Quote from Evaris;1122209:
I personally am displeased with this verdict. It was still the killing of an unarmed teenager, and all witness testimony still shows said teenager as being harassed prior to the shooting. So what the hell humanity why is this guy getting off with nothing for shooting an unarmed man to death? i mean he admitted to killing him, and that the guy was unarmed, and he just "felt threatened"... I mean what the hell?
Did you check the source the Cat posted? If the withheld evidence that was pulled from the victim's thread is true, it may not be as innocent as it seems. Wither that's true or not I'm unsure of.
If it's true, then that changes things completely. Otherwise, if the jury has a reasonable doubt about the outcome of the case they have no choice but to say not guilty as the whole point of a guilty verdict is that the person was guilty 100% with no reasonable doubt.
State can always appeal I'm sure if they strongly feel he's in the wrong and get a new jury to decide.