Here is the thing.
Humans get caught up in the emotional excitement of traumatic situations.
It doesn't matter their age.
Most folks understand the following.
A person walks in on their spouse cheating.
That person gets so caught up in emotion that they go get a gun and start firing away even when their spouse is fleeing.
Most folks understand the above, yet they fail to understand being emotionally caught up under other circumstances, such as this case.
They both are similar in that they are traumatic experiences where the individual gets caught up in the emotions of the moment.
I would suggest that folks start understanding and considering being caught up in the emotions of the moment when judging such.
What the guy did was illegal, but understandable.
I hope the jury walks him, or that he receives the lightest sentence possible.
I doubt anything harsher serves any actual purpose.
As for the following that was slipped in this topic.
Negligent homicide?
iLOL :lamo
He deliberately shot Trayvon in self-defense. That is not negligence.
And you doing so would fly in the face of the evidence. So all you would have done is idiotically hung the jury.
:doh
Not for Zimmerman, as he was acting in self defense.
It's like you forgot all the evidence presented in Court.
You seem to have forgotten, Zimmerman didn't confront Trayvon at all.
Trayvon confronted him. Has to return to an area he was not in to do it. Either that, or he laid in wait.
So no, simply following to keep eyes on a suspicious person until the police arrive, is not "arguably initiating a confrontation".
Trayvon returning to, or coming out of hiding, once Zimmerman stopped keeping eyes on him was the initiation of the confrontation.
Zimmerman did not initiate the confrontation, and the police never told him to back off.
