Dr Valerie Rao's testimony is a sham!

Jacksonville's Med examiner Dr Valerie Rao

So-called experts in the courtroom are nothing but paid drones. We do give those who have extensive experience in their fields, whether its medical or computer systems, so much respect and do take their words as the final. But with the court system where experts and lawyers do battle in favor of either the either the defendant or plaintiff - it boils down to the opinion of experts that serve the purpose of those who signed their "checks".
In this case, Dr. Rao testified that George Zimmerman's injuries were minor and not life threatening and that some lacerations may have been caused by one blow. That is an opinion that would fool dumb jurors to believe that Zimmerman didn't have to kill the assailant.
For that, it is easy to see how such an expert's mere opinions, through looking at photos and testimonies - not eyewitness testimonies, could contaminate the integrity of the case. When defense lawyer asked Dr. Rao if it was her opinion that the injuries "consistent" with one blow or one impact on the concrete, she replied - yes. When pressed further if the injuries, since she only formulated her opinions by observing photos, could be consistent with two or four blows, she replied I can only say that if there were eye-witnesses. Now that is utterly dumb!
My problem with this expert's opinion is that her choice of words, which imply that Zimmerman should not have shot Trayvon Martin since the injuries were so minor, can be misconstrued. When pressed further if the "next blow" would have been deadly, the prosecutor jumped to his feets,objecting as "hearsays" and the Judge quickly, without a second thought, upheld that objection. This is incredible because the expert implies that the injuries, which are the foundation of Zimmerman's case for "self-defense", were not life-threatening therefore implying that Zimmerman acted with excessive force. That begs the question, does the expert knows when Mr Trayvon's would have stopped hitting, or slamming Zimmerman's heard on the concrete. The answer is NO, and Zimmerman never should have waited for the next slamming and the next blows before he could do something.
This case turned out to be a clown show for the prosecutors who were under so much pressure from the African American community, including public protest led by civil rights activists and the radical group - the Black Panthers, to prosecute a man who may have killed save his own life. The parading of inconsistencies from unreliable witnesses should give viewers the conclusion that Zimmerman is not guilty of murder based on Florida's "Stand your ground" law. More experts would only bring shame to the state's case against Zimmerman.