We can entertain any number of possibilities of what happened before, who started it, etc., but every single detail is irrelevant.     The only thing that is relevant is that Zimmerman was on the ground being attacked. Eyewitnesses back this up and the damage to Zimmerman backs this up. This is why an arrest was never made.    So we can argue semantics all we want, but this is the only part of what happened that matters.     Even if Trayvon started off in self defense, he still ends up on the wrong side of the law. Self defense is only self defense to a point.     Self defense is only valid when used to keep a person from attacking you, it is not an excuse to continue to attack the other person once they're subdued.     You can not beat up a person that is on the ground in self defense. Once a person is on the ground and still getting attacked, self defense protection shifts to them, even if they originally started the altercation. Even by following someone, under law we do not waive our rights to defend ourselves, nor waive the right to claim self defense.     This all means that no matter what side of the issue anyone is on, Zimmerman was ultimately operating within the confines of the law.       I'm going to love the face on the black community once the verdict is read 'not guilty', If it even gets that far. Based on the evidence and eyewitnesses, it may be thrown out before it even becomes a trial since they won't have any contrary evidence to even make a case against Zimmerman.    They're not trying to make a case against Zimmerman based on facts (especially considering all the evidence points to him being innocent), They're trying to make a case based on feelings.    The case they are trying to make against Zimmerman, is like if a woman who was raped (with DNA evidence) is being charged for raping the man who raped her. That's how ridiculous the principle of the case they're trying to build against him is.