This message was self-deleted by its author

[chowder66]

266. No.

If you a) pack a loaded gun b) call the cops - why call the cops if you are not expecting them to come to investigate? then ignore the dispatchers advice that there is no need to pursue c) continue to pursue a person who is walking away d) get out of your car with said loaded gun and keep pursuing (possibly confronting the pursuee).... you become the agitator, the aggressor. Now the pursuee is dead from a gunshot from the pursuers gun. The pursuee is dead and unable to "tell their side of the story" but there are traces of what happened via recordings/phone calls. There is a problem with the pursuers background, not so for the pursuee. Even if there was it wouldn't matter.
The event between Trayvon and Zimmerman was obviously a situation for potential disaster and Trayvon did not have anything to do with setting that up.
Zimmerman had everything to do with that by ignoring the fact that he just contacted the police, did not stand down, did not wait for the cops, got out of his car with a weapon and continued to intensify the situation based on assumptions and prejudices. That IS NOT a reason to approach or set up a physical confrontation where deadly force might come into play. Zimmerman had multiples opportunites to stop what he was doing and he ignored them step by step by step.

There is a good case here against Zimmerman.

If I, a woman, was being pursued by a man in a car or on foot and I picked up my pace to get away from him and was later to be found shot dead and that man had injuries, am I the agressor? Am I the attacker? Did I seek out the attack?