Continuation: Discussion of the George Zimmerman case

[Natural Born Skeptic]

I never claimed he did. Simply making a point.

So when you quoted crimresearch and said:

The opinion of a medical expert giving his opinion of the severity of GZ's injuries is absolutely admissible

You were in no way suggesting he had said they weren't? Possible I suppose.

 

[Unabogie]

You know, I don't recall exactly what was in the PA's report. Was he going there to document or to have his nose checked out?

IIRC, it wasn't his idea. He was forced to go by his employer to get medical clearance. The PA said it was "likely broken" and recommended he see an ENT. He declined this recommendation, so the PA's assessment of "likely broken" is the only information we have on the nose.

 

[This is The End]

Of course crimresearch said nothing remotely resembling the post you evidently think he made in order to come up with that response. Or you can show us where he said that medical experts could not give their opinion on the severity of GZ's injuries.

You do realize that not every single post is a counter-argument to the post before it right? Sometimes someone just adds extra information.

 

[KatieG]

[qimg]http://gifsoup.com/webroot/animatedgifs/783811_o.gif[/qimg]

I seem to remember someone mentioning their dislike of games in this thread. Was that you, Natural Born Skeptic (god forbid I just use NBS) or someone else? What does this contribute to the discussion?

 

[Natural Born Skeptic]

What does this contribute to the discussion?

Humor, while aptly communicating my opinion of the statements made and positions held. Feel free to use your own gifs in response to my gif .

 

[johnny karate]

Any honest medical expert will have to admit that a continued assault in that manner would have the expected outcome of death or great bodily injury - which includes loss of conciousness.

Why would an honest medical expert have to admit anything about the specific elements of an assault which have not been factually established?

Because I wasn't aware of any evidence that's been presented that determines Zimmerman was assaulted in the manner in which he described.

Or do you imagine blue arrows are admissable evidence?

Since the state already has a use of force expert on record stating that Zimmerman's injuries were consistent with reasonable fear...

I call shenanigans.

Name the expert.

Cite the credentials which make that person an expert.

Quote the statement that constitutes the expert opinion.

And finally, explain - with citation - how being a use of force expert with no medical training allows one to look at injuries and determine the severity of the attack that caused them.

 

[WildCat]

There are two cuts on the back of GZ's head. One smaller than the other, which COULD come from one major fall, and a second collision after a bounce.

And how common is this? Very.

How comon is this from someone who isn't unconscious?

Frankly, I find it ridiculous that he hit his head at all as the result of falling from the punch, as that's not how one falls from a punch unless they're knocked out cold, and no one claims that. You don't fall flat backwards like that.

But hey, if that's your best theory I guess you have to go with it.

 

[WildCat]

Perhaps you didn't understand my post.

I'm not asking you to prove a negative. I'm asking you, or anyone else who is willing, to prove that these are in fact legitimate injuries, that occurred during the fight, and are not dried blood, or pre-existing injuries.

Asking me to prove that he didn't have the injuries prior to encountering Martin is indeed asking me to prove a negative.

It's not wild speculation, it's legitimate, well educated reasoning.

Without evidence it's nothing but wild speculation. Got any evidence?

Could they have been pre-existing injuries? Yes.

They could have been caused by him getting abducted by space aliens too. Isn't baseless speculation fun!

Could some of the injuries that are marked with blue arrows dried blood? Yes.

Your turn. Prove the assertion that the injuries marked, are in fact injuries.

If they're not injuries they should be evident on Zimmerman to this day. If not, then they have healed and are in fact injuries and not just the way he always looks.

 

[WildCat]

Nope.

Could it be possible? Yep. Do I have evidence of such? Nope.

But, of course, you'll try to put me in that camp that apparently only you see people discussing. I haven't personally seen anything of the sort proposed since the old thread. But, you're welcome to prove me incorrect.

That's not how skepticism works, nor is it how the legal system works. You prove your assertions, if not they just remain unproven assertions.

 

[WildCat]

It's like you didn't even read the posts you quoted.

I read the post, and based on your own words the only possible verdict is "not guilty". I have no idea what you are so confused about.

 

[johnny karate]

That's not how skepticism works, nor is it how the legal system works. You prove your assertions, if not they just remain unproven assertions.

I agree.

Remind me again, what's the evidence Zimmerman had more injuries than indicated in the medical reports?

 

[WildCat]

I agree.

Remind me again, what's the evidence Zimmerman had more injuries than indicated in the medical reports?

You've seen medical reports?

 

[johnny karate]

You've seen medical reports?

Yes, they've been released. A while ago, actually. Did you seriously not know that?

 

[triforcharity]

How comon is this from someone who isn't unconscious?

Common. I have one myself, and I never lost consciousness for even 1 second. I see it all too often.

Frankly, I find it ridiculous that he hit his head at all as the result of falling from the punch, as that's not how one falls from a punch unless they're knocked out cold, and no one claims that. You don't fall flat backwards like that.

But hey, if that's your best theory I guess you have to go with it.

I didn't claim it to be my theory Wild. You are.

I said it could be a possible scenario.

 

[triforcharity]

That's not how skepticism works, nor is it how the legal system works. You prove your assertions, if not they just remain unproven assertions.

I never asserted anything, I said it was possible, and wouldn't be that far fetched. But, anyway, I think this will be the end of my conversations with you.

 

[This is The End]

I read the post, and based on your own words the only possible verdict is "not guilty". I have no idea what you are so confused about.

Well then you clearly didn't read the post you quoted.

 

[sgtbaker]

IIRC, it wasn't his idea. He was forced to go by his employer to get medical clearance. The PA said it was "likely broken" and recommended he see an ENT. He declined this recommendation, so the PA's assessment of "likely broken" is the only information we have on the nose.

So he wasn't going to the PA to document his other wounds?

 

[Unabogie]

So he wasn't going to the PA to document his other wounds?

Apparently, his work made him go (HR) after he told his story the next day. I'm not sure if his exact reason for the visit (to "document his wounds") was stated, but he gave his entire story to the PA (it's recounted in the medical report, including the "head bashing") and still, the PA found the nose as "likely broken", and two small cuts. If there were more wounds, that was the time to notice them.

I'm sure she'll be on the stand (IIRC she's a she).

 

[WildCat]

Yes, they've been released. A while ago, actually. Did you seriously not know that?

I've seen statements by the EMTs, I have not seen any report by Zimmerman's doctor. Got a link?

 

[WildCat]

Common. I have one myself, and I never lost consciousness for even 1 second. I see it all too often.

You fell straight back and hit your head on the ground? No attempt to break your fall?

Note I'm not talking about falling back and hitting your head on a table, or a wall, or some other above-ground protuberance. The claim is he fell straight back and hit his head on the sidewalk.

I didn't claim it to be my theory Wild. You are.

I said it could be a possible scenario.

Oh, a no-claimer. Where else do we see those?