I haven't followed any of the threads, neither have I commented on this case at all simply because I refuse to get caught up in the circus that it truly is.
However, I have a serious question since all I am seeing now is how people and lawmakers all over the country want to change "Stand Your Ground" laws.
All of those people mentioned above are claiming Zimmerman used that as his defense when that fact couldn't be any further from the truth. Plain and simply, this case was purely an Act of Self Defense case.
My question is: Why does everyone think he got off by using Stand Your Ground? It only takes a little bit of reading and just a small percentage of common sense to see this. Anyone not blinded by the bigotry and media bias should be able to see this...
Great article about all of this here: LINK
The initial decision not to arrest Zimmerman, former Sanford, Florida, Police Chief Bill Lee said last week (as paraphrased by CNN), "had nothing to do with Florida's controversial 'Stand Your Ground' law" because "from an investigative standpoint, it was purely a matter of self-defense." And as The New York Times explained last month, "Florida's Stand Your Ground law...has not been invoked in this case." The only context in which "stand your ground" was mentioned during the trial was as part of the prosecution's attempt to undermine Zimmerman's credibility by arguing that he lied when he told Fox News host Sean Hannity that he had not heard of the law until after the shooting. During his rebuttal on Friday, prosecutor John Guy declared, "This case is not about standing your ground."