Jim, you've made it clear from the start that you believe George Zimmerman was innocent/justified, he's a political scapegoat, and he should never have been charged. I will always think that charges were merited, regardless of politics, and that the jury should decide. We are both far from alone in holding those opinions. 'Tis cool.
Now, here are some corrections and disagreements with your last post:
Delays: The delays to trial were requested by the defense, over and over, until Judge Nelson put her foot down. That's not unusual for the defense in any case, but it's a fact in this case as well. It wasn't the prosecution asking for extensions/delays.
Prosecution case/witnesses: If you saw Dr. Bao (a key expert witness for the state) testify and you don't think there's a problem with the prosecution's preparation of its witnesses, we aren't watching the same trial. He was the most extreme of many examples.
The validity of the case: Here's the evidence that the jury has seen/heard in the trial so far, in support of the state's charges, though IMO it's been very sloppily and disjointedly presented.
-A 28 year old man admitted following a boy in his "late teens" (Zimmerman's words) against the clear and repeated instruction of Neighborhood Watch protocols (Neighborhood Watch Liaison and Zimmerman supporter's testimony)
-The 28 year old man chose consciously not to identify himself as NW to the teen (Zimmerman's words)
-The man's description of the beating he took at the hands of the teen (head slammed repeatedly against concrete, dozens of punches to the face) do not match the "insignificant injuries" he actually suffered, as testified by the Chief ME.
Couple those proven facts with the defendant's wrong assumption (proven by his own words) that the teen was one of "those fucking punk assholes who always get away", and the prosecution has a valid case for manslaughter and possibly one for Murder 2. IMO.
Manslaughter is still a very real possibility to me. Murder 2 is a stretch, based on how the state's evidence has been presented at trial so far. Acquittal is also a very real possibility to me. A lot is now riding on the prosecution's ability, in closing arguments, to tie together the testimony of evidence delivered by some ill-prepared witnesses in a disjointed fashion. IMO.
While I believe that charges in this case were merited, that doesn't mean the state can prove its theory beyond reasonable doubt, or that its theory is accurate. That's what the trial is all about.
In any case, I still believe that whatever verdict the jury delivers will be based on how 6 different people, with different viewpoints and personal influences, view/weigh the evidence and testimony, and their interaction in deliberating to reach a consensus/decision. This case is far from cut and dry like a lot of others - no verdict will surprise or rile me.
(Yeah, it's an 'effin novel length post, shoulda seen it pre-edit).
