if there are riots and will not be the white community, I am sure.

in my humble opinion the judge should be tossed. She's thoroughly bias toward the prosecution. This alone would be grounds for an appeal.

The army prosecutor who taught Zimmerman in a 2010 college class on criminal litigation, testified that he covered Florida's self-defense and "Stand Your Ground" laws in his 2010 course. Army Captain Alexis Carter said Zimmerman "was probably one of the better students in the class," calling him an "A" student. In other words, Zimmerman was well versed in Stand Your Ground and was lying when he said we was not familiar with SYG.

I am not a fan of guns, but I don't hate George Zimmerman.

Just sayin'.

State rested so you have heard their side, now let's see what the Defense has to offer. It's a long way from ending.

IF Zimmerman is convicted of murder or manslaughter, his legal team (if there is any money left) will certainly appeal. However, I believe appeals do take a long time to come up (a few years at least) and in the meantime, the convicted person is in prison. A person never is free on bond until their appeal is heard.

Remember, the O'Mara team is not doing this case pro bono. When there is no more money available, there is no more legal dream team.

(Remembering Albuquerque - there was a large and wonderful restaurant called Sadie's. Is it still there?)

I don't hate him, either. I just think that he made too many assumptions that night, took matters into his own hands, and it cost a kid his life when he was not in the commission of any crime.

Zimmerman's duty was to call in and report...period. When Zimmerman told the dispatcher that he lost sight of him, then he should have just left it up to the police from there and gone on to Target. The dispatcher had already told him the police were on the way. The dispatcher testified that he could not order him to do/not do anything and that 'not to follow' was advice. By that same token, Zimmerman was not obligated to try to keep Martin in sight because the dispatcher asked him what Martin was doing then. When he told the dispatcher which direction he last saw him going, that should have been the end of it. Let the police take it from there.

This is just the way I interpret what I have seen to date and I have been watching everyday.

I really wouldn't call these guys "Dream Team", I'd call them good solid local attorneys.

I think you are exactly right.

Patty55's statement of "I really wouldn't call these guys "Dream Team", I'd call them good solid local attorneys" was absolutely correct. I should not have been so flippant in my comment. Thanks for the input.

I agree. I don't hate him either, but neither do I trust him. At this point, without having seen all the evidence, I'm not convinced he's told the truth. Perhaps additional evidence will convince me otherwise. Even if he mostly told the truth, I agree he should have just left it up to the police to take over. I do think he was acting as a police wannabe and was over zealous.

There is no conclusive testimony that Martin asked Zimmerman why he was following him. This came from the 17 year-old friend who was known to lie about some things and where actual events would indicate that she lied about pertinent details. For example, she also testified that Martin said "get off of me". Yet, eyewitness testimony as well as the physical evidence all points to Martin being the one on top. To me, her testimony was coached and is worthless.

Hopefully, these are the thoughts the women on the jury are mulling over and asking themselves, do we want to give this loose cannon his gun back to go out and hunt down more people, as if they are animals, wondering if it could be their children or grandchildren. And then, after the killing, saying he has no remorse and the shooting was God's will.

If convicted, I hope the judge tells Zimmerman that it's God's will that he spend x number of years in jail. He will be in for some fun when his fellow prisoners find out he was convicted for killing an unarmed teenager.

wow !!!

The law is well known in that term. In fact the words are included in the portion of the law.

"(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony"