What about Trayvon's right to stand his ground? Finally, CNN asks the right question.

[ctaylors6]

182. The judge declined to instruct

on the initial aggressor rule. The state asked for it to be included but the judge ruled against them. At least that's what I read in the news and saw when I read the final jury instructions that were posted on the court's website.

So the jury was instructed on the self-defense law by itself. Specifically:

"In deciding whether George Zimmerman was justified in the use of deadly force, you
must judge him by the circumstances by which he was surrounded at the time the force was
used. The danger facing George Zimmerman need not have been actual; however, to justify
the use of deadly force, the appearance of danger must have been so real that a reasonably
cautious and prudent person under the same circumstances would have believed that the
danger could be avoided only through the use of that force. Based upon appearances, George
Zimmerman must have actually believed that the danger was real.
If George Zimmerman was not engaged in an unlawful activity and was attacked in any
place where he had a right to be, he had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand his
ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he reasonably believed that it was
necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or another or to prevent
the commission of a forcible felony."

I have not had time to watch the trial, just read about it in the news. I assume the prosecution argued that Zimmerman assaulted or battered Martin first and therefore was engaged in unlawful activity as well as argued that because of their relative sizes and for other reasons. it was not reasonable for Zimmerman to use deadly force at the time he fired.

Edited to add: There was nothing I could find at all in the jury instructions about stalking. I'm very confused why so many people have brought that up.