Even if the flake thought so, those elements don’t equal to manslaughter. They equal being on neighborhood watch and legally carrying a concealed weapon. Not to manslaughter. The law is clear enough on that.
In manslaughter there has to be an act of intent that inevitably led to the death, whether or not the perp realized it would ultimately lead there but is clearly reckless in nature and led ultimately to the death.
But as has been instructed, if at any point in this scenario Zimmerman shot Trayvon because of reasonable fear of death or serious bodily injury, that takes manslaughter off the table. And that was already given to the jury in the original instructions.
There might be a deliberately DENSE juror who wants to believe Z carrying, watching, following to see where T went etc are reckless acts inevitably leading to the death. But that is simply not true either on facts or the law.
All T had to do was go home and go inside. He got into an altercation and didn’t have to. There is eyewitness testimony to that and that Z was yelling for help and on the bottom being pummeled by T.
Even if you don’t accept Z’s account of how it started, it ended that way and that’s where self defense comes in.
Also, as stated, a “gone home Trayvon” would have never gotten into or provoked the confrontation.
PLEASE LORD LET VENGEANCE BE YOURS AND SEND YOUR ANGELS TO SURROUND AND UPLIFT THE JURY TO YOUR TRUTH AND JUSTICE!
agreed but flaky lady juror will see something wrong with GZ being armed, like my friend who thought GZ was looking for trouble. Well he was, there was plenty trouble in River City!
Not even that. All he had to do was not physically assault Zimmerman. He could have stood face to face with Zimmerman, and called him every racist name in the book. As long as he didn't put Zimmerman in fear for his life, he wouldn't have been shot.