I was not unduly surprised. Obviously a tragedy for the family and friends of Trayvon Martin, but there was simply insufficient evidence to contradict Zimmermans version of events, and no reason to suppose that Zimmerman was lying. The prosecution were unable to demonstrate why Zimmerman should not be believed, and were unable to explain the injuries that Zimmerman had sustained.
I do not like the US laws on guns. I do not like Floridas "stand your ground" policy.I do think that, had Zimmerman heeded police advice and not chased after the "suspect", Martin would still be alive. But on the basis of the evidenced and Zimmermans own testimony, I do not think there is grounds to think him a murderer or even a racist. I can understand why the black community, and indeed many others, might see this as an example of racist bias, but on the evidence and the facts as presented in this specific case, I do not think you can arrive at that conclusion.
I think Coccinelle mentioned another case from Florida, where it is alleged a woman, fearing for her health/life at the hands of an advancing husband, fired shots in the air which did not wound her husband. She has recently been sentenced to 20 years imprisonment. This news - a black woman jailed for 20 years over a self-defence issue, and Zimmerman walking free having killed a young black guy allegedly in self defence, will obviously be seen by the black community and many others as evidence of racial discrimination....
One thing that does really puzzle me about the Martin case though - In various reports and stories, I have read several comments about the jury. I am sure I read that the jury comprised just 6 people- would that be right, or have I misunderstood? And the jury composition was all-white and all female - again that sounds just a little odd for a random selection from a jury pool.....