Newsletter subscribe

Features, Politics, Top Stories

Why George Zimmerman Will Be Acquitted

Posted: June 26, 2013 at 2:15 pm   /   by

The politically-motivated trial of George Zimmerman has begun in Florida, and Zimmerman’s attorneys got off on the wrong foot, telling a knock-knock joke right out of the chute to begin opening statements – an absolute no-no, not to mention a stupid move, in a trial of this nature.

Prosecutor John Guy played a much different tune and came out swinging as he quoted Zimmerman’s profanity-laced phone call to the dispatcher which illustrated Zimmerman’s disgust that the “punks…always get away.” To say that the prosecutor has been effective would be a gross understatement. He has been brutal, precise and simply on target.

Despite the vastly different approaches of the attorneys on both sides, no amount of wordsmithing can change the fact that Zimmerman will be acquitted. The law is simply on his side.

Zimmerman is accused of murdering Trayvon Martin in Sanford, Florida in February 2012. Of course, one of the controversies revolves around the stand your ground law. We can debate whether or not the stand your ground law is a good idea or not, but the fact is that the law was in effect at the time of the shooting. Therefore, it is the law that will apply.  In other words, this is a trial, not a legislative session.

The six-woman jury in this case will be instructed that if they find Zimmerman did not initiate the physical confrontation, he had no duty to retreat from a confrontation. However, even if Zimmerman did “initiate” the encounter, the law still requires him to walk.

Under Florida law, a person can use force to counter the use of unlawful force. In this case, there are two prevailing theories that the jury will be presented with. In either case, Martin is the perpetrator simply because he, and not Zimmerman, escalated the encounter to one of deadly force. And this is precisely what this case will come down to.

The first theory, which is Zimmerman’s story, will be that he encountered Martin, walked back to his truck, and Martin followed and attacked him with physical force. Zimmerman responded and the fight went to the ground. This is when Martin took a dominant position and sent Zimmerman’s head crashing into the concrete. Because of the introduction of deadly force by Martin, Zimmerman was justified in utilizing deadly force. Is it that simple? If robots sat on juries and simply applied the law without emotion, the answer would be an unequivocal “Yes.”

The other theory, likely more in line with the prosecution, is that Zimmerman started the fight with Martin. However, by all accounts, the initial interaction with Martin was one of “hands-on” grappling which went to the ground. Again, it was Martin who elevated the amount of encounter to one of deadly force, and Zimmerman justifiably responded.

The odd twist in the law is that even if Zimmerman started the confrontation, a person is only justified in responding to the threat with the same amount of force. It is for precisely this reason that Martin is far from being a victim. He is the individual in this encounter who far exceeded the level of force with which the law is willing to protect him.

The unavoidable fact is that lethal force was only deployed after Martin began slamming Zimmerman’s head on the ground. Politics aside, Zimmerman should walk. Courtroom aside, this is just tragic.

The charges in this case were motivated by racist claims coming from the likes of Al Sharpton. Emergency 911 tapes were ignored and even doctored by those who wanted to sell a great story. And Zimmerman’s injuries were covered up to give the story longevity. May lady justice arrive in that Florida courtroom with a vengeance.


Shane Krauser is a partner with Davis Miles McGuire Gardner, the director of the American Academy for Constitutional Education, the spokesman for, and the chief firearms instructor at K-Force Vanguard. He is also a former prosecutor. Follow him on twitter: @ShaneKrauser

Shane Krauser

Shane Krauser is the director of the American Academy for Constitutional Education, an attorney in Arizona, the spokesman for Freedom Fires, a radio talk show host, an adjunct professor of constitutional and criminal law, and the chief instructor of K-Force Vanguard. He is also the primary contributor of Freedom Fires, is a former prosecutor of 12 years, and has dedicated his life to defending freedom and the Constitution. He is an author, a political commentator who has appeared on national radio and TV, and a writer whose op-eds have been published in numerous national media outlets.

Shane did his undergraduate work at Arizona State University and received his law degree from the University of Utah. He is married to Janelle Krauser, and they have six children. Follow him on twitter: @shanekrauser

Latest posts by Shane Krauser (see all)


  1. WendiRonPaulMedashefski says:

    All the race baiters refuse to accept that martin was the aggressor. They will riot and loot if theres an acquittal, just like so many other times when the claims of racism were shot down in court, by no less than facts and evidence!

    1. KarVooj says:

      Please explain how the person who ran away was the aggressor.

      1. EdwardOwen says:

        @KarVooj  @WendiRonPaulMedashefski The evidence is the evidence. Injuries on Zimmerman, a single gunshot wound and no other injuries on Martin.
        You can try to postulate all you want about who ran away from who, but the simple fact (and supported by witnesses) is that Martin was on top of ZImmerman beating him and Zimmerman felt in fear of his life.
        SYG isn’t even necessary here because it’s a clear cut self defense.

  2. KarVooj says:

    This article was written from the perspective of not knowing basic facts or at worst ignoring them. Serino was the first person to highlight Z’s pattern of race based calls and he was also the first one who wanted Z charged long before the media race pimps dug their heels into the deady body of another victim for their soap box $cream$.
    Shortly after former Chief Lee gave his first press conference and lied, Mary Cutcher contacted the local media to say he lied when he claimed all the witnesses supported Z. Basically, it is a complete myth to say nobody thought he should have been charged until the media storm.
    SYG law is irrelevant here as Omara himself stated last year this is not a SYG case. He omitted the reason of course but it is the same reason Omara skipped the pretrial immunity hearing. Omara is so desperate he wants to claim the rain washed Z’s dna off of T’s hands.
    I cannot believe this article was published without basic fact checking.

  3. KarVooj says:

    “The six-woman jury in this case will be instructed that if they find Zimmerman did not initiate the physical confrontation, he had no duty to retreat from a confrontation. However, even if Zimmerman did “initiate” the encounter, the law still requires him to walk.”
    This is completely misleading. Once the prosecution establishes Z as the aggressor Z had a legal requirement to attempt to escape using all reasonable means prior to using deadly force. If Z cannot show he attempted to break all contact the jury instructions will include omitting Self Defense during deliberations.
    People keep referencing his injuries while ignoring the fact Z never said the injuries were the reason he pulled the trigger. Furthermore, his injuries were so minor they required the same level of medical treatment as a papercut.
    Im curious what the author’s motivation is in presenting such a false Z heavy narrative and am frankly quite relieved he is no longer a prosecutor.

    1. EdwardOwen says:

      @KarVooj The prosecution can’t establish Z as the aggressor because there isn’t any evidence to suggest this. No injuries on M except knuckle abrasions and a single gunshot.
      Meanwhile injuries on Z are consistent with his version of the events. The evidence is on Z’s side and I’m sorry if that is not what you wish.Also, I feel compelled to point out that your attempts at reasoning are desperate – that his injuries were so minor (they don’t look minor in the pictures, sorry, I guess we’re supposed to make sure that our injuries are at a sufficient level when getting our heads smashed in the concrete before defending ourseelves???) – or that Z didn’t ‘say that he shot because of his injuries’.

      1. KarVooj says:

        Stopped reading with the second sentence because you do not know the basic facts.
        There was not one single abrasion or mark on any of T’s knuckles and you would know this if you read the autopsy instead of relying on second hand sources.
        There is no doubt Z was the aggressor because his own words help prove it. If you follow someone in your car then get out and chase them on foot after they run away you are the aggressor and all of the witnesses contradict Z’s claim on how it started.
        Not trying to be rude but I have little to no patience for people who have reached a conclusion when they clearly do not know the facts.

        1. EdwardOwen says:

          @KarVooj  @EdwardOwen You stopped reading because you want to believe what you already believe and don’t like anything that challenges it.
          Knuckle abrasions or not, Zimmerman had a bloodied skull and nose, Martin had nothing. And that’s the only real concrete evidence anyone has.
          And it’s all that is needed for a self defense case. Sorry. I know you are emotionally invested in this.

        2. KarVooj says:

          I stopped reading because you displayed ignorance of the basic facts and I knew you would ignore the correction. When you thought he had knuckle abrasions you used that to support the claim be beat on Z. When you were corrected you simply move on and ignore it. Please keep proving your agenda is more important than the facts.

    2. vinniekaz says:

      @KarVooj Hey Jackass Boy…when have you ever gone to the emergency room for a paper cut? Typical low information Obama freeloader voter!

      1. KarVooj says:

        Z didnt go to the ER. When you realize your implication is wrong just pretend it doesnt exist.

      2. KarVooj says:

        Sorry for the second reply but I have never supported Obushama and have pointed out he is a sell out for years. The fact you think you can deduce who supports Obushama based on their position in this case is insanely comical.

  4. GregoryConterio says:

    “Stand your Ground” has not been a part of the defense offered for Zimmerman, so far, he has simply claimed self-defense.So far, there is not a single piece of evidence inconsistent with his story.  There has also not been any evidence offered that he was the “aggressor” or that he “initiated” the confrontation that lead to Martin’s death.Martin’s “girlfriend’ was a carnival side-show, a comically un-intelligent girl with a bad-attitude.  If she really is the prosecution’s “star witness,” if she really represents all they have, they are in deep trouble.Zimmerman was not arrested because there was no evidence to indicate he had committed a crime, that he in fact had done anything other than defend himself while being brutally beaten.  This entire matter has been nothing but an attempt to appease the trumped-up outrage in the Black community.  It has little to do with justice.

    1. @GregoryConterio To be put on trial to appease any individual or cohort’s sense of outrage makes the word “justice” essentially meaningless.

    2. KarVooj says:

      There are about ten contradictions between his 1st written statement and the recorded NEN call.
      What medical treatment did he require from this “brutal beating?”

      1. GregoryConterio says:

        @KarVooj  @GregoryConterio
        Broken nose, two black-eyes, lacerations to the back of the head, and a back injury.One can either stubbornly cling to a belief in how things are despite facts to the contrary, or one can allow the facts to shape their view.  You clearly seem to be of the former disposition.  Fortunately for the rest of us, our legal system is based on the latter.

        1. KarVooj says:

          @GregoryConterio one more time:
          What medical treatment did he require from this “brutal beating?”
          Ignore it again and provide another example of the dishonesty required to defend Z. His injuries are not the reason he gave for pulling the trigger and it is not surprising another Z supporter does not know the basic facts

  5. Great and interesting discussion here. Here is the jury instruction that will be given to the jury that they may consider if they believe Zimmerman was the aggressor. As I stated in the op-ed, even if Zimmerman is the initial aggressor, he may still walk. And, of course, I do not deviate. He will be acquitted. This instruction is straight from the Florida Supreme Court (3.6(f)).
    “[T]he use of deadly force is not justifiable if you find that the Defendant initially provoked the use of force against [the victim], unless: The force asserted toward the defendant was so great that he reasonably believed that he was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and had exhausted every reasonable means to escape the danger, other than using deadly force on the assailant.”

    1. @Shane Krauser I wonder if that is essentially the same in all states, or if it differs significantly from state to state.

    2. KarVooj says:

      @Shane Krauser
      You made a false claim when you said:
      “However, even if Zimmerman did “initiate” the encounter, the law still requires him to walk.”
      When I pointed out that was wrong you pretend you didnt make the claim. This type of low integrity is rampant among Z supporters.
      Your article also omitted the fact Serino wanted Z charged the night of the shooting and partly because his injuries were so minor. But maybe you had a better view of Z than Serino, from your house, while not even being aware of his existence.
      You also claimed the sidewalk was being used as a deadly weapon. Forgetting for a moment his medical report contradicts that claim, you are ignoring the fact Z said he was not on the sidewalk when he pulled the trigger. He said he was in the grass. Is grass a deadly weapon?
      Finally, according to Z’s own words the injuries are not the reason he gave for pulling the trigger. Your opinion he will be acquitted is not based on the evidence because you clearly are not even aware of why he said he shot T

  6. KeithMyatt says:

    I would be surprised if Zimmerman does not get convicted. He may have had reason to believe his life was in danger and he was defending himself. That does not matter. If he is not convicted, you can be all of the race baiters (Obama, Sharpton, Jesse Jackson to name just a few) will stir the blacks up and cause riots. And the jurors may feel pressure to convict because they might fear these same people targeting them. Hell hath no fury like a racist who does not get their way. But if Zimmerman does get acquitted, he will have to leave the country because he will be hounded and have to fear for his life. There won’t be a black radical alive that will not try to hunt him down to kill him. I would even be concerned for his family.

    1. @KeithMyatt I had not considered the ongoing threat after acquittal. Yikes!
      That said, do you think there will be riots? That has been predicted before and not come to pass.

      1. KeithMyatt says:

        Look at what happened after the Rodney King verdict in the early 90s. And that was just a beat down but caught on video. And because we have so much divisiveness (coming all the way from the WH), I would not rule it out.
        Also, see how much the LMS is ignoring black on white murders. There was a report the other day about a young lady in St. Louis who was shot by a black man who just walked up to her car, pulled her door open, and shot her multiple times FOR FUN. No mention of it at all in the media.

        1. GregoryConterio says:

           I was living in Los Angeles for the Rodney King riots, and I can tell you, nobody predicted it, nobody saw it coming.  It was spontaneous.  My wife drove right through the epicenter, just before it really got ugly.  We watched her work burn to the ground on live TV.  We lived in Culver City, about a mile and a half from where things got really lawless.  We saw car-loads of young Blacks driving up & down the street, jeering at white people, clearly provoking, looking for opportunities to start trouble.  Fortunately the Culver City PD is a separate and independent force, and kept a lid on things.  LAPD was entirely absent for days.  The city burned each night until they finally sent in the national guard.I have never felt so helpless and vulnerable in my life.I have no idea if such a thing might happen if Zimmerman is acquitted, but in this case, if it does, it will have been deliberate, and the fault of race-baiting “civil rights leaders” and the media who have ignored the facts, and done everything they can to stir-up animosity and anger over what was in reality a simple assault & battery/self-defense case.

        2. @KeithMyatt Right, I remember the Rodney King riots; all I was saying is that there have been predictions of riots since that have not come to pass. But it’s always a possibility.
          As far as the media ignoring the kinds of crimes to which you refer—-that happens all the time. It’s terrifyingly dehumanizing.

        3. @GregoryConterio  @KeithMyatt I didn’t move to LA until two years later, but all the stories are heard were just like that. Dang, I think I would have driven up Highway 2 and gone camping for a few days!

        4. WilliamRAlford says:

          @WesternFreePress  @GregoryConterio  @KeithMyatt

        5. KeithMyatt says:

          @GregoryConterio I am certainly glad that your wife was able to get out of there without injury.
          The big difference to all of the other times when people thought there would be riots for whatever reason is because we did not have the situation we have now. We have an Alinsky community organizer in the WH. This is what he thrives on. He makes a lousy president because he wants to remain in the background and not seem to be part of the rulers but someone “sticking it to the man”. Remember what Obama said about the police in Cambridge when his professor buddy was arrested for causing a scene with the police. He stated “I don’t have the details but I can say the Cambridge police acted stupidly”. How can you say they acted stupidly if you do not have the details. Now people say that the cop (who was white) was harassing the professor (who was black) because he was a racist. Black cops who served with this officer said he acted correctly and had no issue with how he handled the situation. Most police will require someone to show an ID when they are called to a scene where a break in has been reported. It does not matter the color of their skin unless the police officer knows the person personally and that it is their property.
          But if there are widespread riots, I will not be surprised to see Obama declare martial law. I am not saying either will happen. I am only saying that we should be prepared.

        6. @KeithMyatt  @GregoryConterio Well, Obama’s “If I had a son he’d look like Trayvon” comment certainly threw gasoline on the pile of oily rags. I guess we’ll see if it ignites.

    2. WilliamRAlford says:

      @KeithMyatt Do a search on Twitter for “loot zimmerman” and see how many are planning to exploit this situation — and many of the shops that will be targeted will be owned by people who are neither white nor black. Arm yourselves.

      1. @WilliamRAlford  @KeithMyatt These are grim times.

  7. deded says:

    Very  sad day for America when all’s you have to do is imply racism

    1. @deded well then, it’s been a sad few decades.

    2. KeithMyatt says:

      @deded Look at what has happened to Paula Deen for saying that over 20 years ago she evidently used the N word. Yet the star witness for the prosecution in the Zimmerman case does not believe the term cracker is racist. It may not have as strong a negative connotation as the N word but it is racist just the same.

      1. @KeithMyatt  @deded You were expecting something other than raging double-standards? :-)

  8. GregoryConterio says:

    I think it’s done:
    The one and only eye-witness says Martin was on top of Zimmerman, and Zimmerman called for help.
    This MORE than meets the legal definition of reasonable doubt.The prosecution made a point that he (the neighbor) didn’t actually see Martin strike Zimmerman, he only saw him “moving his arms rapidly, up and down toward Zimmerman’s face.”So apparently we’re supposed to believe Martin was on-top of Zimmerman, waving his arms, pretending to hit him, while calling for help?  Seriously?
    Unlike the girlfriend, this guy has no apparent reason to be biased in his testimony.  He has no “rooting interest” in the outcome, no reason to lie.  Unless they can prove this guy was a KKK member (remember what they did to Mark Furman?) there is no reason to doubt him.

    1. KeithMyatt says:

      @GregoryConterio I heard that on the radio today. And you are exactly right. This guy has no vested interest in whether or not Zimmerman is guilty.
      This should get him acquitted but even so, Zimmerman will need to go somewhere that the BP and their buddies cannot get to him. I hope he has his passport and backs packed. I doubt he would last a week without some kind of protection.

  9. GregoryConterio but you don’t know who started it.  Forget GZ’s story that he went back to his car and TM jumped out and attacked him. You can’t believe that because it’s the defendant’s story and not evidence. That witness just shows that AT ONE POINT Trayvon was on top, this doesn’t mean that GZ didn’t grab him or start the fight. You can’t start a fight with someone and then when you start to lose, shoot him. If you are the aggressor in a fight you lose your right to self defense. I couldn’t follow you and ask you what are you doing here and let’s say you tell me to f off, I grab you and then you get mad and shove me and that a fight ensues; well if I grab you first and then when you’re scared you defend YOURSELF and hit me or shove me back, I can’t decide “oh shit that was my bad, I shouldn’t have done that, now I’m scared” and shoot you, well I can, but it’s not self defense because it’s my fault.  GZ got out of his car, why? He says to look for an address, well, we all heard the prosecution say that that was bogus because he lives there and knows the streets and the house number was right there, he changed his story so many times. He had a gun and he knew he would be safe with a gun. He didn’t know Travyon Martin, he said “these a*sholes always get away”. He assumed that this kid was just another A*shole who was up to no good and he followed him. That’s his state of mind while following this kid. Now the problem is: we really don’t know who started the fight, who physically touched who first. Only two people know and one of them is dead, so I’m thinking…maybe manslaughter…but he may walk because his defense lawyers are such great bs artists.

    1. EdwardOwen says:

      JusticePlease GregoryConterio It doesn’t matter. The facts don’t support anything but Zimmerman’s version of the story.
      I’m sorry if your gut feels differently, but that’s emotional, and not based on the evidence.

  10. WilliamRAlford says:

    KarVooj@Shane Krauser The forensic evidence is clear: The projectile penetrated Trayvon’s clothing several inches from his skin — clearly indicating that he was on top of Zimmerman when the shot was fired.
    Zimmerman managed to wiggle himself off the sidewalk to the grass [with the young lad straddling his body] but if he had allowed Trayvon to keep pummeling him he would have lost consciousness and been completely at Trayvon’s mercy. 
    Just because you are losing a fight does not mean you deserve to be beaten to death. 
    Let’s address the real issue here. Trayvon was behaving as if he were casing the houses for burglary in a neighborhood that had a rash of burglaries. Trayvon was raised in a culture in which he was taught that he was born a victim and therefore entitled to re-distribute wealth at his own will. 
    Anyone who would interfere with that righteous process is a racist.
    IMO, this is likely what actually happened: Trayvon saw that he was being observed casing houses and told his girlfriend Jabba the Tireneck that a Creepy-ass Cracka was following him. [HE is the one who made this into a racial issue.] 
    Zimmerman saw this and called the police. He lost sight of Trayvon and looked to see where he went. When Trayvon saw Zimmerman watching a 2nd time, it was clear that he was being deliberately observed and this enraged him, leading to a violent confrontation that Trayvon instigated. 
     I have no doubt in my mind if it were a little old lady watching him, Trayvon would have beat her up also — to death, perhaps.

    Let us bear in mind that everyone has a right to walk on a public sidewalk and watch what what an obvious outsider was doing. I promise you if a white person is walking through a black neighborhood, he will be blatantly observed by everyone on the street — and likely will be confronted.

  11. Northwoods of WI says:

    This article was written about 3 weeks ago, and I hope it still holds true.  George Zimmerman was totally the victim and is totally innocent.  I hope to God those women have the brains and the courage to do the right thing, which is to acquit him.  If not an acquittal, there may be a hung jury, in which case I hope the State of Florida has the wisdom to NOT proceed further. George Zimmerman should not spend a single day in prison; I would have shot my attacker, too, under these circumstanes.  My prayers go to the Zimmerman family that there will justice for George and that he may go back to his former life though, unfortunately, it will be far from normal.

    1. @Northwoods of WI Looks like justice has been done. Now one has to wonder if Zimmerman is under police protection . . . .

      1. Northwoods of WI says:

        Amen for justice!  George and his wife will probably continue to carry their guns, out of necessity, and they may need to hire a part-time armed bodyguard to join them, when they venture outdoors.  Even his PARENTS cannot divulge their whereabouts!  Hopefully, they won’t need to do so for the rest of their lives, but there are a lot of whack-jobs out there!

        1. @Northwoods of WI Whack-jobs is being kind.

  12. valorius300 says:

    this was actually not a stand your ground case, and the law was not applied in it.

  13. Northwoods of WI says:

    Shane, you are a genius … you took an early stand on acquittal and were correct!  Could you provide me with any winning lottery numbers?!  (I’ll share!!)

    1. @Northwoods of WI I wish I could claim brilliance on this one. However, as a former prosecutor and now defense attorney who has tried hundreds of cases, this was one of the easier predictions. This was one of the weakest homicide cases I have ever seen charged. BTW, no lottery numbers to share.

      1. Shane Krauser Yeah, a no-brainer that got brought to trial anyway. The rule of law is faltering and Western civilization along with it.

Why George Zimmerman Will Be Acquitted