Quote from TGregg:
Hopefully that'll simplify it for you. Suppose that post trial we see that the prosecutions evidence was terrible (as in Duke Lacrosse). I do not mean questionable, I do not mean maybe, I mean "Holy #@*& only a retard would bring this case!" Would you (trefoil) support charges against the various prosecutors in this hypothetical situation?
Well obviously. That's a pretty silly hypothetical. It's like asking if I'd support prosecuting some Democrat if he were caught committing mass murder.
It's common for murderers to claim self-defense. What's highly unusual, at least in the other 49 states, is for the cops to believe the guy enough to not prosecute until political pressure is brought to bear. This isn't a case of a person shooting down an intruder in his home, which from what I understand is what these stand your ground laws had originally been intended for, and which is a perfectly reasonable thing to legislate.
This is a case of a person using a public right-of-way for a completely innocent purpose being shot down. Not prosecuting something like this is what most of us (outside of ET P&R anyway) think is nuts.
So how your hypothetical would play out given the above is a pretty large stretch. But we'll see when the trial comes around.
I mean, who knows? Maybe Trayvon knew Z and wanted him dead for some other reason we don't know about? Could be. Could be the Sun rises in the west too, but the chances are it won't, ya know?