| | What isn't clear to me from the facts floating around, if this was an application of 'Stand Your Ground', then ... which of them was standing their ground?
It's not at all clear, and so, it is reasonable that there is an investigation. There is no reason to second guess the special prosecutor, and so, it must be reasonable that there is a trial to examine this one, because it -isn't- clear which one of them was 'standing his ground' on a public sidewalk that they both had every right to be on...
For example...did Zimmerman show his weapon before or after he was struck with other than a question, "Why are you following me?"
That, to me, would be key. If before, then it was Martin who was 'standing his ground...' If after, then it was Zimmerman.
Do we know, from the facts floating around? Or, do we just don't know, and nobody but Zimmerman knows at this point?
There is another recent case in Montgomery County, PA -- ironically, another Hispanic man -- and it was -clearly- a case of self defense. Two men -- a father and son -- were beating on him with baseball bats, he fled to his vehicle to retrieve his firearm, and even then, he did everything he could -not- to shoot-- he warned, he was beat on, he struck back with the firearm but dud not discharge it, he was beat on, and -then- he fired his weapon. It was investigated and ruled self defense.
This case in FLA seems ... nothing like that, and an investigation and so on for sure seems warranted. So, we should just let the process work, it's as good as it gets, and live with the result.
If he is convicted, there will be no riots. If he is acquitted, there will be riots. I think that is an easy prediction.
|
|
