Over the course of the past year I have considered the event
that resulted in the death of a 17-year-old boy.  The trial
presented undisputed evidence of the event that resulted in an
acquittal. It is difficult for me to understand how a person who
stalked another when directed not to do so can be exonerated.
Not until I heard the jury instructions did it become clear.  As
I understand the Florida Legislature's law regarding second-
degree murder and/or manslaughter, the jury was limited in many
ways in rendering a decision. The jury could only determine the
state of mind of the defendant at the time of the shooting. They
were instructed not to consider the precipitating events.  The
fact that Zimmerman determined that the hooded boy sauntering
across the gated grounds was suspicious because he was aware of
previous crimes committed by teens was beyond the scope of the
decision.  The fact that the 911 operator instructed Zimmerman
not to pursue the hooded figure, and he nonetheless did follow
on foot was not a