Anderson Cooper starts out by giving some of the facts of the case as he knows it. But it's not just what he says that's the problem, it's what he doesn't say. Trayvon was carrying Skittles (a type of candy). How is that relevant? It's not. What Cooper fails to mention that there was no way for Zimmerman to know whether Trayvon was armed or not. That wasn't the point. Trayvon looked suspicious and was not a resident of the area. Zimmerman knew this. So the fact that Zimmerman would wonder why Trayvon was in the neighborhood isn't a mystery. The point is that Cooper is trying to paint a picture here of Trayvon being just a normal innocent teen doing nothing wrong. That may be true but it's not up to Cooper to decide that for us.

Zimmerman is talking to 911 and asking to get an officer "over here." Meanwhile, Trayvon is making his way toward Zimmerman. Some of the 911 dialogue with Zimmerman has been edited but you can't tell from the editing............you need to use ellipseswhen doing that.......

Cooper uses the word "pursued" rather than the more correct "following." Why that choice of words? Because it paints a picture of Zimmerman as an aggressor. Then Cooper plays the 911 tape where the dispatcher asks, "Are you following him?" to which Zimmerman responds, "yes." To pursue someone is to chase after them. To follow someone is quite different. Pursued is hardly the word choice of an unbiased reporter.

Next Cooper offers more facts and then interprets those facts for us with his "apparently......" then he explains to us what apparently happened. Apparently? That's like saying, "Here's my best guess of what might have occurred next."

How does Cooper know that Zimmerman "confronted" Trayvor? Clearly from the 911 tape Trayvon was "coming this way..."

Next we'll look at the interview with the father of Trayvon and show why that interview as laced with bias.