It wasn't pre-meditated, but it was something along the lines of instant combat.
What it will boil down to is whether Zimmerman was perceived by Martin as an aggressor and attacked, or Martin decided to attack unprovoked. I think more of the first rather than the second.
I still believe it will reduced Man 1, time served, probation.
Change of venue won't work, because of all the media.
I think it's more likely to be the second than the first but don't have enough info to be sure.In order to decide for sure (or "beyond a reasonable doubt") I'd want to know much,*much* more about *both* individuals.If,by chance,one of them has a "clean" past and the other one a "dirty" one then,IMO,it's most likely the one with the "dirty" one who's at fault.I've heard *nothing*,good *or* bad,about Zimmerman's past.I've heard a bit about the kid's past and,if everything is true and accurate (Twitter posts,school suspensions for example) it paints a picture of a gangsta thug in the making.But I can't be sure if *any* of it is true.
And BTW...it only matters if the kid *had good reason* to see Zimmerman as a threat.I think we all know that there are *millions* of kids in this country that see "threats" where none actually exist.Just listen to all those rap songs about the joys of bustin' a cap in some white pig cop.
That scenario doesn't quite square with this assessment of Florida's 10/20/Life Law. The way I'm reading it, any conviction will require 25 years at a minimum. Unless the prosecution has something good, I can't see a jury convicting him.