I agree - the self defense laws apply to both persons in this case! TM must have felt threatened by this guy following him, making Zimm an aggressor in a sense. And the fact that Zimm had a loaded gun on his person when he followed Zimm adds to the sense he was an aggressor. From all accounts, TM did not give Zimm cause to be followed. He was dressed in a sweatshirt, chinos, and sneakers, hardly "Gang" attire. He was walking in the rain, talking on his cell phone. When he realized he was being followed, TM ran to escape, but Zimm kept on following. After that, the facts are murky, and witnesses disagree about what happened. Add to that a sloppy police investigation as far as how the evidence was handled, photos taken, blood samples not taken, and I too think it will be difficult to come up with a murder conviction. Manslaughter, perhaps. Had the police done a better job of investigating, it might have been easier to corroborate (or not) Zimm's story. Now, we have little except his word, and he's lied about at least one thing, so there is plenty of room for skepticism as far as his testimony.

Had he just taken the time to identify himself and ask Martin what he was doing in the neighborhood, or asked him if he needed assistance, things could have been so much different. Instead he had to play "super cop", and look where that got him.

Lots of assumptions going on here - hope the jury can avoid that and as someone said use common sense and not emotion.

Using your own quote of the self defense laws:

The theory that you put forth - that Martin attacked Zimmerman because he was being followed, does not rise to the "meet force with force" standard of the self defense law. Being followed does not constitute being attacked and does not give one permission to attack the other person.

That is not my own quote, it is the law.

Yes it didn't rise to that standard of the law, but then again he didn't shoot the cop wanna be. I am afraid that I would disagree with you on whether he did not have the right ... We will never know because dead men can't speak.

I don't know if he's guilty or not, but I do know that I'm getting older and whether he did it or not doesn't change that fact at all.

:BigApplause:

Florida's Stand Your Ground Law is based on a dichotomy and as such the jury will have only one of two choices. The operative word is "reasonable".
If the jury find that Zimmerman was correct in that he had "reasonable believe that his actions were necessary then he will be set free. Conversely if the jury finds that his actions were "unreasonable" then he will be convicted as charged.

The jury will be charged to judge what the reasonable person would do if faced with the facts presented Zimmerman's .

If Zimmerman does win he can thank his lawyer whom I believe is doing an excellent job of presenting this case to the jury.

I am not enamored with the Judge

Zimmerman is claiming self defense - not "the stand your ground" defense.

There is a big difference between the two!

My Own Thoughts
 

This trial is based on self defense, not stand your ground. I personally think that GZ's attorney decided to go with self defense because there would be more doubt about which one was standing his ground.

In trying to keep an open mind about the whole thing, I think this business of self defense comes up because GZ shot TM when he was down to keep him from getting to his gun when he said that he thought TM was trying to get it. He did not shoot him just because he got punched in the nose and was getting beat up. Big difference. Unfortunately, at least for me, is about GZ lying on numerous occasions and the embellishments he provided and speaks volumes as to his credibility. With all that went on about hiding the newer passport, trying to hide monies (even from his own counsel), and not even speaking up when he knew his wife was lying speaks volumes for his character. Just remember, too, all of this is based on what GZ has had to say since the other one is dead and cannot rebut any of it.

I think the judge is doing an excellent job following the law. As for her being the judge, it kinda goes back to the old adage of "be careful what you ask for". Remember, there were two others before her.

If this case is about self-defense how can anyone doubt what happened after the professional witness forensic medical examiner testified today. Any could someone please tell me why Trayvon didn't have a mark on him???

Remember this is not about who started it, but was GZ justified in shooting Travon 'cause he feared for his life?

The Forensic Medical Examiner hit it out of the park today for the Defense team.

The defense is right now at this hour (after 9 p.m.) trying on live TV to still get in the text messages and photos of Trayvon Martin trying to buy a gun, fighting, threatening people, and marijuana use...Stay tuned !!!

Been watching the whole trial. He is NOT GUILTY!
Not even close!
But it ain't over for Zimmerman. Expect Martin's parents to start a civil suit and you might even see Eric Holder get involved.
They will (the Martin believers) track and attack George for years. These people will ignore the verdict as they have decided what it is.
The race baiting is at a fever pitch!
BB

Tough ending tonight. Judge Nelson practically walked out on the defense.

The Judge unbelievably just walked out on the defense at 10 p.m. and will most likely deny all their requests again. And she ordered them to be in court before 8 a.m. even though they have no time to prepare. As a paralegal she is setting herself up for an Appellate reversal bigtime if Zimmerman is convicted. I am seriously wondering if she has been threatened or if she is afraid of retribution.