The cops told him "we don't need you to do that", they didn't tell him not to.
Ok I forgot the exact wording and it was the dispatcher not “the cops” but what is the evidence he continued to do so? I remember reading something that he started walking back to his car and that is when Traydmark attacked him.
It was a dispatcher who told him he did not need to follow Trayvon and George said he had lost him and was returning to his car. It seem that then Trayvon doubled back and attacked George.
The cops say Z should have talked to M. But...had he done that and M attacked him, he would have been accused of confronting M with fighting words. Z handled it correctly in keeping his distance and just trying to see where M went for the police.
In hindsight, it would have been better for Z not to have followed him for location information. But it was not an unreasonable thing to do either. If any one of us could repeat events in our lives with the benefit of hind sight, that would be ideal. Also, remember the cops were probably angry at Z because he stood up against them when they beat a homeless man.
911 dispatchers aren't cops. They have no authority. GZ had a right to follow, him as part of his neighborhood watch.
Actually, it was a 911 dispatcher, not a cop. < /splittin' hairs >