idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
How in the world are they supposed to EVER convict someone of murder, then, barring the most blatant pieces of evidence?
When there's no evidence of self defense. I think the problem here is that people continue to ignore the most critical part of this. Zimmerman's description of the sequence of events, the physical evidence at the scene, and at least 3 different eye witness reports all were in agreement and supported his claim of self defense
. Zimmerman doesn't get to start just claiming self defense. Self defense has to be the clear determination at the scene (and it was, overwhelming, in this case).
Once that has happened *then* the burden falls on the police and prosecutors to find evidence that the shooting fails to meet the requirements of self defense.
As I keep repeating over and over, the facts of the scene itself at the time the police arrived all pointed to a legitimate case of self defense. When you've got three witnesses all saying that the shooter was on his back with the other guy on top of him punching him just prior to the shot being fired, that puts the whole thing into the self defense category. At that point, you have to show sufficient evidence to change that assessment. So far, no one has. And frankly, none of even the speculative ideas floating around in this thread are sufficient to do so.
If we'd just found Martin dead with Zimmerman standing over him, with no witnesses and none of the physical evidence (No bloody nose, wound in the back of his head, grass stains on his back, etc) then it's quite certain Zimmerman would have been charged with manslaughter. But the evidence at the time is very very powerfully in support of self defense. As I've said before, this is nearly as perfect an example of legitimate use of a concealed weapon in self defense as you can get. If you asked 100 experts on self defense laws to list their top 5 scenarios in which lethal force is justified for self defense, they'd probably all list this exact situation (shooter on his back with an assailant on top of him continuing to beat him, with no sign that anyone was running over to help) as number 1 or 2 on their lists.
It's really that clear. And that's why the police correctly did not press charges.