1) Trayvon Martin was on top of Zimmerman

1A) This is corroborated by the fact the bullet hole in his hoodie and the bullet hole in his chest were several inches apart in regards to their height, could only happened if Trayon was on top and leaning over Zimmerman

2) Zimmerman's broken nose and cuts/bruises on the back of his head

2A) It amuses me that people make a huge deal about impact hits for football players, but the news and the prosecutor try to marginalize the possibility of concussions in Zimmerman's case in addition to the injuries he sustained

3) An eyewitness for the PROSECUTION stated quite clearly that Trayvon was the one on top in the conflict

In the end it comes down to what we know about the incident, anything else is circumstantial and/or opinion. Did Zimmerman put himself in that situation by getting out of his vehicle? Yes. However that is why his lawyers did not try to use the Stand Your Ground law and instead only claimed self defense. A situation where you are getting pummeled and bloodied with no guarantee the other guy is going to stop IS a viable use of self defense UNLESS you can prove the person instigated the confrontation, which the prosecution has not done. End of story, defendant acquitted.

Instead, what the prosecution has done is tried to introduce opinion based on public bias spawned by the likes of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton to say Zimmerman was racist and had every intent to attack Trayvon, with no actual proof. Annoyance/anger at "these punks always get away" is an attempt to make people try to figure out what he was thinking and planning, but not only can nobody in that court read Zimmerman's mind, nobody on that jury is a licensed psychologist, so again we get back to opinion and not FACT.

By allowing opinion rather than fact to determine the outcome of a case we prepare our court system for its own downfall. Once opinion has been accepted as a viable reason to pronounce guilt things will only go downhill from there.

In order to prove Zimmerman guilty of murder the prosecution must present evidence that proves it BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT, which they have not done.

In order to prove manslaughter the prosecution must again prove beyond reasonable doubt that what Zimmerman did was NOT in self defense, which they have not done.

I agree that the loss of life is a travesty, and that everyone deserves the chance to prove they are more than just what they appear to be. But remember, our court system is "innocent until proven guilty," not the other way around, regardless of public OPINION.

if he would have done what he was told, that boy would be alive fool!

You act as you portray Zimmerman. You escalated a confrontation and acted in a way that your counterpart was unable to resist or retaliate against.

So fuck you, fuck your double standard, and fuck all of you assholes who refuse to accept that the system might make mistakes.

The judge isn't there to say what is right and what is wrong, the judge is there to sort the evidence and determine who has the better case. The justice system was founded on laws, not ethics.

If the kid would have walked the block to his house - he would be alive... u forget the kid attacked zimmerman. Stupid mothafucka shoulda kept walking, but he wanted to be a tough guy. And he's a lil racist fuck, callin dude a "crazy cracker" - Fuck that kid. I dont think he deserved to die, but i aint mad. You know how many kids die every fuckin day, no one gives a shit, but when the media starts race baiting - this is a big deal... everyone is a fuckin hypocrite.