During the debate concerning this incident, some have brought into question the "Stand Your Ground" law, more commonly referred to as the "castle doctrine,"
which has been used by the attacker to pardon his actions.
snip
The castle doctrine as passed, clarified that individuals are lawfully able to defend themselves when attacked and there is
no duty to retreat when an individual is attacked on their property
Read more:
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012...er-not-covered-under-law-wrote/#ixzz1pn0YXGUL
Reads as if the castle doctrine stand your ground law primary sponsor feels that GZ was in the wrong and uses the word "attack" to describe the action.
Unless I am mistaken, castle doctrine should not apply anyway because regardless of who touched who first, GZ was NOT being "attacked" on HIS property.
This is why I am so angry with the initial police response that "oh, we can't arrest him, we aren't allowed - he claims self defense"
It is
so not LE's call to make, it is a judge who will make that call.