That’s a good point. That implication is just sort of ‘there’ in most discussions but it’s flat wrong. Even following someone is not assault or being an ‘aggressor’. Martin responded inappropriately and it cost him his life. It’s the ‘ol ‘I’m black and you’re white and you don’t look at me, question me, or tell me what to do’ syndrome. I guess it’s what blacks are taught; Resentment of whites for slavery we have nothing to do with and the blacks of today are not victims of. Happens everywhere, every minute of everyday. At workplaces all over America and in this case in a neighborhood. Blacks need to understand that whites wouldn’t fear them IF THEY RESPONDED IN A NORMAL FASHION!; Too late for Trayvon!
The Zimmerman case is a political lynching made in order to satisfy one group of minorities in this country and to try to convince them not to burn and loot.
Unfortunately unless he is found guilty the rioting and looting will start , trial or no trial.
“Even following someone is not assault or being an ‘aggressor’.”
I don’t know why you add the “even.” Following never has been illegal, unless the person you followed had a restraining order against you, or it amounts to stalking or harrassment. But you don’t just assume it was stalking or harrassment without evidence. The fight is not itself evidence, whoever started it, as most people and apparently the prosecution assume.
I seem to remember the affadavit for 2nd degree murder mentioning Zimmerman “confronting” Martin. Since when is it illegal to confront someone? It’s not. It’s no more illegal than following. When and whether you are allowed to instigate violence is another matter. If Zimmerman started the fight, they must prove it. They can’t. If Martin started the fight, they must demonstrate that Zimmerman precipitated it. But Martin’s options for legally instigating violence very limited, and someone following you is not sufficient. Nor is someone confronting you. There have to be fighting words, brandishing of weapons, aggressive movements, etc. Since there’s no evidence Zimmerman did any of these things, nor evidence that he started the fight—beyond following and “confronting” Martin—there’s no evidence of his guilt.
Now, just like what constitutes “disturbing the peace” lies entirely within the mind of the arresting cop, “following” and “confrontating” can easily be twisted into harrassment, stalking, and “fighting words” by interested parties. luckily, the burden of proof is on the prosecution. Following and confronting Martin did not take away Zimmerman’s ability to defend himself, nor lay the groundwork for 2nd degree murder in the event he shot Martin just because they say so. They have to prove it.
Also, there is the 9-11 recording. Whatever it shows about who was confronting whom and whether or not Zimmerman obeyed a non-order that was non-lawful by a non-officer, it certainly doesn’t show Zimmerman erasing his own claim to self-defense. Nor does it buttress the prosecution’s assertion of 2nd degree murder.
Nonetheless, all the prosecution and the national media know is that an unarmed minority youth is dead at the hands of a kinda-sorta white-looking guy, and it never would have happened if the latter hadn’t followed him and got out of his truck. Which means it’s second degree murder because...? I don’t know, aside from it being politically correct.
Now