Prosecution and defense had a say in who sat in the jury box.

If folks claim it was rigged have to believe prosecution was corrupt.

Some folks have little idea how it works and make up fantasy court.

I agree, I don't know those people who think it was rigged

I think simmermnans lies and a juries propensity to believe them, caused a minors death not to receive proper justice

actually, there WASNT enough reasonable doubt for me to have found anything but that an armed adult unnecessarily and unreasonably shot and killed an unarmed minor,,,

That is not how it works. He is innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt... guilty of an intended and malicious act.

I think everyone on both sides agree that an armed adult shot and killed an unarmed minor. That fact was established and agreed upon from both sides.

But that fact was not in question. "Was it self defense" was in question.

Intent was in question. There is no way you could KNOW beyond reasonable doubt what Zimmerman's intent was. If you say you do, then you prove your dishonesty and prejudice as far as I am concerned.

You have your doubts alright. And you have your opinion and everyone knows what that is.

But you don't have proof beyond reasonable doubt. Neither did the jury.

WRONG

manslaughter was the lesser charge

manslaughter is not required to have malicious intent

I believe BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT THAT

A. Zimmerman did cause the death of Treyvon martin

and

B. it was not justifiable

those are the only two elements for a MANSLAUGHTER conviction


by the way , INTENT is not really an element that can ever be PROVEN, because noone lives in another persons heart or mind

You don't have proof and neither did the jury. Manslaughter was not the charge.

There was NO PROOF THAT IT WAS NOT JUSTIFIED.

I dont believe you watched the trial,,

so why state facts you aren't sure of regarding the charges

,, you seem uninformed about the case, I Watched it everyday,,,

manslaughter WAS A lesser included charge,, the jury asked for clarification about its definition, they were denied for not submitting a more 'specific' question about the charge,,

Yes, Manslaughter was a lesser option for them. He was charged with second degree murder.

There was NO PROOF beyond reasonable doubt that it was NOT JUSTIFIED.

P.S. I don't need to have watched the trial to know what all is involved in finding a person guilty.

Proof.

Beyond A REASONABLE DOUBT.

They didn't have it.

not for those six jurors, obviously

though I still believe, their decision not to come back with second degree was well founded, (That is the charge that includes an intent be proven)


but their decision not to come back with manslaughter was

EITHER because

they felt what he did was justifiable

AND/OR

they really didn't understand the elements necessary for a manslaughter convictin


and six different jurors may have not found it to be a justifiable action,,,,,

I guess you can believe what you want.

The trial was rigged and the jurors were racist.

the trial wasn't 'rigged' , the jurors believed the narrative that was easiest for them to believe,,

they were human,,,and american

Good for them!

Human is good. American is good.

So, now you can read the minds of the jurors to "know" what they understand?

do I have to be a mindreader to share an opinion?

Another dead ghetto rat in another thread.
Where are the fairy tale weavers claiming the cops were wrong?

no matter what the verdict, someone was gonna be unhappy. Our justice system works but when it gives a verdict that people don't like, it's suddenly corrupt.

I don't know all the details but whatever happened to:

Innocent until proven guilty?

Has that been thrown out the window?

Plenty of people decided that Zimmerman was guilty of a felony before his trial even started, and now those same people are claiming that the jury got its decision wrong.

...bunch of sore losers and cry babies... <---sore loser <---cry baby