On the flip side... why would George Zimmerman want to get into a fight with a random kid with the intent of shooting him?
For their to be murder, there needs to be some sort of intent involved. The state NEVER should have gone after a murder charge in this case. They should have gone after a lesser, easier to prove charge. They bent to public pressure, and now they'll likely end up letting Zimmerman walk... although I do believe that he will eventually be found civilly liable.
Perhaps I need to elaborate more on my view and be more clear. I'm not suggesting there is any murder involved. I'm simply suggesting GZ is not telling the whole truth about the fight itself that led to the shooting. Of that, I am 100% confident.
Wanting or not wanting to get into a fight has nothing to do with the point I was trying to get at. It was about the fight as it happened. And the credibility of GZ's account, which doesn't seem to make sense to me.
After second guessing his account...from there I can basically speculate...
I think he killed him to stop the fight, regardless of why the fight happened. And he acquired the gun, on his own, to stop the beating he was receiving.
I don't believe TM reached for the gun, I don't believe GZ was truly in fear of his life, and I think GZ overreacted. He might also have known precisely what his rights were and figured, even subconsciously, that what he was doing was right. And lastly...he knew that justification and could simply tell it to police.
I think it is also possible, in addition to that, that he was shamed by being beaten up and (if so, probably subconsciously) took the easiest way out. I don't think he intended on killing (or set out to kill) TM at all. Just want to make that clear. I also don't believe he could amazingly shoot him straight through the heart while being so...scared and wrestling with the gun.
Anyway, I think manslaughter would be sufficient. Any jail time would be sufficient at this point. I'll let others argue that. I don't know the specifics.
Evidently the ME for the Defense said GZ had 6 wounds on his head.
Two cuts on the back of his head - one abt an inch long - another smaller.
Two 'bruises' on his temples, one on his forehead and his nose.
In other words, you could easily say 4 of those 6 wounds came from punches, likely when TM was on top of him. While the other two cuts on the back of his head came from the cement. And STILL I am supposed to believe TM saw that gun in his back waistband - and went after it. At what point? In the dark? I'm sorry, I am trying to be fair to GZ here, honestly.
I stayed quiet for as long as I could. I waited for the trial. I dodged all the race card BS and the politics. And I've tried to absorb the trial evidence as it has come out. And I ALWAYS presume innocence if I possibly can, through the empathy that people would (hopefully) assume that about me should I have the misfortune of being accused of something. But my goodness...
As I am simultaneously realizing GZ is going to walk free (some FL prosecutors seem to like to over-charge and see the defendants walk), I am also coming to my own realization that there is (likely) little reason he should.