Fistful, what do you beleive is different about leaving the front door for skittles, and leaving your car to follow a suspicious person who looked at you, and then ran away? I'm not sure why anyone else should be troubled to explain how those two situations are fundamentally different.
Then explain it, please. Am I now supposed to hide in my house or my car, if someone looks at me? If a suspicious person is in my neighborhood, have I now a duty to remain hidden? Is running away now to be taken as a challenge to a duel? You said it would be easy to explain. Well?
How can you justify Trayvon Martin's going out alone, after dark, merely to get Skittles and beverage? Was he not aware that burglaries had been going on? Did he not have a duty to stay in the house, lest he encounter one of these miscreants? And didn't Trayvon Martin further realize he might look suspicious and therefore provoke a confrontation with the neighborhood watch?
Edited to add:
In my last few posts, I'm not talking about the whole case, or the totality of the evidence. I'm just talking about Zimmerman getting out of his car and going on foot, and how or why that would incriminate him. Allegedly, getting out of the car, having seen a suspicious person
walking away, makes Z liable for M's death. If it were alleged that Z had said, "I think he will attack me," or "He looks like he's going to assault someone," the allegation might make sense. But Z's comments to police only pertained to M looking suspicious and burglars getting away with stuff. That does not make Z look like he was knowingly entering into a confrontation.
I heard some cars were broken into at Shakespeare Festival St. Louis, last night. I was planning to go, tomorrow, but I guess I'd better not.