you don't answer my counterpoints and you pose irrelevant follow ups to skirt the issue. we're trying to have a grown up conversation here, brah. besides all that, i never gave an opinion or made a claim as to whether he did or did not act in self defense. i was trying to understand your reasoning for saying "well that seems open and shut, zimmerman's gun, zimmerman's bullet, martin dead... slam dunk" because you give this reason pretty often when it comes to Z/M discussions my simple question to you was: 1. are you for seriously saying that you don't understand he is claiming self defense, and that that is the issue the court has to decide? it's a simple yes/no/maybe question and some explanation for your answer. as with much of what i post on this site, it doesn't matter whether it's an honest opinion, devil's advocate, trolling, whatever. as long as everyone is having fun. the ones who don't have fun, lose, the ones who raff, winrar.