Quote Originally Posted by MrSplitshot View Post
You don't convict for MURDER based on root causes. Murder needs two critical components that so many people forget - MALICE and INTENT. George Zimmerman would have had to get out of that car with the INTENT to go shoot and kill Trevon Martin in a malicious fashion, with no regard for human life.

That wasn't the case.

You could have convicted him for MANSLAUGHTER if the killing was unjustified and unlawful. Obviously, the jury didn't see it that way. There was reasonable doubt, enough for them to uphold the Castle Doctrine and say that Zimmerman had the right to stand his ground, to protect himself from death or severe bodily harm with lethal force.

End of story.
The Castle Doctrine was not brought into play, or there never would have been a trial (if it was accepted, that is). And unless you've read the jurors' minds, there's no way to know if they acquitted him based on self-defense or on reasonable doubt.