You know what’s missing here? Have you explained WHY you think it wasn’t a thorough investigation?
What is it you believe should have been done in this investigation, which you believe has not been done?
Nothing is missing. I question the investigation’s thoroughness because there is no evidence that has come to light which supports Zimmerman’s claim he was attacked by the 17 year old unprovoked. A bloody nose and a kid lying dead are hardly evidence the kid started the incident. Unless people believe that someone who possibly initiates a confrontation, and then is on the losing end of the proposition, may then use a firearm to kill the person they are losing to and justify it by claiming self-defense? I want to know the facts of what actually happened before the fight and before the shooting. I don’t understand why that is seen as inappropriate to know.