Wow! It sounds like the JUDGE, not the jury, may have freed Zimmerman.

[onenote]

147. I don't think it was the prosecution's entire case.

In fact, I don't think the prosecution made any effort to establish that Zimmerman engaged in behavior that met the legal standard of being the initial aggressor (i.e. actually used force against Trayvon first or actually threatened Trayvon with the use of force).

The fact is that if the instruction sought by the prosecution had been included and Zimmerman was convicted, the case probably would end up having to be retried. Florida courts have often reversed decisions where an instruction is erroneously included.

On the other hand, not including it was harmless error. This is because the burden was on the state to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Zimmerman did not act out of a reasonable belief that he faced imminent death or great bodily harm. Assuming that the reason the jury acquitted was that they concluded that the state had failed to meet its burden, they also would have had to reject the application of the exception since it doesn't apply unless the state proves, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Zimmerman did not act out of a reasonable belief that he faced imminent death or great bodily harm.

I'm not saying that this has to make sense to people. Just explaining the law.