In response to tvoter's comment:
I wish Zimmerman would have stayed in his car or that neither of them would have been so ill tempered as to get in a fight but, they did and the evidence shows Treyvon was kicking his a55 and Zimmerman pulled a gun and shot him dead.
If, the defebse had any solid evidence that Zimmerman did in fact stalk him or that Zimmerman threw the first blow or even initiated the altercation then I think manslaughter might be feasible but, they do not have anything substantial and there "star" witness perjured herself at least once.
For example, MA superior court model instructions:
Self Defense: Deadly Force
"...In order to defend oneself with a dangerous weapon likely to cause injury or death or to use deadly force, the person using the weapon or deadly force must have a reasonable ground to believe, and must actually believe, that he/she was in imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury from which he/she could only save himself/herself by using deadly force...
..."A person may not use force to defend himself or herself until he or she has availed himself or herself of all proper means to avoid physical combat.
..."The law does not permit retaliation or revenge. A person's right to lawfully defend himself or herself exists concurrently with the danger. It arises from necessity and ends when necessity ends.
A person may use no more force than is reasonably necessary in all of the circumstances to defend himself or herself. Unreasonable or excessive force is force that is manifestly disproportionate under all the circumstances."
FL is probably similar. I haven't researched. My points were two-fold:
1. Morally, not legally, this is very much on Zimmerman for me no matter how the trial comes out. I dont' care if he is on the neighborhood watch. People should not play cop. I would be seriously worried if someone was stalking me and then tried to confront me.
2. Legally, it does not matter so much whether Zimmerman initiated the physical confrontation. The question for self-defense purposes is: When he's on the ground did he fear for his life and was it reasonable.
And I have a hard time matching up the evidence of relatively minor injuries - a bleeding scrape to the scalp (scalps bleed like hell from tiny cuts) - and a claim that his head was being repeatedly "slammed" on concrete.
I have a hard time believing that someone whose head was repeatedly slammed on concrete is going to shoot someone dead and not so much as have a MRI at the hospital?
Are you kidding? Especially with all the news about concussions? They're worried about high school kids with helmets getting brain damage, and this is someone claiming their bare head was being repeatedly slammed on concrete!
I find your assertion that he is playing cop very parochial. Check the crime statistics in Sanford, and tell me people cary side arms, participatinng in neighborhood watches are "playing cop". A very misguided comment on your part.