Having wounds is not evidence of having been attacked first. We've heard nothing about whether Martin had any wounds other than the gunshot wound to the chest, and it could be just as simple as Zimmerman confronting him, grabbing him by the arm, getting pounced on and ultimately killing the young man.
As I've repeatedly said, I simply want Zimmerman to stand trial. Nothing more, nothing less.
It should be the court system that is deciding whether it was self-defense or murder, not the police department because that is a decision to be made by the judicial system.
Also, I would ask how it can be self-defense when Mr. Zimmerman was clearly told by the dispatcher to not follow Mr. Martin but to let the police handle it. Mr. Zimmerman decided to keep following him, totally ignoring the instructions he'd been given. Also, if anyone had a right to feel threatened, it was Mr. Martin who was being followed by an armed man he didn't know. I think if anyone was defending himself or "standing his ground", it was the man who was killed. By the way, it is Mr. Zimmerman who has the criminal record. What criminal record does Mr. Martin have? I've got to wonder why someone with a criminal record would be allowed to have a gun license. I don't think I'll ever live in Florida if they allow criminals to buy guns and get licenses to carry them.
__________________ Truly the penitent is not one who laments over the evil he has committed, but one who laments over all the evil that he is capable of committing. A wise landowner not only cuts the thornbush that has pricked him, but every thornbush on the field that is waiting to prick him. St. Nikolai Velimirovich (1880-1956) in Prayers by the Lake
If the weight argument doesn't mean anything, why did you use it?
I didn't use it. The weight argument is the argument over exactly how much each one weighed compared to height. What I was referring to is that Zimmerman was clearly bigger than Martin AND ARMED, while Martin was smaller (bulk wise) and unarmed.