IF you believe TM gf then TM confronted GZ when he first asked "Why are you following me" then GZ asked "What are you doing here".If TM then punched GZ and they began wrestling around on the ground TM might have felt GZ gun when he was on top of him.IF GZ was back on his way to his truck like he said he was that makes TM the aggressor not GZ. I am sure if GZ was waving a gun around TM would never have punched him in the nose and broke it,unfortunately IMO TM did not realize he was attacking an armed man.GZ was not acting against the law until he thought he had no choice IMO.What if when everything comes out it shows GZ was telling the truth do you still think he deserves to spend life in jail? I sure do not.IMO,JMO and all that jazz.
Let me put it to you this way: if a person that had been following me in the dark suddenly confronted me angrily, and answered my question of "Why are you following me?" with his own question of "What are you doing here?" as though he were actually entitled to demand that information from me, my response would not be polite, or even civil, and would probably include some not-so-nice words about the not-so-nice place where that person could go. My right to walk in an area where I have every right to be is not superseded by a another person's desire to play rent-a-cop, and I think that kind of mind set assumes Zimmerman had some sort of authority when, in reality, he had absolutely none at all to follow, confront, or question Martin.
What I wouldn't do, however, is just attack that person out of hand for it, because I'm not a violent person. I don't think anyone would do that unless they already have a propensity for violence, and it has been attested to repeatedly by all who knew Martin that he wasn't a violent person in the least. Zimmerman, however, DOES have a record of violent behavior, and, IMO, I don't think he would have hesitated to lay hands on Martin if he didn't feel like he was getting the answers he wanted.
I will also say that when and how the gun was made known is a real point of contention for me. For one thing, Martin couldn't have initiated an attack over the gun unless it was already out, and Zimmerman claims it was in his waistband; he said at one point that Martin saw it in his pants and tried to pull it out when they were already down and wrestling.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/04/02/us/the-events-leading-to-the-shooting-of-trayvon-martin.html NOTE: I like the nifty interactive map. It's all high-tech and stuff. :wink:
And that would have to mean that Martin, who has no history or record of violence at all, decided to jump Zimmerman and darn near beat him to death without even knowing he had a weapon, which doesn't sound all that plausible.
The alternative is that the gun was out, and a teen that previously seemed set on evading and getting away, suddenly grow a set of cajones the size of watermelons and decide to aggressively confront a man with a gun. Again, doesn't sound all that plausible to me.
I don't know how the gun came into play, but I personally suspect that Zimmerman, fueled on certainty and feeling confident knowing that he was armed and police were on the way, confronted Trayvon and questioned him angrily (as the gf overheard). But I can't imagine that once he was face to face with the kid he'd been trying to catch up to that he would just stand around with his hands to himself, can you? So I think he grabbed this kid by the arm so he couldn't get away and Trayvon struggled (pulls away, maybe started swinging), so Zimmerman pulled the gun, and that's when the fight over the gun started. That's my opinion, but I think it's a lot more plausible than what Zimmerman is trying to sell us.
Does starting an altercation and then pulling a gun on someone because you can't subdue them any other way qualify as self-defense? I don't think it does. And considering that Zimmerman and the truth don't appear to be the best of friends, I would be shocked to my toes if his story is even close to being true.
