|
What a joke
I am hooked on watching the Zimmerman trial. I have it streaming on
my computer, so it isn't interrupted by TV commercials and am also monitoring the video on the left leaning MSNBC which occasionally breaks for commercials and the viewer misses much of the testimony by witnesses. The State called a doctor who is the chief medical examiner for the area that the Zimmerman event took place. She examined the photos of his head injuries, along with the report of the PA at the medical clinic who treated him. She testified that Zimmerman's injuries were "very minor" (repeating it at every opportunity) and, in her opinion, resulted from one blow to the nose and one, maybe two head bangings on the concrete walkway. This conflicts with Zimmerman's account of the incident. She went out of her way to minimize the injuries and insisted they were the result of minimal blows with not much force. During this lengthy direct examination by the State, MSNBC didn't interrupt a single time for a commercial. Then came the cross examination by the defense. The defense attorney started picking her testimony apart questioning why she was so sure the injuries were from so few blows. She became hostile occasionally and the attorney made good use of her frustration with him. She finally had to admit that it was indeed "possible" that Zimmerman had been hit not just once or twice, but multiple times. She did so with a hostile attitude. MSNBC had at least two lengthy station breaks during this cross examination. The viewers missed a good portion of the cross examination. Could that just be coincidence? So now the court is in a 15 minute break. The MSNBC crew are all excitedly discussing this "conflicting expert testimony" and about how the doc said Zimmerman only got hit a couple of times. You gotta be kidding me. |
What a joke
On Tuesday, 2 July 2013 16:21:15 UTC-3, Eisboch wrote:
I am hooked on watching the Zimmerman trial. I have it streaming on my computer, so it isn't interrupted by TV commercials and am also monitoring the video on the left leaning MSNBC which occasionally breaks for commercials and the viewer misses much of the testimony by witnesses. The State called a doctor who is the chief medical examiner for the area that the Zimmerman event took place. She examined the photos of his head injuries, along with the report of the PA at the medical clinic who treated him. She testified that Zimmerman's injuries were "very minor" (repeating it at every opportunity) and, in her opinion, resulted from one blow to the nose and one, maybe two head bangings on the concrete walkway. This conflicts with Zimmerman's account of the incident. She went out of her way to minimize the injuries and insisted they were the result of minimal blows with not much force. During this lengthy direct examination by the State, MSNBC didn't interrupt a single time for a commercial. Then came the cross examination by the defense. The defense attorney started picking her testimony apart questioning why she was so sure the injuries were from so few blows. She became hostile occasionally and the attorney made good use of her frustration with him. She finally had to admit that it was indeed "possible" that Zimmerman had been hit not just once or twice, but multiple times. She did so with a hostile attitude. MSNBC had at least two lengthy station breaks during this cross examination. The viewers missed a good portion of the cross examination. Could that just be coincidence? So now the court is in a 15 minute break. The MSNBC crew are all excitedly discussing this "conflicting expert testimony" and about how the doc said Zimmerman only got hit a couple of times. You gotta be kidding me. Seems like the whole country is lined up on one side or the other. It's starting to resemble this newsgroup...or at least it will when the verdict is handed in. |
What a joke
"True North" wrote in message ... On Tuesday, 2 July 2013 16:21:15 UTC-3, Eisboch wrote: I am hooked on watching the Zimmerman trial. I have it streaming on my computer, so it isn't interrupted by TV commercials and am also monitoring the video on the left leaning MSNBC which occasionally breaks for commercials and the viewer misses much of the testimony by witnesses. The State called a doctor who is the chief medical examiner for the area that the Zimmerman event took place. She examined the photos of his head injuries, along with the report of the PA at the medical clinic who treated him. She testified that Zimmerman's injuries were "very minor" (repeating it at every opportunity) and, in her opinion, resulted from one blow to the nose and one, maybe two head bangings on the concrete walkway. This conflicts with Zimmerman's account of the incident. She went out of her way to minimize the injuries and insisted they were the result of minimal blows with not much force. During this lengthy direct examination by the State, MSNBC didn't interrupt a single time for a commercial. Then came the cross examination by the defense. The defense attorney started picking her testimony apart questioning why she was so sure the injuries were from so few blows. She became hostile occasionally and the attorney made good use of her frustration with him. She finally had to admit that it was indeed "possible" that Zimmerman had been hit not just once or twice, but multiple times. She did so with a hostile attitude. MSNBC had at least two lengthy station breaks during this cross examination. The viewers missed a good portion of the cross examination. Could that just be coincidence? So now the court is in a 15 minute break. The MSNBC crew are all excitedly discussing this "conflicting expert testimony" and about how the doc said Zimmerman only got hit a couple of times. You gotta be kidding me. Seems like the whole country is lined up on one side or the other. It's starting to resemble this newsgroup...or at least it will when the verdict is handed in. ------------------------------------------ Personally, I haven't "lined up" with either side yet. I am fascinated with the trial. What I am noticing big time is the presumption of guilt by some of the liberal media and their possible attempts to keep information that may conflict with their attitudes away from viewers. I confess, I haven't watched Fox News to see what their slant is, if any. Maybe I'll do that for a while and see if their coverage is equally biased the other way. |
What a joke
|
What a joke
|
What a joke
|
What a joke
"iBoaterer" wrote in message ... This trial has gotten SO political and it's a damned shame. No matter what the outcome, there is going to be a large percentage of people who aren't happy with it. -------------------------------------- Similar but different from the O.J. Simpson trial. That one had external forces applying influence but it wasn't necessarily racial or political. |
What a joke
|
What a joke
Let's just hope that the end result doesn't deteriorate into a Rodney King type situation.
|
What a joke
|
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:16 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com