General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Any police officer who said that GZ had blood on him, a broken nose, or marks on the back of his [View all]TorchTheWitch
(11,065 posts)He could have had a bloody nose that wasn't all that bloody. It happens. Big fucking deal. His defenders can say whatever the hell they want. It isn't going to change the facts. Whether or not Zimmerman had some minor injuries ISN'T RELEVANT - how he got them and under what circumstances IS. Claiming he had none at all based on a grainy video after he had been attended to at the scene is just unbelievably stupid because you CAN'T tell and it doesn't matter ANYWAY. People are going to look mighty stupid when it turns out that he did have a bloody nose and a laceration on the back of his head when they already look stupid claiming from nothing but a grainy video after he'd been medically attended to that he had no injuries whatsoever especially when the video DOES reveal SOMETHING on the back of Zimmerman's head that can't be identified from the video as an injury or dirt or what, but it is there. At least I'm honest enough to admit and say publically that I DO see something on the back of Zimmerman's head in that video but have no idea what the hell it is and that in no way whatsoever makes me a Zimmerman defender - it makes me an honest Martin defender that isn't willing to engage in overblown embellishment to further an agenda because that's exactly what I am and have been from the beginning of this horror.
Nothing at all about this case needs to be overblown and it SHOULDN'T be. The bare facts that we know of are bad enough all by themselves without having to make shit up. Not to mention that making shit up just makes Martin's defenders at least here look not so pristine and agenda driven. That's the last thing that Trayvon's memory and his family needs. Stick to the facts - they are PLENTY bad enough - embelishing and making ludicrous unfounded claims to support the defense of Trayvon is just as bad as the defenders of Zimmerman making ludicrous and unfounded claims. Neither is either necessary nor appropriate.