The question was;
I simply asked if Crump and team would be sufficient.
Now I think you are playing another one of your games.
“When you look at that video with your eyes and listen to the 911 tapes we had to sue for, everybody in America now sees that the police report was a fabrication,” said attorney Ben Crump. “George Zimmerman doesn’t exhibit a broken nose. He doesn’t exhibit blood on the back of his head. He doesn’t exhibit his clothes messed up. So America can judge for themselves.”
Simply acknowledging that there is evidence, which he later does, does not qualify as admitting you were wrong.
Especially since he was trying to incite with his language.
Which is where our reading of what was said differs.
Somehow you seem to think it means "maintaining that GZ had no injuries". Which of course Crump doesn't maintain.
Where as I see it as not admitting a previous mistake, which he used to incite. Which Crump hasn't admitted to.
He has not admitted to being wrong.
So take your miles and ... vary them? :mrgreen: