Re "Shooting cases very different" (Letters, Aug. 28): The killing of Australian student Christopher Lane and George Zimmerman's acquittal are indeed very different. Lane's killing was almost surely cold-blooded murder, while the legal grounds for the shooting death of Trayvon Martin is debatable.
Any reasonably objective person should believe Zimmerman's battered face is evidence he was losing the fight. With very few facts to guide them,the jurors had to decide if Zimmerman was justified in shooting Martin. "Proof beyond a reasonable doubt" is required in order to convict; the jurors decided, correctly I believe, reasonable doubt existed. As far as Zimmerman not being arrested immediately, his badly injured face gave the police reason to believe he acted in self defense. The jury's decision should validate their decision.
-- Theodore R. Shannon, Mokelumne Hill