" there is certainly no proof that supports George Zimmerman when it comes to these cases beyond Trayvon"?
Sounds like you require him to prove his innocence.
But hey, 'prove' me wrong. Agree that there's no proof of George Zimmerman's guilt in this assault case.
Or - alternatively - argue that he must prove a negative.
You sure read in things that don't exist don't you. Need I remind you what you said: there's no proof of George Zimmerman's guilt in this assault case. I merely turned your statement around to show you that there are two plausible sides that could be deemed factual. Of course only one is. Neither you nor I know which is and which isn't factual. Fortunately he doesn't have to prove his innocence or guilt since she recanted, nor was I suggesting that he must. I was refuting your claim that she was a liar.
I see you are going to bed. Sleep tight.