How can you claim self defense if you pursue someone who walks away?

Like it or not, YOU have no idea what actually happened the night Trayvon Martin was shot by George Zimmerman. There are only two people that EVER knew, or ever will know who began the actual confrontation that ended in that incident. Of the two, Martin is dead and Zimmerman claims self defense. There is NO physical evidence that actually contradicts that claim.

I am not convinced that Zimmerman didn't do several things he should not have done, but the evidence he did something wrong simply doesn't exist. For all anyone can PROVE, Martin actually chased Zimmerman before the physical confrontation.

Note: I am NOT stating what I believe happened, because I am on a the few that admits I CAN'T know. i am simply pointing out what NONE of us know.

Edit: NO, Zimmerman DID NOT know Martin was not armed. It is NO POSSIBLE to know that without actually searching him. I have personally observed a concealed carry instructor pull more than a dozen handguns that I GUARANTEE you would not have been able to tell they were carrying by looking at them.

While Zimmerman directly disobeyed the 911 operator, he had every legal right to step out of the vehicle, follow the person, and question them on their actions to see if they were doing something illegal. At that point, he has the legal right to make a citizen's arrest if the person was in fact doing something illegal. He was acting within legal rights. However, (for the sake of the question assume that Zimmerman's story was true) Martin did not have the right to attack Zimmerman, who was acting within his rights. That is how he claimed self defense. He had the right to follow someone to make a potential citizen's arrest, or something along those lines, but Martin had no right to attack. Zimmerman then acted within his rights according to Florida's ever so controversial "Stand Your Ground" law, and was therefore, acquitted.

NOTE:

If you disagree with the verdict, just shut up. Even if he was 110 percent unquestionable innocent people would still cry racism. You cannot prove reasonably that Zimmerman was lying, and what he did was legal in the state of Florida. If you believe that the law is not right, then voice that opinion. But don't disagree with the verdict on grounds of racism or evidence. There just simply wasn't enough evidence to convict.

Some people understand that there a huge difference between simply following someone and actually initiating a violent confrontation.

Following someone is not a crime, shows no intent or threat, especially when they're a pudgy, short guy talking into a phone that a young, strong street fighter towers over.

Please try to inform your opinion using the facts of the incident, not this fairy tale of racism and evil that you made up.

1) See suspicious person who matches description of robber..

2) Suspicious person ducks between a couple houses..

3) You follow....nobody's there...

4) Somebody jumps you from behind...knocks you to the ground

5) He jumps on you. Your head is being pounded on the ground.

6) You panic, grab for the gun in your waistband.

7) During the struggle, it discharges...

Are you saying this could never happen? I mean..as long as we're talking "hypotheticals" right?

when someone jumps on someone and is beating their head against the ground .. thats when and how.