Quote Scotia: Trinilisa,,thank,you for your post. Although I may not agree with all your post, I find you at lease,the sound of some reason in all of this.
I am Canadian and served in a jury here many years,ago. In Canada, unlike in the U.S. jury members,are forbidden to discuss a trial they are involved in, either before, during or after said trial. It is against t he law.
However, having said that, in the trial I was involved in,,to be honest we wished we could find both sides,guilty because,there were problems on both sides, so as such, we had no option but to find the defendant not guilty.
This is just my opinion, and experience with a case in Canada. I know our laws are different from the U.S. laws, I am just sharing my experience.
I did not watch this case on TV, so I don't feel I am justified in giving a guilty/not guilty opinion, I am just relaying my experiences! Because I didn't watch this trial, I haven't posted on this topic,,but I just felt I had to add some thoughts.,
In,adding this post, I hope I haven't offended anyone, it isn't my intention. I am totally non committal, hopefully!
With different backgrounds and life experiences behind each of us there will always be peeps who agree and disagree, are offended, not offended, on EVERY topic, so don't sweat it.
I don’t see neither person here as faultless. A situation that should have been handled with verbal communication from both sides, escalated in physical violence. While, TM is not here to verify the fact, GZ and Rachel Jeantel both agree on one thing, TM threw the first punch. It is a grey area as to why. (he could have felt he was in danger and wanted to get the first blow in; we don't know). But it started the physical confrontation which ensued and caused GZ to pull out his gun and shoot TM, out of fear for his life. (per his account)
2nd degree murder is a high charge to convict someone of. The unlawful killing, of a human being by another, with malice aforethough.
Malice aforethought is the key here, I just don't see how any jury could say "beyond a reasonable doubt" that GZ's had the conscious intent to cause death or great bodily harm to TM when he approached him.
Definition of reasonable doubt: It is the state of the case, which, after the entire comparison and consideration of all the evidence, leaves the minds of jurors in that condition that they cannot say they feel an abiding conviction, to a moral certainty, of the truth of the charge
I don't know for certain but I think Zimmerman might have been have been convicted of a lessor charge, if the prosecutors had used one.