[mlmpetert]

Originally Posted by saden1

I have a really really hard time justifying self-defense on the part of Zimmerman when he trailed him despite being told to stop following him. I have a hard time believing there exists a neighborhood watchman that doesn't know the streets in his own neighborhood. I have an even harder time believing getting out of your car to look at a street sign. Most of all I have a really hard time believing the down right disregard for what self-defense means in this country by so many.

It is irrelevant whether Trayvon was on top beating him or below getting beat up, or who was screaming for help. What is truly relevant is that you can apparently follow someone and shoot them and then claim self-defense.

It's very difficult to not wish you all or your children to suffer the same fate as Trayvon and experience Zimmermanian self-defense first hand.

Those are definitely very good points. The fact that Zimmerman's face didnt look red or anything either makes me question how just how assaulted he was.

But i havent seen/heard anything that makes me think Zimmerman kept following Martin after it was suggested to stop. Once the dispatcher told him to stop it looks like he stopped.

I think for me its did Zimmerman retreat, and if so did Martin then go towards Zimmerman and pick a fight? If so i think Zimmerman was justified to shoot Martin if during the fight he became reasonably fearful of being killed. If someone smashed my head into the pavement or reached for my gun i would be fearful of my life.

While i dont approve of the conditions that Zimmerman used to "stalk" Martin, i really just dont think that of everything we know of what Zimmerman did, Martin never had the right to assult him or should have felt reasonable provoked to assault him (espicially if Zimmerman did indeed turn around or retreated).