What kind of cherry picking of the facts (not to mention an apparent ability to read minds) article is this! I expect better from TownHall. When I first heard the MSM description of this incident, I indeed thought that a great injustice had been done. But further facts turned my opinion 180 degrees.
Fact 1: the gated community had been having problems with crimes and home invasions perpetrated by young black males.
Fact 2: Mr. Zimmerman was following the suspect because he appeared out of place and was acting suspiciously in light of Fact 1. This is NOT stalking as it is defined in law.
Fact 3: One of the cops lied to Mr. Zimmerman and told him there was a surveillance camera that caught the whole incident on tape. This lie was designed to shock Mr. Z. to see if he might "suddenly remember" some differences between the account he had just given and what "actually happened." Instead, Mr. Z. simply said "Thank God," implying that this video (if it had existed) would substantiate everything he had said. This was one of the key reasons why no charges were pressed against him by the police!
Fact 4: Mr. Z. claimed the reason he got out of his car was to check the street signs to make sure of exactly where he was, and to see if someone had switched the signs as had happened on previous occasions. There can be no certain independent verification of this claim to be sure, but based on fact 3, there is little reason to doubt his word.
Fact 5: Mr. Z.'s injuries had not been life-threatening UP TO THAT POINT. However, had he waited until they were actually life threatening, he may have already been dead. So this fact is not negative toward Mr. Z. at all but does help verify the claim by Mr. Z, as to HOW he was being assaulted which sounds pretty life threatening to me.
In light of all this, I hope Mr. Lambro's article is really clever sarcasm to make people see what I have written above. It can't be serious journalism.