I'm not disagreeing, I am just asking whether a broken nose can be 100% diagnosed without xray? Or would it be suspected if no xray?
I'm guessing you don't know either...
As I said I really doubt whether his nose was broken or suspected broken will make much difference. It doesn't take a great deal of force to fracture a bone in the nose(and there is no dispute there was a physical conflict), but as you can see from the Zimmerman police station pics any facial damage is minimal. The camera never lies as they say.
I'm not sure if a broken nose can be "100% diagnosed without xray," but what difference does that make? I've been around sports enough to know what a broken nose looks like. And the doctor said he had a broken nose, so who cares what you or I think anyway?
You're saying Martin used "minimal force" to punch Zimmerman in the nose and break it. What the heck is "minimal force"? It's not like they were slap boxing. lol You can't just tap someone on the nose and break it.
So you are disagreeing with the doctor's diagnosis of a broken nose. And yes, the fact (it is a fact) that he had broken nose and cuts on the back of his head makes a huge difference. It supports his story. So do the pictures. So do several witnesses.
But hey you are free to disagree with his doctor:
"A medical report compiled by the family physician of Trayvon Martin shooter George Zimmerman and obtained exclusively by ABC News found that Zimmerman was diagnosed with a "closed fracture" of his nose, a pair of black eyes, two lacerations to the back of his head and a minor back injury the day after he fatally shot Martin during an alleged altercation."
http://abcnews.go.com/US/george-zimmerman-medical-report-sheds-light-injuries-trayvon/story?id=16353532