General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Marcia Clark brought up a great point on Anderson Cooper [View all]Captain Stern
(2,201 posts)Zimmerman's version of the events is that he was struck by Martin and that knocked him to the ground. He then claims that he was being repeatedly struck by Martin while Martin was straddling him, and that Martin was also banging his head against the sidewalk. He also admits to shooting Martin at that point. His claim is self-defense.
The questions:
1. Is Zimmerman's story true? Is there enough evidence to convince the jury that things didn't happen the way Zimmerman said they happened? (In my opinion, there's not so far. although there definitely are other scenarios that could have happened)
2. If Zimmerman's story is true, was it reasonable for him to believe he was in danger of grievous harm? I believe that if things happened the way Zimmerman said they did, then yes.
Once Zimmerman has laid out his case for self-defense, my understanding is that it's up to the prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that his version didn't happen. If they jury thinks that Zimmerman's story could reasonably be true, they should acquit. I could be mistaken, but that's my understanding of how it works.