Did the Prosecution in the Zimmerman Trial Try to Use Reverse Jury Nullification?

Late in the night of July 13, 2013 George Zimmerman was acquitted of murder and manslaughter for shooting Trayvon Martin. (Details of the case can be read here.) The scary part is that one of the prosecutors, John Guy, in his rebuttal to the defense's closing arguments asked the jurors to disregard the lack of evidence and the lack of credibility of two key witnesses to find Zimmerman guilty. Hear his words in the short clip below:



The law requires that the prosecution prove their case and by Guy's own admission they didn't. In so many words he called for the jurors to stand the concept of jury nullification on its head. Jury nullification is when a jury finds that a person broke the law but that justice requires a not guilty verdict. (Unfortunately, judges don't inform jurors that they can judge the law as well as the facts of a case in order to acquit. Visit the Fully Informed Jury Association website for more information on this.) Guy asked the jury to disregard the facts and the law and to convict a man whose guilt wasn't proved. This is the most unnoticed aspect, and one of the scariest, of a trial fraught with terrifying aspects. Kudos to the jury for not implementing this kind of tyranny in the courtroom.