So when a person like Zimmerman refuses to take the stand in his own defense

[Generic Other]

47. In this case we have a "law abiding" defendant

a man who has made this the central part of his defense -- his volunteer citizen watch activities. Why would he have any fear of facing the jury and looking them in the eye and pleading his case? He's been assaulted. He was practically a LEO. Trayvon Martin was suspicious and he had the right to follow and accost him. He called 911. He did everything "right."

So the reticence to testify is pertinent to me. It disputes the argument that he is open and honest and forthright and unafraid to face the justice system and defend his actions because he knows he was in the right. If Zimmerman is guilty, the entire justice system is on trial too. He is defending himself, his manhood, the law, and the reputation of his neighborhood watch program. So we are left to conclude Zimmerman is a coward who is hiding behind the very law he claims to serve.

I think in most cases, I can understand not having the defendant testify -- especially when they will hurt their own cases, but when you are clearly defending a legal principle you live your life by, when you have dedicated yourself to being an upstanding citizen under the law, one who can be trusted to follow the letter of the law -- his refusal to testify undermines his whole line of argument in my mind.

But everyone on this thread says I am ignorant and uninformed. So I guess, I will decline jury duty in the future as I am incapable.