Zimmerman claimed the injuries the night of the attack without benefit of witness testimony.
I don't know that that's true. It's unlikely he self-diagnosed a broken nose and a need for stitches, only then to refuse to go to the hospital for treatment of either.
Every eyewitness to the altercation asserts that one person was on top of the other. At least one identified Zimmerman as the person on bottom and that he was being beaten. None of the other eyewitnesses that I am aware of dispute that placement.
I don't doubt this part of Zimmerman's story. What I doubt is the part where Martin was repeatedly bashing his head against the concrete. No one else saw that.
Eyewitness to the aftermath report Zimmerman holding his head, looking dazed and pacing.
I'm not sure how that's evidence of anything. He just killed someone. I would imagine that would put anyone in a daze.
A witness to the aftermath photographed the injuries.
Which proved to be less severe then in the narrative we were given.
Zimmerman's photographed and police documented injuries are consistent with the claim that Martin beat Zimmerman's head against the cement.
According to whom?
Though the police did assert inconsistencies with (and in) Zimmerman's claim, when directly confronted about this specific claim, the investigator had no evidence to dispute it - even after months of investigation.
Yes, and this occurred during a bond hearing, not a trial. The investigation is still ongoing.
The prosecution has to explain these injuries.
And the defense will have to explain their lack of severity in the face of Zimmerman's narrative. If it is ultimately determined that Zimmerman did exaggerate his injuries - and therefore fabricated parts of his story - I think the defense will have a tougher time with Zimmerman's credibility than the prosecution will in explaining what injuries he did have.
So you're claiming that any treatment not given by EMTs are medicially unneccessary? The broken nose would not have neccessarily been treated by the responder becuase there's nothing really they could do for it at the scene and it didn't pose any immediate concern. The responder could well have an opinion if the nose was or was not broken, but that's not a definitive diagnosis.
What I'm claiming is that - according to Zimmerman's friend - he didn't even know his nose was broken until the next day. I'm not suggesting the EMTs offer a definitive diagnosis or full-scale treatment on site. I'm suggesting it's damn strange that it didn't come up at all.
I don't even know why we're arguing this point - the evidence will bear itself out in this matter. It's not really subjective or argumentative in nature. Remember in the bond hearing when O'Mara had his little joke on the investigator he asked about a "broken nose" (lay term), picked up the medical report to display to the witness, stopped himself and restated "fractured nose" (medical term)? What do you think that medical report is going to say?
I don't doubt that medical report will say Zimmerman had a broken nose...
the next day. What would be helpful and reliable is a medical report immediately after the incident telling us the same thing.
The idea that Zimmerman presented at the scene to witnesses seconds after the altercation with a bloody nose, had it documented by police along with signs of signifigant head trauma...
Significant head trauma? I don't think so. He had two cuts on his head, and what looked like maybe a scrape.
...hung out with the police the rest of the night, then went home and decided to break his nose to bolster his claims would be an interesting argument to present to a jury.
Stranger things have happened. He's a desperate man facing a serious criminal charge.
That still doesn't explain the head injuries, does it?
No one is saying he didn't receive any injuries at all. It's the severity of the injuries he received and how that impacts the veracity of his story. I doubt the prosecution will deny the fact that an altercation took place. What they will most likely attack is Zimmerman's credibility in his recount of that altercation.
Edit:
What is this obsession with bandages? Clearly, the photo shows injuries that should have been bandaged.
That's an awfully big assumption you made there. And considering that these injuries that supposedly should have been bandaged actually
weren't, it's an assumption that flies in the face of the facts.
The prosecution will have to explain the laceration and contusions on the back of Zimmerman's head. There's no way around that.
All the prosecution has to do is stipulate that an altercation did occur and some injuries might have resulted. What the defense will have to explain is why Zimmerman's story is at odds with the facts.