I agree. He is a nut. And now a criminal. He needs to be prosecuted for first degree murder. He cannot claim self defense.
Not sure of FL law specifically, but many states’ self defense laws indeed do protect someone who, after initiating a conflict, breaks it off and attempts to withdraw and then are counter-attacked so to speak-the right to self defense may indeed be Zimmerman’s.
The fact that he contacted the police 46 or how ever many times is irrelevant. He was a member or known to be acting as a Neighborhood Watch volunteer-it would be completely reasonable for one acting thusly to be in regular contact with the 911 dispatcher-doing his duty as a volunteer.
On the other hand, if I was walking along doing nothing other than being there and a stranger followed me and then approached me and proceeded to get verbal and eventually physical, I would do my best to avoid it, but eventually I may be required and be entitled under the law to defend myself with essential countervailing force as needed.
All we know is the youth (a 17 YO is not a “boy” by any means) is dead from a single gunshot wound and Zimmerman claims to have done so in self defense. The evidence of an investigation and other information PERTINENT to the case will tell the story.
Zimmerman may have been out of line and indeed guilty as hell but to assess guilt before any trial so determines is unAmerican and illogical.
Maybe the youth was indeed acting out his past (wasn’t he out of his own town visiting Dad “to get his life on track”) or something? Was he a juvy felon type? Is that important? Not sure.
All of this is necessary BEFORE assessing guilt of murder or a relatively complex case of self-defense as already claimed and as prelim evidence may indicate (why else would the local PD or SP?SBI not have already arrested him? He isn’t a cop or something, after all). Isn’t the case before a grand jury right now?
Just because the youth’s family and the city is enraged, means nothing in and of itself in terms of what the state should do. Either we have absolute justice based on fact and evidence or we are Iran, Egypt etc.
That there are no eyewitnesses (that we know of) is certainly in Zs favor, but if he is lying about what happened, it will eventually come out.
Patience is a virtue that we as a nation has collectively lost, it seems.
If Z is indeed a murderer, if evidence and testimony verifies, then he should fry. If he has a claim to SD, and that is either proved or is reasonable in light of the evidence (or lack against such conclusion), then he should walk. That is called justice as man knows it.