Video: Court Records Detail George Zimmerman Injuries

Florida Law states that if you start the fight, you can’t “settle it” with deadly force, and then use self-defense as a legal defense. Normally, the prosecution has the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the homicide. This is not the situation in this case. Zim has admitted to the homicide, but is claiming an affirmative defense - that the homicide was justifiable. With an affirmative defense, it’s the attorney for the defense that must prove it was justified beyond a reasonable doubt.

Therefore, the case is not dependent on whether there was a fight, but rather, who started it. The prosecution, with the aid of the 911 call, asserts that Zim first profiled Martin as a criminal, & followed him in his SUV. Then pursued him on foot, not stopping when advised to (refusal to meet police at the mailboxes, and distance he traveled for his parked SUV), and confronted Martin, thus provoking the fight.

Zim’s attorney will have to prove that Zim stopped the chase. But there is more. SYG says that if Martin felt threatened, he has the right to defend himself, which includes a preemptive first blow. Zim’s attorney will have to prove that Martin didn’t feel threatened, and the fight, if started my Martin, was malicious. It appears that the difference between one of the stories Zim told detectives that night and the stories of Zim’s father, brother, and friends, were their attempts to build just such a scenario. As Zim on the call says that Martin ran, and ran away from any confrontation, Zim’s statements that Martin turned malicious may need independent verification to be believed.

Reggie LeBlanc of LA 1:52PM May 16, 2012