Do you think george zimmerman WAS guilty?

Yes, there was no logical reason for Zimmerman to take it upon himself to be stalking anyone who was simply walking home from the store. The police were on their way and told him to remain in his car. He chose not to obey the police.

If someone was stalking me, and he was not wearing a police uniform, I would be scared and I be fighting back. This is my opinion and I think the jury failed to do their job.

I'm thankful that I was not on the jury. And, the jury system seems to me to be much superior to other countries' methods of conducting trials. So, I'm going to go with the jury -- they couldn't find anything else given the testimony, evidence, and the law.

[testimony -- Martin was on top and whaling on Zimmerman. evidence -- Zimmerman had a bloody nose, possibly broken. law -- citizen has right to defend himself from apparent severe or deadly attack using whatever force he has available. recorded testimony -- I've lost him. He ducked out on me somewhere. (Martin had gotten away in the night and yet returned to attack Zimmerman -- don't care why, Martin started the physical part of it and that's guilty in the eyes of the law.)]

all citizens have the right to walk or drive about their neighborhoods and observe strangers. they even get to be stupid about it.

Trayvon Martin's actions and state of mind that day, resulted in his death. This was no "choir boy". He was a thug using "innocuous" items like skittles and iced tea to make some kind of drug that whacks people out and started by "Southern Rap Culture." The toxicology reports support this fact.

As for Zimmerman, the best the D.A. could have done to actually obtain a conviction, was to charge involuntary manslaughter. This was no "white" on black hate crime, as Zimmerman is a Latino. The media hyped it up as a hate crime, while in reality, the hate was perpetrated by Trayvon Martin, then vocal members of the black community thereafter, who tried to perpetuate the divisiveness.

Guilty? No, not as far as murder charges. But he has some blame for what happened, though not any for criminal charges under the law. If we go by his story (which seems plausible based on his injuries), if he didn't have the gun, there would have been no fight over the gun, and therefore no reason to shoot Martin. He might have just got a beating out of it (worse than he got), or might not have even confronted him and just let the police deal with Martin.

But, as they say, "Hindsight is 20/20."

Guilty of aggravated first degree murder. Most people (including the jury) were unaware of the fact that he was just in a huge argument with his (now ex) wife. Hw was pi$$ed off and looking to take it out on someone. He happened to come across Martin and took his anger out on an unarmed kid. I suspect that if the cops had actually done an investigation, the two bullets are in the ground under the area Martin died on. Zimmerman's subsequent actions in assaulting his girlfriend and her father with a gun points to my theory.

no. there was no witness at all that indicated he was guilty. the rumor that he is supposed guilty was created by propaganda and people who were offended by the incident. honestly, im am not biased at all, but i think it was trayvon who acted incorrectly which led to the shooting. I didn't believe trayvon had any good purpose of attacking zimmerman nearly trying to kill him.

Truthfully the only reason the Martins lost that trial is because that mother and girlfriend didn't show any emotion, I mean it's like she didn't even care and also his parents failed him.

Based on the evidence presented I don't believe he was guilty.

I think so. He started the altercation when he confronted Trayvon Martin.

I suppose that depends where you live. In Canada he would probably be guilty of brandishing a restricted weapon in public, carrying a concealed weapon and manslaughter.