Exactly. Either they completely bought his claim of self defense, or the prosecution simply didn't prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt. Until one of the jurors speaks out, we can only guess. Personally, I would speculate that it was the latter, because there wasn't any solid evidence to prove one way or the other who was the aggressor. There was only testimony from unreliable sources, and yes I'm including Zimmerman himself as one of those, because his story changed more than once, and it would not be unreasonable to wonder whether or not he was telling the truth.




Reply With Quote