The Reasons Zimmerman was Found Innocent.

Originally posted on 7/23/2013

...or acquitted if you want to use the technical term.

Before we start tossing around racial insults. Let's look at the very few facts we know. What I know is that yes, Zimmerman was wrong in assuming Treyvon was up to no good, and yes Zimmerman was wrong to follow him, but if he had any intentions of killing Treyvon because he was black or whatever reason, he could have done it earlier. Treyvon had his back turned, Zimmerman could have easily shot him in the back. Zimmerman also had visible wounds confirming what witnesses saw or heard (a struggle) To me that means Zimmerman did not initiate the fight. If you had a gun on you and had intentions to kill, why would you get into a fight with that person? To me it's wasted energy.

According to Rachel Jeantel, she said she heard Treyvon ask Zimmerman what he was doing following him and Zimmerman asked what Treyvon was doing, then the brawl began. We do NOT know who threw the first punch. What is assumed is that Zimmerman approached Treyvon to question him, an act that only police officers or security guards should do, then Treyvon possibly, already being angry with Zimmerman for following him, became defensive. Again that is what is assumed happened. I've seen alot of people say the justice system is a joke. In fairness this was a very tough case for the prosecution. They had very little evidence (if any) to work with and their job was to convince the jury without reasonable doubt that Zimmerman killed Treyvon for the heck of it.

It had more to do with the case then the system.

On a side note: I was watching Rachel Jeantel in court, the female that was on the phone with Treyvon, and if you ask me.....the court needs speakers, a hearing aid or something. Are they deaf? Then some people saying they don't understand? Come on I understood her perfectly and despite what many say on TV it isn't how her culture talks (that in itself is racism), it's slang, almost every young person uses that language. In my opinion she gave a believable testimony, but the constant repeating she had to make, due to deaf ears, slight hesitations, lying about going to his funeral out of guilt and her demeanor changing during cross examination (she became frustrated and impatient) cost her. The defense team did what they had to do, they rattled her. They brought out time stamps of the events of the phone calls and laid it all out pretty well making Rachel seem uncredible. That's what a defense team does, that's why the get paid the big bucks. The prosecution has to prove without a reasonable doubt that Treyvon was murdered (they couldn't prove it) All the defense team has to do is dissect that theory and they did. They don't have to prove anything else. They just have to prove that Zimmerman did not kill anyone in a cold blooded way. The doctors they brought in proved Treyvon was on top of Zimmerman and align that with the laws of Florida, the jury had doubts and if they have doubts they can't vote on murder. We will never know the truth on what happened, even if Treyvon were alive, because as in every altercation the stories are different. What we do know, weather we agree with it or not, by law in the state of Florida George Zimmerman, based on testimony, evidence, experts etc, is innocent. Credit to a good defense team and a very bad case for prosecutor.