Trials with strong racial elements like this one and the OJ trial are a kind or Rorschach test: everybody projects his own biases into the event and the actual event gets lost in the shuffle.
Here's the way I see it, for what it's worth: The jury heard the evidence and got to judge the credibility of witnesses including their demeanor, the forensic evidence, and the expert testimony. They were instructed on Florida law by the judge. They reached a unanimous verdict based on that information. No one has suggested the jurors themselves were biased. There's no way that you or I or anybody who wasn't sitting in that jury box can honestly reach a different conclusion. If we do reach a different conclusion, we're letting our pre-existing beliefs substitute for a judgment based on the evidence and the law as those things were presented to the jury.
Racism is a festering sore on the American body politic. But there is no evidence that racism was responsible for this verdict.
Not everyone projects bias into the event you ID10T. In fact the only ones injecting any bias whatsoever are the racists. This was never about race, but was made into race, by those racists who stood to gain from it. Like you. How can anyone make a blanket statement about everyone? We are all not the same and never will be no matter how much you want us to be in your perfect world. This was a trial about self defense or not self defense. The original prosecutors could not even find enough evidence to charge the guy. Then the federal govt stuck its nose in and all those involved including the judge should be disbarred!
Nusiance says, "How can anyone make a blanket statement about everyone? We are all not the same and never will be no matter how much you want us to be in your perfect world." Considering the source does this quote seem as funny to you as it does me.
BTW Nusiance, I hate being a nuisance but what is a "nusiance",
How about taking "Yes" for an answer! LOL! The point of my post was that, so far as I can tell, this was NOT a racist verdict, as so many people are claiming. And your point about self-defense is exactly right. Because of Florida's "stand your ground" law, if Zimmerman felt his life was threatened, as the jury concluded he did, he had the right to use deadly force to defend himself. In nearly all other states, he would have been guilty of using excessive force (manslaughter) but not in Florida. Whether you like the Florida law or you don't, the jury seems to have applied it correctly.