Jury finds George Zimmerman not guilty

[Morganfleeman]

280. They are not aware who requests the lesser included

Though I agree it is confusing because no one ever argued manslaughter. Not to mention the jury instructions are not entirely clear

http://media.cmgdigital.com/shared/news/documents/2013/07/12/Zimmerman_Final_Jury_Instructions.pdf

As a lawyer myself i could see how any jury would be confused by these instructions but they are standard instructions in Florida for manslaughter. I'm not surprised the jury had questions about manslaughter because it talks about things like negligence, excusable homicide, justifiable homicide etc., and then SEPARATELY it talks about justifiable use of deadly force. It's a lot for a lay person to digest and frankly it's disgraceful that in this day we cant provide juries with better instructions.

That said, the prosecution also bears a burden because they put their eggs into the second degree murder basket. Had this been a manslaughter case from the beginning they would have significantly improved their odds of a conviction. Arguing in the alternative is something lawyers do all the time and its perfectly acceptable legal practice, but it could very well have been seen as a "kitchen sink" charge by the jury and indicative of a weaker case as no one specifically articulated the manslaughter argument. Closing argument was all about ill will, hatred and depravity.