Here's Why a Jury Won't Convict Zimmerman
Prosecution couldn't prove it wasn't self-defense: Dan Abrams
By Evann Gastaldo, Newser Staff
Posted Jul 8, 2013 1:08 PM CDT
George Zimmerman, right, is greeted by defense counsel Don West at the start of his trial in Seminole Circuit Court, in Sanford, Fla., Monday, July 8, 2013.   (AP Photo/Orlando Sentinel, Joe Burbank, Pool)

(Newser) – Before George Zimmerman went to trial for the killing of Trayvon Martin, Dan Abrams tended to believe he would be found guilty of at least manslaughter, if not murder. Now that the prosecution has rested its case, however, Abrams doesn't see how the jury can find him guilty of either. The prosecution needed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman did not shoot in self-defense, out of fear that he himself would be killed or hurt by Trayvon. The prosecution failed in that objective, Abrams writes for ABC News.

Even if the jury is suspicious of Zimmerman's own account, it doesn't matter. Nothing that the prosecution proved (for example, that Zimmerman was an overzealous neighborhood patroller; that his injuries were minor) means he wasn't acting in self-defense when he shot. Even if Zimmerman initiated the confrontation, he still could have been defending himself at the moment the gun went off. And then, of course, there's "the fact that many of the prosecution witnesses seemed to help Zimmerman in one way or another." Click for Abrams' full column.

More From Newser
My Take on This Story
To report an error on this story,
notify our editors.
Here's Why a Jury Won't Convict Zimmerman is...
3%
4%
40%
46%
3%
5%
Show results without voting
You Might Like
Comments
Showing 3 of 219 comments
ossest
Jul 20, 2013 10:02 AM CDT
"Even if Zimmerman INITIATED the confrontation, he still could have been defending himself at the moment the gun went off."---Initiate: cause (a process or action) to begin; to cause or facilitate the beginning of; to set going by taking the first step. Doesn't that still imply that Zimmerman is responsible for the outcome??? Even if all the alleged stories about Trayvon were true at this particular time he was minding his OWN business on his way home; he did NOT initiate the confrontation!
momsense1
Jul 11, 2013 6:13 AM CDT
There never should have been a trial in the first place-----it was to appease the mob that the politicians conducted this farce. The fact that they did it without really giving themselves time to collect and digest the evidence makes it an even bigger farce. If we allow people like the race hustlers Loud-Mouthed Al Sharpton and Jessee the Jerk and the Black Panther storm troopers push the system to a conclusion already pre determined we may as well live in a society governed by the rule of the Lord of the Flies.
Imhotep
Jul 9, 2013 4:48 PM CDT
If he's not guilty of murder he's certainly guilty of eating too much. He's looking more and more like Jabba the Hut each day. Not to worry those that hate him. He'll be dead of a heart attack in another ten years from obesity. Com'on Zimmy slim up, you couldn't chase down Grandma Moses carrying that much blubber.