Did the photo being used by the media create a false impression, yes or no?
Perhaps you should read the entire conversation. No aspersions were being cast at the Martins, the poster that was a response to claimed they picked a photo that showed TM as being "well-kempt and good-looking" my inquiry was to determine why they didn't pick a newer one of him that showed him as being "well-kempt and good-looking." I know that when I was 17 my mother had photos of me at 17, and I hated having my photo taken, and we had to do all with film camera, not digital like we have today. I find it strange that they would not have had a more recent image that would have worked just as well. I'm not saying that they did it deliberately to fool people, I'm just curious as to why the older photo was used.
I have no idea how the Martin family takes and maintains their pictures so this is just more speculation. I can say that my mother had way more printed photos of me than I have of my children because most of my kids pictures are digital. It was only about a month ago that I finally bought a cheap photo printer, so until a month ago, the only recent pictures I had on hand were school pictures. The last year my son was in public school, 2010, I lost his school picture envelope. Then he went into a school for children with special needs and they don't have "picture day." The reason I bought a printer was so that I could take a picture of my son, print out an 8x10 and put it up on the wall with my daughters' pictures. Until last month, the most recent printed picture I had of my son was from 2009.
Were the pictures misleading? Absolutely! I remember one of the intial arguments against Zimmerman's claim was that there was no way that skinny little kid could possibly overpower big giant Zimmerman.