[Coffee.]

This case stresses me out. To me, it came down to manslaughter or self-defense. Although, in my personal opinion, second degree could be an option, there was not enough evidence to prove it. Now, for self-defense, they had to prove that Trayvone was a thread to Zimmerman's life, and they defense did so by saying that the concrete was the weapon. I see their point, but I disagree. First, I don't think he had the right to be following him in the first place. Neighborhood watch? That's not how it works, you call the police if you do something suspicious, not go after him. And why did he have a gun to do "neighborhood watch" in the first place? Second, I definitely think something was left out of the story. The defense basically said that Zimmerman followed Trayvone, Trayvone saw that he was being followed and he turned around and randomly decided to beat Zimmerman up. This does not sound realistic to me and that something is being left out. If you are being followed, you don't normally decide to just bust out in violence, but instead, run or yell or something. I feel that something must have triggered Trayvone to do what he did, from Zimmerman flashing the gun, saying a threat, etc. That doesn't say he should have beat up Zimmerman, but it would validate both sides' story, because it me, it sounds incredibly foggy.

I think, by evidence, it should have been manslaughter. However, the prosecution did a terrible job, and it doesn't help that my country is full of racist bigots anyway. I'm so done with this case and listening to people in my life spew racism. (Family. Oh boy.)