Oooh, Latin! Please demonstrate where I have drawn a conclusion in order to prove a conclusion. To me, it's the folks who say, "Cops are bad; therefore the cop is guilty" rather than looking at the facts that are reasonably established to propose that the older man is guilty of a crime, not the victim. Copitude is just a part of his personality. It doesn't matter to me why he did it; but that he did it, and that texting is not a reasonable excuse for shooting someone, if, in fact, testimony and evidence prove to a court that he did it.
Post hoc ergo propter hoc is Latin for "after this, therefore because of this" meaning that you are drawing a conclusion that does not logically follow from events at hand. "It doesn't matter to me why he did it; but that he did it, and that texting is not a reasonable excuse for shooting someone..."
See, right there, classic "after this, therefore because of this". You might as well say he was shot because he put his child in day care or that he bought popcorn.
Out of curiosity were you one of those people here on FR that was calling for Zimmerman's head before all the facts were in?