Zimmerman Trial? Predictions?

Arlen wrote: Considering that the Community Relations Service (CRS), a unit of the Department of Justice, was deployed to Sanford, Fla., following the death of Trayvon Martin to help organize rallies against George Zimmerman, it is a foregone conclusion that Zimmerman will be found guilty of one charge or the other.

There is no justice under the Obama regime.

Arlen, always looking to blame everything from a jury's verdict to his latest hang nail on Obama.

Facts are facts.

Jury is asking for clarification on instructions for manslaughter. If they are following the judges instructions to begin with the most severe charge, that means 2nd degree murder, the crime "the prosecutors" thought he committed, the crime they charged him with, the crime that he was tried for committing, is a crime he did not commit.

No need for a trial or a jury, Florida should just ask PrintSmith or Arlen who is guilty and who is not.

archer wrote: No need for a trial or a jury, Florida should just ask PrintSmith or Arlen who is guilty and who is not.

Isn't it possible to argue the substance of your differences instead of just leaping to the easy out snark? This is what drives me so crazy around here... a good debate could be started (even littered with snarks if one can't resist). I'm actually interested in this topic and would like to hear both sides.

I admit that I did not watch every minute of the trial.

Based upon what I did watch, and reports I have read, IMO the prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman is guilty of anything.

The prosecution changing the rules at the end of the trial appeared to be a desperation move to me, and makes me think of a witch hunt.

I would like to know others evaluations, and the reasons for same.

Not Guilty....

Still think it shouldn't have gone to trial? Zimmerman will have more peace in his life after being found not guilty than if it had never gone to trial.

Rick wrote:

archer wrote: No need for a trial or a jury, Florida should just ask PrintSmith or Arlen who is guilty and who is not.

Isn't it possible to argue the substance of your differences instead of just leaping to the easy out snark? This is what drives me so crazy around here... a good debate could be started (even littered with snarks if one can't resist). I'm actually interested in this topic and would like to hear both sides.

What I posted was not intended as snark.... It was pure disgust with those who think so little of our judicial system, the very foundation of this nation. They are not judge and jury.... They are entitled to their own opinion but are not the difinitive source of who is guilty and who is not.

It's been a VERY long journey.....the jury worked VERY hard and brought this to it's end.....the
decision was UNexpected from my POV, but, in the end....there was a trial and a jury and 6
citizens came to a decision that Z. was not guilty. Let this family,community,and state START
the process of healing.....JMO