So with the local news reporting that Zimmerman had head injuries, including a broken nose, and Martin had a gunshot wound and injured knuckles, it is apparent to me that Zimmerman’s account which claimed that Martin was the aggressor and was shot in self defense is the most plausible story, considering the evidence.
I recently had a conversation that shows how little some people understand about self defense and the law. Here is the conversation that I recently had:
Woman: but still Zimmerman was the one who followed Martin
DM: Not illegal, and someone following someone is not a legal reason to begin beating on them.
Woman: no, but how do you know who “started it”? Martin had to fight harder, all he had was candy, Zimmerman had a gun.
man has head injuries, the other has no other injury than the gunshot
wound and bruised knuckles. This supports Zimmerman’s statement that he
was attacked by Martin. Since the state has to prove that Zimmerman is
guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, unless
there is some other evidence here that changes the story, there is a
real possibility that Zimmerman is telling the truth. As long as that
possibility exists, there is reasonable doubt, which means that
Zimmerman is not guilty.
Saying that Zimmerman had a
gun is meaningless. It doesn’t mean that Zimmerman was looking for
trouble, simply because he carried a gun, any more than having car
insurance means that you are looking to have a car accident. I have
carried a gun every day for over 20 years, and not once have I started a
fight while carrying it.
Woman: No response.