|
zimmermans account lacks credibility. his own version of the facts is that he did nothing wrong at all. that martin was the aggressor, was winning the fight, & innocent zim was just defending himself from the violent potsmoker. the dialogue to me seems contrived. when does an unarmed teen, by himself, pick a fight with a stranger whose following him?
pretty clear, from the 911 call before the fight, zim was in the wrong mental state for a person packing heat. the dispatcher said not to follow him. Zim did it anyway, out of some paranoia the hoodie kid would get away. the gun possessor has responsibility to not place himself in a confrontational situation. or, if attacked, run & clear some distance, then pull out the weapon & shoot it in the air. given martin had no weapon, there was no excuse for zims actions, none.
|