black eyes, and numerous other injuries to his face and head, as shown in the photos and medical reports, and other witness statements.
I will also note that proving Zimmerman unreliable doesn’t prove that any given statement of his is false. As people seem to be once again forgetting, he does not have to prove his innocence, he has to be proven guilty. That will include proving he’s lying about his claim that he was in fear for his life. That alone, though, as I’ve shown, will not suffice to convict him.
TL;DR version - you are wrong, and even were you right, it would be irrelevant.
[QUOTE=Terr]
I see black eyes. Your biases seem to be blinding you.
[/QUOTE]
You only see black eyes because that’s what you want to see. There is no evidence of black eyes in that pic.
Black eyes. It takes a long time for them come. But don’t worry! They don’t last very long either. How convenient!
The poor girl must have just come out of a bad fight.
And poor Benicio! I hope he killed the person who beat him up!
To a blind man, there isn’t.
The medical report to which I linked documents black eyes. Explicitly. It says “black eyes”. You can’t wave it away unless you want to claim that the PA that made the report was lying.
Again - do you accuse the PA that filed the medical report the day after the incident of lying?
Why do you keep linking to pictures of a man with serious facial injuries, including but not limited to two black eyes, in an attempt to claim that that man was not assaulted? If I saw those pictures of Zimmerman, my immediate thought would be that someone’s hit him a few times.
Oddly, he claims, when asked how he was injured, that someone hit him a few times.
Are you going to give an alternative explanation, or just keep pretending the photos don’t show what they clearly show?