Zimmerman should prevail on classic self-defense at trial regardless of stand your ground. Raising stand your ground before trial gives him the possibility of a quicker win, and the opportunity to preview the state's strategy before it gets to a jury.Lots more at the link. A whole lot more. But the general take-away is that based on the available evidence, Mr. Zimmerman was acting reasonably and in self-defense.
As I've said before, there is a whole lot more that I need to know before drawing a conclusion. And since I'm not in the jury pool, it isn't likely that I'll ever know enough to satisfy myself, much less others.
But the more I learn, the more the conclusion of justifiable self-defense (regardless of Stand Your Ground) seems reasonable.
