That isn't self defense.
The injuries George and Treyvon received are consistent with George being fearful for his life if the fight continued - but they do not determine who initiated the confrontation.
All posters saying this proves that Treyvon started the fight.... how?
If the case continues it will be based upon who started the fight to establish self defense - not who was losing the fight.
That isn't self defense.
Can you cite statutes or rulings in support of this claim? (I'll stipulate that who started the fight is relevant to whether one believed one's life was in danger.)
That isn't self defense.
That is true. However, it is not up to Zimmerman to prove that he didn't start the fight - it is up to the prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman started the fight in order to negate any self-defense claim by Zimmerman. So far, the evidence appears to point toward Martin being the aggressor, but the state probably cannot prove who started the fight one way or another. In this case, that favors Zimmerman, because legally, he doesn't have to prove anything.
As a lawyer, I can tell you that is not true.
It differs from state to state - and it's even codified as part of Stand You Ground (Florida Statutes 776.041; which is different than common law) - but the attacker can declare the right is over, physically separate, stop - and if the other party continues, the initial attacker can draw the gun. 776.041 is even tougher. If you can't separate because you can't retreat, you can fire.
I'm just telling you the law. Read it; don't believe me. I learned it in law school years ago and I've read it multiple times since Zimmerman.