At this point if I turn around and become confrontational with neighborhood watch member and proceed to beat him up, I am clearly guilty of assault.
This is exactly what appears to have happened based on the reported facts.
So far I have only heard about one supposed piece of evidence (reported by media with no corroboration from other media outlets) that supports another story and it directly contradicts other testimony of numerous people.
Based on this it's likely Zimmerman's story is the correct one. Emotion laden, conclusion jumping, mind reading, race baiting, "fact" inventing counter stories don't sway me.
Key statement, “I’m not going to let him get away.” That implies a confrontational intent. I don’t know how anybody can read anything else into that.
You would have to know, with certainty, that the person who is confronting you is part of a neighbourhood watch, otherwise it’s just somebody who is confronting you with an unknown intent, who may be armed.
To assume he did would contradict his statements to the 911 operator. Otherwise, how could he ensure the guy (Martin) wasn’t going to get away, if Zimmerman kept himself at the level of observation. Martin could have just hopped a fence and Zimmerman would have let him get away, so Zimmerman could not have kept himself at the level of observation, yet not let him get away.
What "facts" support this story, as opposed to an alternate story that Zimmerman approached Martin and became confrontational with him. What evidence is there that Martin initiated the confrontation, as opposed to Zimmerman?