What kind of person would think that Zimmerman had the right to...

[John2]

192. To me stalking

innocent people is against the law, unless you are a policemen. What Zimmerman did, provoked the incident. That is a fact known.

This is where the law kicks in for no right to self defense if Zimmerman had some fault. Zimmerman is trying to use a small portion of the law justifying self defense, if he was the initial aggressor. He is trying to claim his life was in danger,in order to use deadly force on Martin.

Martin is the only person had wounds indicating he fought Zimmerman with small abrasions on his hands, but strangely Zimmerman has no wounds, indicating he put up a fight for his life, except firing a gun. He hasn't even mentioned throwing punches at Martin. That is not using all available means to escape before using deadly force to kill someone with a gun.

I think this is becoming politically racially charged. Zimmerman had no right to monitor, or follow Trayvon Martin without him being in some kind of criminal activity. His excuse was some kinda program empowered him to do so, yet everyone in the community that lived there doesn't even know Zimmerman. If they didn't want people going through that area, then the community should have closed it off and put up no trespassing signs.

So that community is responsible for Zimmerman's actions if they gave him such authority. If I was Trayvon's parents, I would be seeking a civil lawsuit against the owners of that property, and the people authorizing Zimmerman to act as a police officer. The law can work both ways here. Martin had a right to go from point A to B without being accosted by Zimmerman.