[suthener]

> I do believe that Zimmerman did exacerbate the situation and a charge of manslaughter or negligent homicide could have been argued for. <

A guy I know is a lawyer. And he’s passionate about the Second Amendment. Very passionate. He’s taken on cases on behalf of the NRA.

And he agrees with you.

You can argue anything, but you can still be wrong. What convinced me was when Zimmerman physically walked the police through the entire encounter with no inconsistencies or obfuscations. Guilty people can’t do that. They simply had no case for any criminal charge.

[LukeL]

My issue was not the use of deadly force that Zimmerman used, it was should Zimmerman have been following him on foot in the first place. It is clear that Martin had basically a 0% chance of seeing thirty as he would have been killed by the street, in prison, or by the police sooner or later.

I also was 100% behind Zimmerman until after the trial when more and more came out about him. He seems to be a wannabe cop and a vigilante. I think we went out looking for trouble and found it.

Again he was 100% justified in what he did. The question I raised was could a DA have made a legal (but morally wrong) argument for manslaughter based on Florida law.