One wonders. The most likely explanation, is that she wants to be absolutely sure that the investigation is complete and has been as thorough as possible, before making a decision. If she were ready to indict, as of now, she'd have likely taken advantage of the political cover afforded by presenting the case to the Grand Jury; it's easy enough to get a true bill from a Grand Jury, with simple probable cause, let alone probative evidence. This says to me, that she's making sure every "t" is crossed, and every "i' dotted, before rendering a decision that will make a lot of people VERY angry and unhappy, either way. Given the way that Florida law is written, I'd be careful as a prosecutor too, because the letter of the law seems to put a heavy burden of proof of probable cause on a prosecutor, before he/she can even charge someone in a self defense case. A lot of people here either do not understand what the Florida law actually says, or don't like what it says, but that is the law that will apply in this case.
You've already decided it was SELF DEFENSE! The pro killer mindset is astonishing.
Its not "pro-killer." That phrase kind of tips the fact that YOU have made up your own mind, and very prematurely at that.
There actually IS legitimate room to harbor some doubt here, PARTICULARLY where we are presently still in the dark on so much of the needed information.
The Olympic Centennial Park bomber who was
identified by NBC ( a guy named Eric Rudolph)
turned out NOT to have been the Olympic Centennial Park bomber.
With that kind of fairly important object lesson in mind, ask the question:
WHAT IF Zimmerman really is innocent?
Yeah, he shot Trayvon and Trayvon died as a result of that, and yeah, Trayvon's death is a tragedy. But what if it was actually (as well as legally) justified?
What IF Zimmerman actually IS innocent?