Originally Posted by countrygun
As someone whospent a long time on a murder trial jury and also on Grand Jury I think I know what the jury would be looking at if all they had were the facts we, the public, have at this moment.
The very first thing they will ask in deliberations is,
"Is there any actual evidence or any witness that PROVED Zimmerman did anything illegal?"
That simple, not "should he have done "X" "but "were his known actions lawful?"
They are NOT a civil jury, they are not there to decide if Zimmerman getting out of bed that morning led to the death, that doesn't mean squat.
Then the question of whether or not his decisions led to the shooting from an indifference to human life? Did he do something NEGLIGENT? Now whether or not the florida laws under which he was charged cover that or not, I can tell you that guilty or innocent juries want to leave that courtroom knowing, in their hearts, they made the right decision. They will reconstruct the incident until THEY feel they know what happened. If there are blank spots in the prosecutions case, they will only have Zimmerman's word to gon on, so they will evaluate and "profile" if you will, the participants in the event. Here is what they will add up (If they have no more info than we have today)
1. What is Zimmermans history with, Blacks, other minorities, Law enforcement. Are there any patterns?
Zimmerman has a few Black friends, including a friend who is a commentator on CNN. That is why the one judge reclused herself.
2. On that day Zimmerman called the police, not Martin
We will see if he did
3. When the dispatcher told him that they didn't need him to follow he said "OK", Do witnesses or evidence (location of the fight etc) corroberate refiute that he stopped.
Zimmerman did disregarded the dispatchers advise, and got out of his truck to look for Martin, but that is not illegal.
4. When asked for his address, Zimmerman hesitate because he said that he didn't know where Martin was. evidence, witnesses? Zimmerman lost track of where martin was and was apparently in an area of the neighborhood he was unfimilar with with no street signs.
5. Martin had a Cell Phone, why didn't he call the police if he was or felt threatened, if he was a law abiding citizen, isn't that what Zimmerman did when he saw soneone suspicious? Martin's girlfriend stated that he was on the cellphone with Martin, and that he told her that someone was following him, and she told him to run when Zimmerman approached Martin.
6. Is it more believable (absent any evidence) that Zimmerman who knew the police were on their way, would pursue and incite a fight when he was completely within his legal rights an responsibilities at that point, knowing that he had called the police and that they would show up at anytime pursued and caused a confrontation, or is it more believable that the young man who didn't feel threatened enough, or didn't for some reason,want to call the police, decided to physically confront Zimmerman?
That is the grey area that will come out. Did Zimmerman play wannabe cop, and confront, harrass, and assault Martin which led Martin to defend himself, or was Zimmerman wandering around looking for Martin, he found him, and Zimmerman did nothing more then get verbal with Martin, and Martin attack Zimmerman.
When they feel they have the answers, to their satisfaction, to 1-6 it will justify in their minds the final vote on the charges before them.
Again this is based on what WE know and don't at this moment.
edit to add: It will come down to the question "Did Zimmerman start the "fight" or did he do anything to cause us to feel that we couldn't convict Martin of assault if he started the fight?"