So if kids believe GZ's side of this it means they are prejudiced? Just honestly curious, not trying to be sarcastic.
It's certainly a possibility. In my opinion, an unbiased and objective evaluation of this case might leave open the possibility that it was actually self defense rather than murder, and result in a desire to withold judgement until more information is available, but that is a far cry from assuming that this possibility is a reality.
In other words, there is a difference between A. having doubts about Zimmerman's guilt; B. Concluding that Trayvin is the guilty party. Let's look deeper.
There is ZERO evidence at this time that Zimmerman suffered injuries that would result in a reasonable and rational person deciding that killing the other guy was the only choice. There is ONLY Zimmerman's claim, and that is meaningless at this time.
On the other side of the coin we have at least the following:
1. Zimmerman's lack of known significant injuries
2. Zimmerman's aggressive and racist comments
3. Zimmerman's scripted (and implausible) description of the subject
3. Zimmerman's pursuit of the victim
4. Zimmerman's refusal to follow the advice of LE
5. Zimmerman's deliberate deception of LE
6. Zimmerman's apparent choice to cut-off TM's route of escape.
7. Zimmerman's own statement that TM was attempting to flee the confrontation
8. Two expert witnesses identifying the pleading voice as belonging to the victim
9. TM's mother identifying the voice as belonging to her son
10. Zimmerman's conduct after the shooting
11. Zimmerman's history of violence, including assault on a police officer
12. Statements from Zimmerman's NW partner, describing in glowing terms Zimmerman's aggressive crime-fighter attitude
13. Statement's from Zimmerman's friends and family that do not match known facts in the case.
I could go on, but no need.