The media draw, of the Zimmerman/Martin 'case' is based on many factors. The initial media allegation that it was a racially motivated murder or execution was one. The initial media allegation that 'stand your ground' laws permit the armed to execute the unarmed for 'no reason' except fear is another. As the facts finally emerge, it may fade from the news, as neither of these primary 'assumptions' seem to have played out well. I see this case as a legitimate use of deadly force in self defense, not a 'murder' at all. The issue of 'profiling' is still a central point of many that argue, regardless of ANY other facts, that had Martin not been a young black male, dressed as he was, none of this would have occured. Perhaps there is some validity to that argument, yet very little, IMHO. As evidenced by the description of the 'suspect' used on the police dispacther tapes, behavior played a significant role of the action/reaction of both Zimmerman and Martin. Zimmerman took the 'aimless wandering' of Martin as a sign that he may be 'up to no good', while Martin took the surveillance by Zimmerman as a threat, or sign of disrespect. Nobody, so far, has claimed to have seen (or heard) the initial meeting of Martin and Zimmerman, the key to the 'confrontation'. Zimmerman asserts that Martin attacked (jumped?) him from behind as he was returning to his vehicle and continued to assault him until he used his handgun to stop him. The Martin 'defense' will almost have to be that Martin was 'provoked' into taking that defensive action against the threat/force shown by Zimmerman. I think that Martin, the highschool athlete, decided that he would teach that 'nosy' Zimmerman a lesson about 'eyeing' or 'dissing' such a macho man as he deemed himself to be. You do not bring skittles and an attitude to a gunfight twice.