^^ Exactly. I'm not trying to intentionally misread, and I'm not interchanging obstruction and accessory. In fact, my post specifically differentiated between the two. I've reread the posts, and I'm simply not seeing which part CS thinks is being ignored in favor of other parts. The posts come off to me as though anything about Zimmerman, including his lawyers and their press conferences, must automatically be condemned in some way. And if we don't have evidence for it, heck, let's read into it until we get some. What does it matter if it's accessory after the fact, that isn't "that bad" anyway, so why not level that charge? With all the media/internet attention this case has gotten, I'd be surprised if anyone gets any real justice.