PredFan
Diamond Member
- Oct 13, 2011
- 40,690
- 6,925
Doesn't have to be. There is evidence of assault justifying the use of force. There you go spouting off shit that you believe and has nothing at all to do with the truth.BS, there is NO evidence that Martin tried to kill GZ. GZ might have suffered those lacerations to the back of his head when he fell backwards. The "head banging on concrete" lie could not have occurred since there was no concrete where the struggle took place.And of course you are simply lying your ass off.Not necessarily.Who started the fight is irrelevant once Zimmerman was on his back pleading for his life. After that point Martin was legally obligated to let him up, but instead he kept going according to other witnesses.
If you are armed and start a fight you are responsible for putting your own life in danger therefore it's pretty tough to claim self defense.
CCW permit holders are held to a higher standard as they should be. GZ was obligated to try to avoid any situation that would require him shooting someone
Try it and tell me how your trial goes.
There is no way to know who started the fight. The only evidence we have shows that Martin tried to kill GZ. Sufficient grounds for self-defense.