The feds are not going to touch the Zimmerman situation

[dballance]

A jury acquitted because they felt he acted in self defense. That means they felt no hate crime was committed.

The feds are not going to try to make a hate crimes case on top of that.

For the record, I was hoping for at least manslaughter.

[Niceguy1]

1. I agree

I think manslaughter nwould have been appropriate. Some people are calling for the federal death penalty but I think they are just acting on their emotions.

[Igel]

2. That's fairly routine.

I was thinking manslaughter because I figured the jury would at least partly bow to their emotions and find a way to exact some punishment or retribution. That's what a lot of people want, they just call it justice.

The jury didn't go that way. They looked at the evidence, they looked at the law, and they came up with the verdict I suspect I would have.

Then again, I don't have an axe to grind. For a lot of people, it's personal, it's about group justice or historical justice or justice for the dead and not a trial of the living. The people I've spoken to face to face--often they had their desired verdict after hearing a painfully small number of facts. Since then, it's been a search to justify that verdict. You can't assume the conclusion and make the evidence fit the the conclusion, however much you may want it to.

[FarCenter]

3. Jurors can only consider the evidence presented in the court, and nothing else

And there deliberations have to comply with the judge's instructions to them.

It is quite different than group discussions of news stories.

[golfguru]

4. Every Jury is instructed by the judge to not act on emotions

A court of law is not a psychiatrist's office. The court has to go based on law and law alone. If there is a "reasonable" doubt about the charge, then the jury is instructed by judge to acquit. That is what happened.

Zimmerman was NOT FOUND INNOCENT. He was found not guilty. There is a subtle difference in there..