Help me understand something about the Trayvon Martin case.

Since things have settled down, I wanted to revisit an old issue:


I'm no legal expert, but it seems to me the Trayvon Martin case - which I find a very confusing case - was essentially, "Blame the law, don't blame the jury," am I right? That is to say, under the parameters of the law, the jury didn't really have much choice but to acquit Zimmerman?


If so, then why did many people get angry at the jury instead of the law? Would convicting Zimmerman have actually been the right choice, under the parameters of the situation? Seems to me the jury had little choice but to acquit.


It's immensely confusing.