You are mistaking incompetence with corruption.
These prosecutors were not inept, they were crooked.
They tried to railroad man innocent man and they almost succeeded.
To chalk this acquittal up to prosecutorial incompetence is to suggest that they really had the goods on Zimmerman.
Don’t insult the jury by suggesting that they would have convicted Zimmerman if only the prosecution had done a better job. Given that they were trying to frame an innocent man, they did a bang up job.
Missed the point. All I really want to know is if any of the usual suspects had anything to say about the conduct of the prosecution, that I might have missed. If you read my post you would know that I said that there was more than enough evidence and testimony to acquit GZ beyond any doubt.
These prosecutors were not inept, they were crooked.
They tried to railroad man innocent man and they almost succeeded.
To chalk this acquittal up to prosecutorial incompetence is to suggest that they really had the goods on Zimmerman.
Don’t insult the jury by suggesting that they would have convicted Zimmerman if only the prosecution had done a better job. Given that they were trying to frame an innocent man, they did a bang up job.
***********************
Well said. The fact that this was a jury of only six makes the acquittal even more of an indictment of the prosecution, imho.