Completely irrelevent.
All they have to prove is that Zimmerman deprived Trayvon of his civil rights.
They didn't have to prove the cops who beat Rodney King were "racists" in order to put them on trial when an all-white jury acquitted those assholes.
The big difference between Zimmerman and the cops who beat up Rodney King, was that the cops, were cops, on the job and whatever they did was state action. Zimmerman is not under an obligation to protect Martin's civil right, or anyone's civil rights. The police are.
To find that Zimmerman violated Trayvon Martin's civil rights would be to create a new civil right. The right of black people to beat up white people. Is the government willing to create that right?
Hopefully the jury is not made up of pro-gun racists who think it is okay for an innocent, unarmed individual who is just walking home from the mini-mart to end up dead because some crazy ass vigilant profiles him, follows him, ignores the authority's suggestion to not follow, and creates a confrontation where the kid ends up dead. If it was your white kid and the killer was black, wow oh wow you'd be singing a completely different song.
Really? Prove it. If you're going to sling around accusations like that, Sparkles, you'd better be prepared to back them up. Otherwise, we're going to just have to assume that the reason you did it is because that's how YOU would behave, and you're projecting your own vile, disgusting, lowlife racism onto others.
So if that's not the impression you want to leave, do tell us the foundation for the bolded sentence in your post.