[Rooivalk]

You state many false claims that, if you were to read many of the postings on FR would show you that your wrong on many of your assumptions. Zimmerman was following Martin. He had a right to as a neighborhood watch person. When the dispatcher said to stop that it wasn’t needed Zimmerman said OK and was returning to his car. Witness accounts back him up on this.

So you admit that Zimmerman decided to leave his car and follow Martin ON FOOT. That action right there makes Zimmerman the aggressor since he had NO AUTHORITY to confront anyone on foot or otherwise.No authority. Nada.

Zimmerman's job was to WATCH, not confront. And I ask you what part of WATCH don't you understand?

Even the police dispatcher agreed that Zimmerman was to WATCH and not engage. Yet he made the choice to engage. On foot.

So tell us why did he do that?

[Molon Labbie]

Rooivalk, as a police officer, I am telling you that Martin or any other citizen has a right to follow any suspicious person in their neighborhood and yes, even ask them what they are doing or who they are. The person being asked has no legal obligation to answer. Absent a private peace disturbance (fighting words) directed at the suspicious person, they don’t have right to assault the questioner.

There is no evidence that Zimmerman said any fighting words, but there is evidence that Martin attacked him anyway.

They cannot physically detain them (citizens arrest) unless they have personally seen them commit a crime, usually a felony.

Zimmerman was a volunteer with nothing that was legally binding in his “job” as neighborhood watch captain other than the normal laws any one of us is bound by.

A dispatcher has no legal authority to tell ANYONE what they must do.

If Martin ran away from Zimmerman, he can easily argue that he only ran after Martin to observe his route of travel and destination, not to detain or confront. That is still WATCHING.