Couple of things...
First, I am surprised by how many people find that wearing a hood up on a hooded sweatshirt makes one suspect. I don't know if it was raining or cool when this happened, but the simple act of wearing a hood up shouldn't equate suspicious activity, should it? I put up the hood of my coat when I walk the dog in the rain, does that make me suspicious?
Second, I recall reading somewhere that this was a neighborhood watch of one. He was his own neighborhood watch, and not a part of any formal organization. Does it matter? Don't know yet.
Third, much has been made...good and bad...about the background of both players in this event. Backgrounds are irrelevent, it is only the acts of the event which matter to the situation being self-defense or a homicide.
My concern in this whole thing is that the truth has become a victim of the circumstances, and as such we may never know that truth. For the louder the crowds yell, and the larger they get, the more likely it is that someone along the way will say "remember LA burning? We don't want that again/here." And, as such, to appease the masses, there will be an arrest, likely a trial, and then, who knows? But by appeasing the masses, is justice served? Is it a crime because the incident occured as speculated, or is it a crime because millions of people are talking about it and suddenly wearing hooded sweatshirts? We are a nation founded on the principal (at least in theory) that the majorty rules. And, if the majority watching Inside Edition decides that Mr. Neighborhood Watch is guilty, must it be that way, to preserve the peace?
I, for one, watch with keen interest how this plays out, and with hope to know the truth...
