What I keep trying to tell people is, all any jury can do is render a decision based on what has been presented in court and in accordance with the law and the instructions; it isn't their job to correct the mistakes of the lawyers, or fill in the gaps in either side's case.

While I think it's marginally interesting what any jury's thoughts were, I think that the ongoing focus on them may be a little misplaced, only because this jury could just as easily have rendered a different verdict, and then what?  Would people still be praising them or using them as proof that justice was served?  Sure - they wouldn't be the same people, but there would be people who felt that was the right decision.

It was what it was - there were any number of things that, had they gone differently - including the actual events of that night - could have changed the outcome of this case, but I suspect that is true in almost every case wending its way through the system.

But I mean the centrist types who get their info from the media.  I have been discussing this on my Facebook page, going into some detail on the evidence.  I'm getting a lot of response from people telling me that they are shocked and had no idea, for example, about what Zimmerman's story even was, much less that it fit the evidence so perfectly.  I think a lot of people genuinely think that this case is about a man who saw a black teenager, said he "felt threatened", and shot him.

Walking aimlessly IN THE RAIN and appearing to be scoping out residences is suspicious.  That is what Zimmerman reported.  Given that it was dark, raining, and Martin was wearing a hoodie, we don't even know that Zimmerman could even guess at Martin's race at that point.

Indeed, later when the dispatcher asked for race Zimmermsn responded with the less certain "looks black" rather than the definite "is black."

Zimmerman profiled based on actions.  There is ZERO evidence that Zimmerman had the slightest clue as to Martin's race at that time.  Just because you really really want to believe otherwise does not make it so.

...project on to the situation his own preconceived notions about the person in question. And the fact is his interpretation of what he saw was completely wrong.

6. She used forensic evidence to infer what happened in the fight. . .

My, oh my, oh my!  Using the "forensic evidence" would be distinguished, I suppose, from "going by the prosecution's opening argument" or, by "believing everything said by Rachel Jeantel or by everything said by Syrdyka who heard 3 shots"?

Here is another misleading, distorted fact implication:

Her certainty that the person calling for help was Zimmerman, despite an FBI voice expert's inability to resolve that question, is somewhat jarring.

However, her certainty comes not from a scientific voice analysis, but from John Good's testimony and the fact that Zimmerman was being injured and beaten and Martin was not . . .

Here is a whopper:
But the "Stand Your Ground" doctrine, as cited by this juror, plainly influenced the verdict.

However, even without SYG, Z had a valid self-defense claim, cause he was not in a position to retreat . . . unless you suppose he was on top . . . or unless you suppose he had his gun out from the start and was never pinned to ground!

Here is what is proper:
In the end, "I had no doubt George feared for his life in the situation he was in at the time." He "had a right to protect himself at that point."

I am not questioning TM's actions as vigorously because no one is dead because of his actions, and while injuries like Zimmerman suffered are unfortunate they do not rise the level of harm brought about from the taking of a human life.

Here's a few:

Man kills with one punch in Vegas casino

Teenager kills cancer surgeon with one punch

In a sworn affidavit, now-reassigned MDSPD Chief Charles Hurley spoke about programs his agency utilized to refrain from ushering black male youth into the criminal justice system.

He then decided not to go in the house and expose Chad to potential danger but wasn't sure what to do next.

Obviously, the obstacle to any positive results is the way our elites want to keep viewing people as victims of something or someone.

I have zero respect for people who are upset that there was a trial to begin with, and who believe that the police should have been allowed to be the judge and jury of Zimmerman's credibility.

It was Corey who acted like judge and jury when she bypassed the grand jury to issued a murder charge (not the SPD who kicked the case over to Seminole County State Attorney Office where a sitting grand jury could have made the determination).

The absence of Zimmerman's blood on Martin's hand was proof of one of two things- either Zimmerman's story was not credible, or the police did not conduct the investigation properly.

Or that the County Medical Examiner's Office was
tardy in arriving at the scene and negligent in preserving and collecting evidence.

In either case that is proof to me that a trial was needed because it shows the either the police were not capable of conducting a fair and competent investigation and therefore should not be trusted to decide the issue;

What additional evidence did Corey's office unearth that the SPD did not already have?

The morality of the actions of George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin has never been a topic here. They are irrelevant to the legal proceedings.

TL has opened my eyes to the problem with our drug laws and the way we arrest and put young men in jail (especially the poor and minorities) at an alarming rate.

However, as Jearalyn has pointed out many, many times that is not a good reason to put GZ in jail.

TM probably attacked GZ.  Was he scared?  Did he feel threatened?  I think so.   IMHO he saw this creepy guy following him, confronted him, a fight ensued and ended with deadly results.  We'll never know.  

However nothing, except wild speculation showed anything close to enough evidence to send GZ to jail.

The actions of the media and all the hoopla before the trial was a media circus that ruined the lives of some public officials and led to the prosecution bringing a case it couldn't win.

That is now obvious and those personally invested in a GZ guilty verdict are not happy about it.

I am not questioning TM's actions as vigorously because no one is dead because of his actions

Quite to the country; here a short list:

The Stand Your Ground (SYG) principle was not in the least implicated in the case, and you all know how that's played out in the media.  It's playing out poorly in politics; while there are 33 states that have it now (California even allows pursuing your attacker if needed (!!!)), it's very unlikely any more will adopt it for quite some time.

We're all taught that shooting the unarmed is the absolute worst case when there are no other confounding factors.  My Virginia concealed carry instructor essentially said that my face would have to look like Zimmerman's if I wanted to avoid a conviction in the courts.  It's also a stark object lesson in how a serious criminal defense will cost middle-low six figures.

Obviously the narrative of a "creepy a** cracker" "white Hispanic" man gunning down an angelic black child in that red Hollister shirt, who was armed only with Skittles and a soft drink he was getting for his brother, has done incalculable damage to the cause.

Since the case boiled down to the principle of simple self-defense if the facts were sufficiently established, a conviction would have created an intolerable precedent with many ugly consequences.  We still may see a conviction in the Federal courts, civil or criminal, and in the State civil courts under a sufficiently biased judge (can an adverse ruling of an immunity determination be appealed?).

and it becomes equally plausible and IMO extremely likely that Trayvon waited for George to end the call with dispatch, the phone timeline proves this, and then administer a beatdown for snitching.

From the time of initial report of suspicious behavior to the time of answering the dispatcher's question about race, Zimmerman had more time to observe and make an estimation of Martin's race.  

At first glance you may see some playing cards on the floor, with time and focus you may see that one is the four of diamonds.  

Doesn't happen. The thought would not even cross a man's mind.  There are alternative, plausible threat assessments.