No, the phrase is "presumed innocent" until proven guilty.
Do you want to argue that OJ was innocent?
_________________________________
"What facts are known benefit Z and implicate T." -----
Which known facts, the ones where zimmerman (armed with a loaded sidearm) got out of his car to follow and martin (unarmed) ran away, are those the facts you mean?
I mean the rather large pile of facts, well & widely discussed on FR in great detail, which you obviously choose to ignore.
“Which known facts, the ones where zimmerman (armed with a loaded sidearm) got out of his car to follow and martin (unarmed) ran away, are those the facts you mean?”
I have seen no evidence to support your theory. Like I said in my above post I will wait to see what evidence is presented at trial before making my decision.
Sorry but you have your facts wrong. Getting out of your car and following another person is not a crime especially when you are with Neighborhood Watch and supposed to be on the look out for suspicious persons. Rather than doing something wrong, he was doing his duty.
But slugging a person with your fists as Trayvon did is a crime. It is called assault. Fists can be deadly weapons and Trayvon was using his as deadly weapons that night. The deadly Trayvon fist barrage came first. The gunshot followed.
“Which known facts, the ones where zimmerman (armed with a loaded sidearm) got out of his car to follow and martin (unarmed) ran away, are those the facts you mean?”
Your description seems to paint a picture that Martin only ran when Zimmerman exited his car, gun exposed, which prompted Martin to take off running in fear. If that was your intent the I say bull hockey.
Zimmerman was on his phone with the police, in fact in mid sentence, when Martin suddenly turned and ran off. In the 911 recording you will see that it is crystal clear that only after Martin takes off does Zimmerman exit his vehicle and head in the direction where Martin disappeared.