OTOH, reports state that the “watchman” himself had been in trouble with the police.
Mr. Zimmerman's claim (which is consistent with the physical evidence) is that he was assaulted by the "kid". What part of assault is not a crime in your world?
Again, the "watchman" had been arrested, but the charges had been dropped. When the charges were dropped any claims that he has "been in trouble" became false.
What evidence is there that Mr. Zimmerman was assaulted? Oh, yes, that’s right - Mr. Zimmerman said so.
It seems there are many excuses being made for this Mr. Zimmerman. He is given the benefit of the doubt, no matter what. Meanwhile, the victim - the one who was killed - is being presumed guilty.
We know from Zimmerman’s own 911 call that he was pursuing Martin because he thought the teen looked suspicious. We know the teen was running away - Zimmerman says so himself to 911. We also know the teen had only candy and iced tea with him. Now the teen is dead, and Zimmerman claims he acted in self-defense. Who’s to say the teen himself wasn’t acting in self-defense?