It's no more wrong to try to persuade the jury of that with no
evidence
than it is to try to persuade the jury that Zimmerman is a great
humanitarian that was just trying to help better his neighborhood.
------------------------------------------
Sorry to say, but you have a very prejudiced interpretation of the
actual testimony and evidence to date.
Any implied "evidence" by either side that doesn't exist would
immediately prompt an objection from the other side and would be
tossed by the judge.
Are you actually *watching* the trial or are you just getting opinions
from the media?