[E. Pluribus Unum]

...he now has given the Prosecution the best weapon they could possibly have hoped for, “reasonable doubt”.

Your understanding of "reasonable doubt" evidently comes form bizarro world.

If there is reasonable doubt of Zimmerman's guilt, a juror must vote to acquit.

I don't have any idea what your "reasonable doubt" is about.

I don't believe you do, either.

[Hodar]

Zimmerman, by his own actions - demonstrated that his sworn testamony is worthless. The jury now knows that anything he says “under oath” is not to be trusted.

The only thing they have to work with now, is the evidence (which supports Zimmerman’s story), the police report (which supports Zimmeman’s story) and the evidence collected at the crime scene (which supports his story).

Instead of having 100% of the trust - he has sacrificed a huge amount of that trust. This was stupid of him. Perhaps you would do something like this; but I can assure you that if this was MY life on the line - I would have been 100% truthful. I fail to understand what possible motive he could have had to pull this stunt.

If the bail was set higher, I’d contest it on my first offense, my standing in the neighborhood and charge “Unreasonable Bail”.

As is, he gave the Prosecution ammunition it didn’t have before. In fact, prior to this stunt; the Prosecution had no ammo whatsoever.