I don't know much about the details of the Trayvon Martin shooting but the 'stand your ground' defence has been mentioned many times and my understanding is that it means you can shoot someone in self-defence if you feel your life is threatened.
It seems that Zimmerman felt his life was in danger and shot and killed Martin and so he is innocent.
I again mention that i don't know the fine details except that America has some completely crazy gun laws but the 'stand your ground' defence that i heard explained was that you could claim it in self-defence.
As Zimmerman armed himself, left his car against police advice to do so and initiated the altercation with Trayvon Martin, i'm not sure how he could then claim he was merely standing his ground in self-defence.
If he had stayed in his car then nobody would have been killed in self-defence or otherwise so surely Zimmerman manoeuvred himself into a position where he initiated the conflict where he could claim self-defence.
Isn't this a red light for anybody in America to pick a fight with someone and then shoot them dead when they retaliate and claim they felt their life was in danger?
Maybe i'm missing something here.