I don't believe I've ever disagreed with a single sentence written by the inestimable Dr. Sowell. Until now. I think it is an exaggeration to say there is no evidence. A gun, a dead body, an admitted shooter, those things are evidence. I think, on balance, that the jury got it right, there was nothing to dispute the assertion that it was self-defense. On the other hand, the positioning of the gun with Trayvon on top seems to suggest that Trayvon must have been backing up, standing up, or in some other way freeing Zimmerman's hand to reach for that gun. If so, two scenarios come to mind. Zimmerman may have fired in the heat of battle not realizing that Trayvon was stopping the attack, or perhaps sensing that Trayvon was merely shifting positions during the attack. If that's what happened it's self defense. On the other hand, Zimmerman may have acted out of a sense of revenge once he realized that Trayvon, having beaten him fair and square was backing off. If that's what happened, it was murder. But, it is unknowable which scenario represents reality and there is no proof either way. Advantage defense.
I certainly agree, however, with the rest of Dr. Sowell's article. Our president and many black and "progressive" leaders have acted abysmally in this matter.