Before judgement is handed down upon George Zimmerman, the jury is implored to understand a few things. First and formost is the idea of "reasonable doubt." In other words, the defendant may indeed be a miserable SOB who shot up his church in cold blood (not this case, obviously), but if there is "reasonable doubt" that perhaps it was someone else who actually did the deed, then the defendant must be found "not guilty."
In the George Zimmerman/Trayvon Martin case, there is a great deal of doubt to sift through. Keep in mind yesterday's testimony where Bill Lee, the former Sanford, Florida police Chief, testified that he initially did not bring charges against Zimmerman because he felt they weren't warranted. It was only after pressure by the State and Federal government demanded charges be brought, in order to placate the Al Sharpton's of the world.
Look, in my humble opinion, I am glad I am nit the one deciding the fate of the defendant. However, be I on the jury, I would take those instructions of reasonable doubt very seriously.
The facts as I've read are that Zimmerman watched Martin and, based on recent burglaries, had a reason to monitor Martin. However, Martin did not like being followed and so he confronted Zimmerman and physically beat the snot out of him. The photos that NBC refused to show at first clearly show severe head trauma instigated by Martin landing numerous blows while Zimmerman was on the bottom of the pile. Sometime during this beating, Zimmerman drew his gun - whether he cognitively decided he needed to protect his own life, or feared Zimmerman would take it is a large part of the prosecution's case.
Considering Florida law, you are allowed to draw your weapon (assuming it is legally registered) in matters of self defense. The defense has shown that Zimmerman was, at the time, being beaten viciously by Martin. Keep in mind the testimony of John Good, who was the lone eye witness to the fight. He testified that Martin was on top of Zimmerman "MMA" style (mixed martial arts). This adds proof to the defense' case of self-defense.
So if this case seems to simple as a case of self defense, why is it so heavily driven by the media? After all, there are plenty of black on white crimes that do unoticed - some, like the case in Atlanta where last Tuesday in Atlanta, four young, black gang members beat a white man then threw him into traffic. He was hit and killed by an uncoming car. But that wasn't on Headline News because it does not fit the agenda of the liberal Obama media.
Since his election in 2008, race relations in American have suffered greatly. From the two Black Panthers standing guard, armed with billy clubs at a Philadelphia polling station to the Cambridge (Mass.) police acting "stupidly" (they weren't, although Obama served as judge, jury and executioner), to the giddiness of MSNBC in praise of the demise of white America during their newscasts, it's been almost comical in it's formation.
Again, I'm not calling Zimmerman innocent, or guilty. However, there seems to be such a large amount of reasonable doubt, I don't see how he can convicted - especially convicted of second-degree murder - a charge that needs the addition burden of proof that Zimmerman acted with a "depraved mind." Considering the evidence showing Martin beating the snot out of Zimmerman, that alone seems impossible to prove.
But this isn't going to be the verdict, even if Zimmerman is exonerated. Zimmerman will forever be chased and ostracized and on the run - not for what he's done, but for what the media has done to him. By doctoring audio and referring him as a "white Hispanic", so to stoke the race baiters (NBC) and demanding conviction before the facts (MSNBC, CNN, ABC, CBS and the White House), the media has long ago convicted Zimmerman. After all, it was Obama who stated Trayvon looked like "his son." If Zimmerman is cleared, will Obama take back the conviction? What about the murders of Channon Gail Christian and Hugh Christopher Newsom, Jr.? They were two white University of Tennessee students who were car-jacked, kidnapped, continually raped and mutilated by 4 young black men. Did Obama ever say if they reminded him of what my son would look like?
In 1994, O.J. Simpson was clearly guilty of murder, but due to the sensationalism of the trial, as well as the fear of riots in LA, Simpson beat the rap and was found not guilty. This time it's reversed. Yet race may well determine whether or not Zimmerman goes free. In 2013, will "reasonable doubt" even be considered?