CNN airs hit piece with witness who says it was too dark to see anything

  CNN questioner on Anderson 360, who has a soft light cast on her face and is wearing square fashionable glasses, introduces the segment with the fact that we don't really know any facts yet in the Trayvon/Zimmerman case and, thus, they were going to do another story adding more non-facts to their non-story.
  We see the shadow of a "woman," (we think), voice obscured, face unseen. She has an attorney, we find out later, to represent her. Doesn't everyone?
  Her anonymous testimony is being aired for the second time today on CNN, exclusively. (These statements/questions are not in order or inclusive and not necessarily verbatim. Did the best I could.)
  During the non-story segment, the anonymous witness says, "I THINK I heard 2 people arguing."
  CNN questioner. "Could you tell if the voice you heard screaming for help was someone in his late teens or mid twenties?"
  Answer: "I don't really know. I just kinda think it was the younger man."
  CNN: "Did you hear any racial slurs?" 
  Answer: "I dunno.....I told them there was two men on the ground...... Something really horrible was going on."
  CNN: Of the two men, who would you say was on top during the fight?
  Answer: "It was very dark. I couldn't say. I would have to say it was the larger man on the top.....I think it was the larger man."
  Questioner: "The larger man....the larger man...the larger man..."
  Answer: "I did not see [enough} to be able to testify."
Questioner: "Were police interested in hearing your account?"
  Answer: "The police weren't interested in my taking them to the location where I saw the two fighting."
 CNN: "In retrospect, are you surprised police were not interested in seeing where you saw them fighting?"
  Answer: "I can't answer that...."
  CNN: "Was there a hard surface anywhere you saw the fight taking place?"
  Answer: "The fight never took place on a hard surface. Only grass. I would say they were four feet away from the sidewalk."
  Then the anonymous witness announced THERE WAS A COMMUNITY MEETING in their neighborhood where the police came to talk to everyone about the killing.
  Isn't that new information?
  Community meetings are where people talk together, form and harden opinions and agree on matters.
  Why would CNN broadcast this non-story, when even the witness admitted it was too dark, she wasn't sure and she isn't willing to go on the record?
  Once again, this is another case of the media hyping racial hatred and stacking the deck against one person and for another.
  The obvious purpose for this interview was to cast doubt on the police's research and to promote the idea that Zimmerman beat Trayvon and then shot him. 
  Does that make sense? Did Trayvon have beating bruises and cuts?
  The "witness" makes it sound like Zimmerman went after Martin, beat him on the grass (having received no blows himself) and then shot him.
  In other words, everything that Zimmerman can possibly do wrong he did, according to what the anonymous witness thinks she saw, although it was dark and she couldn't tell.