Off The Reservation

There are several things that the State could claim. Provocation wouldn't be high on the list most likely. Instead, they'd probably argue that Zimmerman was the aggressor and had no legal basis to "stand his ground" against Martin. That's just one of many theories that they could use. Read the jury instruction I provided as it might help some more (unless you've already read it). Also, keep in mind that I don't know most of the facts in this case as I've purposely tuned them out so the theories would change based on whatever evidence that they would have if they decided to charge him.

Yes, you are absolutely correct. I will note however that the response to race from various news groups, most notably CNN lacks consistency. When issues of discrimination towards Hispanics are addressed, the differentiation is not addressed. This is actually the first time I have heard the term white Hispanic at any point other than the recent change in our census race classifications. Furthermore our president (not criticizing him) will often refer to the discrimination and hardships that black and Latino Americans face. Again, no mention of white Hispanics. I mentioned he was Hispanic and posted pictures because most would, by looking at him consider him as such. His race has no bearing on his guilt or innocence however it is impossible to ignore the racial undertones the are present in any and all coverage of this case.

so, equa, when SYG is raised, what is required for probable cause to arrest in spite of the defense?

The difference is that the events are separate things. Stand your ground is done by the person-often the Defendant-accused of the "crime." The provocation is done by the victim more times than not. It's really a state of mind issue because the judge and/or jury is asked to place themselves in the shoes of the accused (person claiming stand your ground as a defense) and decide if the person had a justifiable reason to commit the murder, battery, etc., upon the other person.

So, in shorter terms, one is done by one person and one is done by the other. They are two separate acts.

source of information for jurors I found that is an easy to read format.

Read in all cases.
In deciding whether defendant was justified in the use of deadly force, you must judge [him] [her] by the circumstances by which [he] [she] was surrounded at the time the force was used. The danger facing the defendant need not have been actual; however, to justify the use of deadly force, the appearance of danger must have been so real that a reasonably cautious and prudent person under the same circumstances would have believed that the danger could be avoided only through the use of that force. Based upon appearances, the defendant must have actually believed that the danger was real.

No duty to retreat. § 776.013(3), Fla. Stat. See Novak v. State 974 So. 2d 520 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) regarding unlawful activity. There is no duty to retreat where the defendant was not engaged in any unlawful activity other than the crime(s) for which the defendant asserts the justification.
If the defendant [was not engaged in an unlawful activity and] was attacked in any place where [he] [she] had a right to be, [he] [she] had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand [his] [her] ground and meet force with force, including deadly force, if [he] [she] reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to [himself] [herself] [another] or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

^^Zimmerman disobeyed the 911 operator but did not break any Florida State Statute by following the "suspicious person".

Points:
This was a dead case until the parents went to the media. I would have done the same thing.
SYG law is a terribly written law that needs to be scrapped and re-worked
The victim has as good a case for SYG as the killer.
Several in here have used language that most people would consider "race-baiting" at the very least.
I am white and am outraged at the lack of an arrest and full investigation
There is a debate about who cried out for help. Voice recognition experts will help shed light on this issue.
Eye-witness accounts are notoriously wrong, so other evidence can and has been used to nullify eye-witness accounts.
There are conflicting eye-witness accounts.
Race will have a huge effect on this case including how people perceive it. [As we see here]
The killer will never be the same and I suspect, even if exonerated, will need years of psychological counseling to deal with his deed.
Guns in the hands of untrained individuals [and I am not just talking about going to the range and practicing] is a huge issue. Even well trained soldiers and police officers have issues with the use of deadly force. Many folks think it is simply pulling the trigger and going on with your life. It isn't.

Well one account is that Trayvon struck Zimmerman first and I think it even states he did so while Zimmerman was going back to his suv...the witness seems to cooberate this with his account, at least cooberates that Zimmerman was getting his ass kicked

http://www.wnd.com/2012/03/witness-trayvon-martin-attacked-zimmerman/

We perceive situations differently based on experience. Race has a lot to do with our experience therefore how we perceive situations. That goes for everyone involved from the investigators, DA, potential jury pool, media, and us.

I've never heard the term "white hispanic" before. The blatant sensationalizing is just so damn obvious. From the photos of the 11 year old TM, to the leaving out one side of the story, to the portrayal of Zimmerman as a wanna be....I feel manipulated. Well, not anymore.

News doesn't sell anymore. Newspapers are in the dumper. The new wave is to create emotional responses. Racism is a top seller...regardless of facts.

This racism this is getting real old. Al Sharpton is a huge racist but he gets a free pass for some reason.

I've also never heard of "white hispanic" and I think that guy just made it up. Also, George Zimmerman's hispanic ethnicity is of Peruvian origin not Cuban (Coley was the comparative example given who is Cuban and in his mind "white hispanic").

You don't quite get it. There is nothing to change. It is the way the brain works. This is not the forum for the total explanation, but we have come a long way in understanding how the brain works over the last decade. The brain doesn't record images like a camera nor does it "think" rationally. Everything goes through different parts of the brain. And the general, the part of the brain in charge? It is the part of the brain that houses our emotions. That is why people can swear and really believe their account of what happened, but be totally off from the actual action they are describing. This is why two people can see the same event or read the same article and come up with totally opposing thoughts on it.

As to your thing about the media. Yes, the media tries to get eyeballs to it so it can make a profit. All you have to do is put your channel to Fox or pick up the Washington Post, Tampa Tribune, etc. which are conservative leaning outlets to see it work the other direction. FOX has cultivated its audience well and knows what it wants to see and gives it to them. They make a huge profit because of it.

Racism is in the mind, just as everything else is. You denying it exists doesn't change how other people [ie black people] understand it.

That is untrue. As a neuroscientist, I can tell you that your "explanation" seeks to release any personal responsibility from the perspective of the beholder...and that this release is unjustifiable and you are misinterpreting scientific evidence by suggesting that as such. Rational thought, morals, and perceptions, while influenced by previous experience, are still primarily influenced by current choice with only modulations rather than commands from the limbic system.

No, my explanation does not seek to "release any personal responsibility from the perspective of the beholder."
Quite the opposite. It places responsibility squarely onto the observer. It only attempts to explain why eye witness and other accounts can vary so much based on the observers personal experiential bias. As to the rest of your statement, explain to me how "current choice" is not influenced by cultural and personal experience???? Explain to me how white and black people understand and see the same behavior in such different perspectives? That's some "modulation?" In fact if I am not mistaken, cross-racial identification is much lower than than any other identification. That seems to be something hard-wired into the brain, but that would be your area of expertise, so maybe you could explain it? And for you keeping score, neuroscientist and psychologist still disagree about much and it is centered on the effect of culture. But I defer to you on how the brain works and if I have misinterpreted the actual technical details I am sorry. All I know is that we now know our emotions have a much larger degree of influence than we ever believed before. In the applied setting for which I worked for over a decade, we see that play out every day. We even see it played out here in these posts and in your specific posts!