[Hoot Gibson]

Looks like reasonable doubt to me.

First, from ABC - directly from the police file:

[Image: http://abcnews.go.com/images/US/ht_georg..._wmain.jpg]

Now we know why the Sanford prosecutor had not filed murder charges against Zimmerman before the media blitz and the Obama administration's good friend, the dishonorable tax cheat Rev. Al Sharpton's race baiting. It is extremely unlikely that the state of Florida can make a murder charge against Zimmerman stick. At best, a case for manslaughter might be made, considering the physical evidence seems to support Zimmerman's account of the events leading up to the shooting, as well as the accounts of eyewitnesses in the case.

So much for the fuzzy video that some resident legal experts contended proved that Zimmerman suffered no injuries in his scuffle with Martin.

Zimmerman was wrong to continue following Martin after reporting what he thought was suspicious behavior to the Sanford police but the evidence that is now available does not seem to support a murder charge against him.

From Breitbart.com:

[INDENT]

With ABC News’ release of the George Zimmerman photo showing blood flowing freely from his head, the question becomes whether Angela Corey, the prosecutor in the case, had access to the photo before charging Zimmerman with second-degree murder.

DERSHOWITZ BLASTS ZIMMERMAN PROSECUTION: 'NOT ONLY IMMORAL, BUT STUPID'

The arrest affidavit did not mention the photograph, or the bleeding, gashes, and bruises on Zimmermans’ head. Professor Alan Dershowitz of Harvard Law School stated upon release of the arrest affidavit that it was “so thin that it won’t make it past a judge on a second degree murder charge … everything in the affidavit is completely consistent with a defense of self-defense.”
After the release of the photo, however, Dershowitz went much further, telling Breitbart News that if the prosecutors did have the photo and didn’t mention it in the affidavit, that would constitute a “grave ethical violation,” since affidavits are supposed to contain “all relevant information.”

Dershowitz continued, “An affidavit that willfully misstates undisputed evidence known to the prosecution is not only unethical but borders on perjury because an affiant swears to tell not only the truth, but the whole truth, and suppressing an important part of the whole truth is a lie."

When asked if it made a difference whether the prosecution had the bloody photograph at the time they charged Zimmerman, Dershowitz responded, “We do know that there were earlier photographs before the affidavit was done that strongly suggested blood on the back of the head, and we know the police had first access to him, so if there was blood they [the prosecution] would know about it …

"I've had cases in Florida against prosecutors,” Dershowitz said, “and this is not the first time they have willfully omitted exculpatory evidence. It's a continuing problem. Here, it’s not only immoral, but stupid. The whole country is watching. What do they benefit from having half-truths in an affidavit?"

Dershowitz added, "I'm not taking sides, but I'm insisting that both sides play by the rules, and so far the prosecution is not playing by the rules."

[/INDENT]