Recent case. This woman was a victim of domestic abuse. Her ex-husband attacked her in her own home putting her life in danger and all she did was fire a warning shot. Her husband wasn't even hurt. And they just gave her 20 years for attempted murder. Looking at the evidence she was clearly standing her ground. Why was she convicted? She's black and female! They are appealing it and I hope she gets acquitted but I'm not holding my breath. Even if she wasn't justified under stand your ground under the circumstances "reckless endangerment" would be a more apt conviction than "attempted murder". She wasn't trying to kill him just frighten him away. Her case shows a major racial disparity in justice. Even if you believe Zimmerman was justified, if you believe he was just defending himself he was acquitted with less evidence in his favor.
If roles were switched where Trayvon was a older black man who targeted a 17 year old white boy, he would be found guilty even before he stepped in the courtroom. The people would have made a decision even before the case that Trayvon would be guilty. Blacks are 7 times as likely to be charged for an offence against a white person than the other way around. The reason these cases get so much hype is that most of these cases are almost passed over. They are a representation of the bigotry that leads this country. Many older whites try to claim victimhood and state that if it was the other way around, the black man would be set free. Statistics show that that assumption is wrong and that African-Americans are almost always guilty of a crime like that. The reason the media doesn't cover these crimes is because in the end, most people know the African-American person will probably be put in jail.
I think the roles had a lot to do with the verdict, and if the roles were reversed and Trayvon was the security guard who was set upon by a suspicious acting Zimmerman, there would likely have been no charges filed in the first place. But if there were, then with the same evidence he would have been found not guilty.
How they ended up fighting is irrelevant for self defense. Prosecution should have said Trayvon allowed Zimmerman up when John Good came out and said he was calling police and Zimmerman should not have shot as the only way he could get his gun was by Trayvon retreating. A New York case Roderick Scott (Black) shot unarmed 16 teen Chris Cervini saying he was charging him from the car that a group of 3 white teens was breaking in to. No injuries to Scott, but acquitted. Jurors in Trayvon case were emotional and wanted to follow their heart and find him guilty of something, but had to follow the law.
I think that if Trayvon Martin was the man on watch and Zimmerman was the 17 year old kid, this would not of happened because you have to look at why Zimmerman went to interact with Trayvon was because of the recent crimes, and the crimes were with from black people. So If it was a black man on watch seeing a white kid would not be a app to investigate. However if it did play out like it did, I still think that Trayvon Martin would not of been found guilty.