Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="dilligaf" data-source="post: 955004" data-attributes="member: 11476">The Castle Doctrine may not have any validity in this case but there are still parts of the investigation that have not been released to the public. You cannot make a determination on the case based solely on the Castle Doctrines application to this. (and so you know, I do not necessarily disagree that the Castle Doctrine doesn't have any validity to this case)As to the 'seeming' ease that one can invoke self defense and walk away, it is still "Innocent until prove guilty" regardless if you like it or not. There are many cases that stink to high heaven. There have also been many (way to many) cases where an innocent person has been wrongly charged, tried and sentenced to prison. If Zimmerman is found to be wrong in shooting Martin then he should be charged. I firmly believe in the Castle Doctrine. I have the right to defend myself. I DO NOT have the right to go after someone who is leaving the scene with the intent of doing bodily harm to that person. There are witness statements that say that Martin attacked Zimmerman. You do not know what happened between the time Zimmerman followed Martin and Martin attacked Zimmerman. What if Zimmerman had been told a second time to return to his vehicle and was in the process of doing just that? As to the 911 recording that showed Zimmerman saying derogatory things about Martin, calling Martin a 'coon' does not justify Martin attacking Zimmerman. There are too many gray areas that have not been addressed to the public yet. Again, let the investigation play out.  </blockquote>

Verification