When a case is a public/political hot potato, the actions of the officials are usually justified or sold to the public as correct, by involving (part of) the public in the decision.  If a grand jury indicts Zimmerman, the decision has more legitimacy.

Corey's problem was that her orders did not include allowing a possibility of a no bill.  She HAD to bring an indictment, normal procedures and even prosecutorial ethics be damned (it is unethical to bring a case unless you believe you can prove it, beyond a reasonable doubt).

Well, now Corey doesn't have the cushion of a grand jury to justify the decision to charge Zimmerman.  She made that call, personally.  Her butt is on the line.

--

Clearly, from your question, you don't understand the law.  The law is all about proportionality, and it requires certain beliefs on the part of the shooter, those beliefs also evaluated and agreed by "the jury" or somebody other than the shooter.

In simple form, in order to be justified in using deadly force, a person has to reasonably believe that he is at risk of serious injury or death.

Use-of-force in self-defense does require a measure of proportionality. If someone at a bar starts physically pushing me, I'm allowed to use just enough force to make them stop. Generally speaking, I could push them back or maybe use a restaint technique. That really doesn't allow me to put a serious beat-down on the person.

Oh well.

I do thank those who responded to the question.  And, no I don't know much about the law, which is why I asked what I asked. Nor do I claim to be in possession of all the facts of the case.

But clearly, this is not the forum for...much of anything other than advocating for a defense.

Deletedly yours,

I deleted your comment with the non-working link.

Just type your comment, highlight the words you want to go to the link, like MOTION TO UNSEAL INFORMATION LISTED AS CONFIDENTIAL WITHIN A COURT DOCUMENT and click on the link button. A box will come up where you paste the url.

GZ went in the have a Voice Test done to determine if it was him yelling for Help, it was determined there was not enough recorded tape to accurately compare, it seemed to me at the time, that it was GZ's voice which is more high pitched

as I recall Parks or maybe Crump said they would provide a sample of TM's voice, possibly from phone messages

Question? was a sample provided?

from the short clip of the 7-11 video TM answers his phone "hello" in a deep voice, not high like the yelling

Of course he could have a transcripted and linked  video  of the Gov telling Corey to arrest and charge no matter what, and you'd STILL be defending this prosecution.

In fact, that would be a perfect example of actual evidence, as opposed to ..

For the Zimmerman family to allege that the justice system doesn't work, simply because they are unhappy their son was arrested in the first place, is disingenuous and disrespectful to the very system that is currently affording him every available opportunity to defend himself.

There is a certain irony to this.  If the Fulton Martins had not "been unhappy" that Zimmerman was not arrested, I doubt that Sharpton and Jackson would have been brought onboard.  Sharpton called for an increase in civil disobedience if there was not an arrest made.  Crump stated over and over again that they wanted an arrest.

Zimmerman was cuffed and brought to the station for questioning.  He was not allowed to leave at his own discretion.  He was mirandized by Singleton.  Only when there was no evidence in the statements taken by witnesses that night was he allowed to go.  Including W6 who saw part of the altercation before the shot where Martin was in the dominant position of being mounted on Zimmerman. There's that little thing called "Probable Cause."  

Weeks later there was still no real evidence that contradicted his narrative. Gilbreath said as such during the first bond hearing and when questioned admitted that the State had no evidence to prove who threw the first punch.  During another hearing, BDLR admitted that Martin had struck Zimmerman "at some point." Oddly, he never directly said that Zimmerman hit Martin "at some point" because there was no evidence to support it.  If he could have said it he would have said it.

But the political motivations were strong then and still are.  It has always been about the money.  Tourism is HUGE busine$$.  It had taken a beating by the BP spill and was just starting to recover.  There was a lot at stake for the State of Florida.