Zimmerman and Martin injuries: Media Wrong (Again), Blot Right (Again)--Blog 9347 Media 0

The DISHOENST, INCOMPETENT media (see blg article on Anderson Cooper, LIAR on The Liar Network) tired to tell ou that "grainy" police video showed that Geor G Zimmerman suffered NO injurinies during the incident that led to Trayvon Martin being killed.


What did this blog tel you? This blog told you that the plice video, NOT made for the purpose of evaluating "injuries", did NOT show that there was NO "blood or bruises". As this blog told you, thss was esssentially IMPOSSIBLE. The BEST sources for whethe rthere were injuries suffered by Zimmerman wre the FIRST RESPONDERS on teh scene, along with anyhone else who PERSONALLY examined Zimmerman right after the event. The police video was taaken after the fact, and simply was INADEQUATE to evaluate "injuries". The most that could be sai, as this blog told you, was that Zimmermn suffered no SERIOUS injuries. But you can have your nowe hit, and our head banged against the ground, without suffering SERIOUS injuries.


Well, now the media--at least CNN--is backing off of their DIHOSNEST attempt to MISREPRESENT how that police vidoe shuld be interpreted. Wolf Blitzer, on CNN tonight, did what this blog said was OBVIOUS: went to the sources of the FIRST people who saw Zimmerman, and confirrmed what HD to be true: taht Zimmerman was initially found to have injuries to the back of his head and nose (even if not found serious enough to sned him to the hospital by ambulance). Further, CNN had an NEHANCCED versioin of portionsns of the video, which apparently showed INJURIES to Zimmerman (which, really, there HAD to be, unless the police were as incompetent as CNN and the rest of the media). See the blog article about Yahoo, The Cutlknine, and "The Daily Caller. The Daily Caler ws evidently proven right, despite the attempt by Yahoo "News" to disparage their report. SHAME ON YAHOO. and ABC.


Now waht are CNN and (probably) the rest of the media ding? They are trying to do one of those "expert" thchnical analyses of teh "SCREAMING" for "help" that is heard on the audio tape. They are trying to say tahta the audio analysis suggests taht Zimmerman was NOT the person screaming . However, again, this is NOT the BEST evidence. First, there is apparently that EYEWITNESS who says that Zimmerman was the one ofn the bottom calling for help.


However, as this blog has said before, what about MARTIN'S INJURIES. The dshonest media seems UNINTERESTED. Yet, there HAD to be an AUTOPSY on Martin. What if Martin has NO injury? Could he then have been the one "SCREAMING" (unless he wre puttin gon an act)? Nope. Not possible, or even significant if Martin had NO bruisesss (beyond the gunshot wound that killed him). Contrary to what the media seems to assume, it is NOT jsut Zimmerman's injuries that are significant. MARTIN'S injuries are just as telling--both for Zimmerman's story and as to whether Martin had any reason to be screaming.


This blog has already told you all of this, while the media has been LYING to you (not to mention incompetent). The next lbog article will be about a DELIBERATE lLIE by NBC.


In the meantime, you shuld realize that media reports are WORTHLESS SPECUALATION. They have an AGENDA< and do NOT HAVE the facts (including the facts as to Martin's injuries, if any, priior to the gnshot).


P.S. No proofrreading or spell checkng (bad eyesight).