Florida's Stand Your Ground law - good or bad law? Poorly understood?

True or false: this creep, that society stupidly let have a gun, made an innocent child fear for his life?

You can argue technicalities but Zimmerman shot an innocent scared kid. Zimmerman is totally at fault for making this kid scared for his life, and Zimmerman is evil stupid fuck who pulled the trigger ending a child’s life.

If the law lets a stalking murderer go free then this law is beyond retarded and it, and everyone who supports it, has their hands covered in the blood of an innocent.
If you make an innocent reasonably fear for their safety, you have no right to murder them if they defend themselves. What did Martin do wrong?

It is amazing, the girl can hear someone pushing and can determine from afar the reason for the headphone falling off someone’s head. I am sure the jury will be impressed by her psychic powers.

Hint: asking someone “What are you doing here?” is not assault.

Although I would disagree with the certainty of the first half of the sentence, yes, the second part of the sentence is possible.

The “stalking murderer” presupposes the crime. Thus your sentence is tautological.

See the previous transcription of the girlfriend’s phone call.

Someone asks you: “What are you doing here?”. What’s your reaction?

Personally, I’d say, “Huh?” Then I’d see that he wasn’t uniformed and I’d say, “None of your business.”

The second Martin was stopped he knew it was because he was guilty of walking while black.

Questions I would like answered. First, what sort of neighborhood is this, that a young black man walking about is worthy of notice? Second, when the young lady who was on the phone suggested that he run and he refused, was it a matter of pride, or was he concerned that being seen running would only make it worse? Thirdly, he had a cell phone and he called his girlfriend? Did he offer a reason why he didn’t call the cops himself? And why didn’t she call them?

Because that can often turn out poorly for young black men walking in neighborhoods where their mere presence is “suspicious”. I can imagine where walking fast and trying to avoid trouble seems like the better choice.

It is perfectly fair for a jury to listen to Zimmerman’s testimony, and the girl’s testimony, to consider all the circumstances surrounding the events, and make a judgment concerning whether Zimmerman is telling the truth or lying. Circumstantial evidence is enough to convict someone.

**Given the evidence we presently have **I believe Zimmerman is lying. Of course, I do not have all the evidence, and such evidence as I do have access to might not convince me beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman is guilty of a given crime. I believe he did, but that is not the same as being convinced beyond a reasonable doubt. But I do see enough circumstantial evidence that I’d be quite interesting in seeing more. It’s possible the totality of the evidence would convince twelve reasonable people that Zimmerman’s version of events cannot be believed, and that he committed a felony, thereby negating his right to self defense.

If I was a hundred pounds lighter than the person who’d been following me, I’d probably ask “why are you following me?” I might also say “fuck off” or “none of your business,” depending on the attitude of the person asking. I certainly would not tell someone what I was doing unless they were a police officer. Martin was doing nothing illegal, walking in a neighborhood he was living in; he had every right to tell Zimmerman nothing at all, anything at all, or to demand an explanation of his own.

Of course, since I’m white, I am never stopped randomly by people who think I’m suspicious. That’s something that happens to black guys about a hundred times more often. I don’t know how I’d react if I were black, but I know a lot of black guys whose natural reaction is to become extremely conciliatory when confronted by anyone who thinks they’re an authority figure, as they’re scared of being arrested, beaten, or assaulted. They shouldn’t have to be that way, though.

Yet according to the girlfriend Martin didn’t respond at all. At least not verbally.

A hundred pounds lighter, but 6" taller and more fit, yes. And you would have said something, right? Yet according to the girlfriend, Martin made no verbal response whatsoever. I would presume his response was physical.

Wrong. From my cite:

Why?

Huh? What?, as in “What the fuck?” You “presume” his response was physical? Is that “presume” in the sense of “I’m going to pull this right out of my ass because I’m in too deep to retreat”?

Wrong. From your cite:

"Trayvon said, ‘What are you following me for,’ and the man said, ‘What are you doing here.’ Next thing I hear is somebody pushing

So - someone asks you “What are you doing here?”. What do you do? Start “pushing”? (not that I think that someone can “hear” pushing).

Zimmerman provoked the confrontation by pursuing Martin, who was trying to avoid him. The more reasonable conclusion is that Zimmerman grabbed Martin as he grilled him.

Fantasies.

Fantasy.

Exactly. Both your conjectures and mine. There is no evidence whatsoever who initiated the physical confrontation. At least none that has been reported.

But a jury can reach a reasonable conclusion based on circumstantial evidence, which points at Zimmerman as the aggressor.

Of course there is. The kid wasn’t following Zimmerman. The kid didn’t put Zimmerman in a position of anxiety and possible threat. Zimmerman manufactured the confrontation, he initiated the problem. If he had just minded his own business, or even called the cops and then minded his own business, none of this would have happened.

Physical aggressor? Can you point to that circumstantial evidence?

You do realize that following someone and asking him what he’s doing here is not illegal, right? And doesn’t make you an “aggressor”?

Even granting all that, there is no evidence whatsoever who initiated the physical confrontation.