Now, if the prosecutor is inept, they have a favorable judge, and/or they hit the lotto during jury selection everything above doesn't matter.
In California, remember the gun hating state, you only need one juror to believe that you are in danger.
And not in danger of dying, but bodily harm(albeit great), in order for the self defense laws to apply.
I don't think that would be very hard for Zimmerman to do, if he were in California. California has no, 'Stand Your Ground' law.
But he is not, he is in Florida. If he convinces just one juror that the man 'went for his gun', he is going to get off. If he convinces one juror that his injuries were real, he is going to get off.
Now why would he plea something out with a conviction, when he can easily be acquitted and discharged?
I have no idea about this 'equal force'. That is not in California laws 197-199, which comes directly from common law. It reads great bodily harm. Even a public defender could show that a 6 foot 2/3 athlete(the media pictures portray him as an athlete) could EASILY cause great bodily harm with his hands or feet alone. And Zimmerman only needs to convince a juror that he believed that he was in danger of great bodily harm, if the wounds to his face and back of head were real, that is a slam dunk. A single blow to the head can be fatal, don't ask me, ask Natasha Richardson(she hit her head on the soft snow of a bunny hill and suffered a fatal intracranial hemorrhage).
The fact that the man was carrying only Skittles and an Arizona Ice Tea(an athlete could do a lot of damage to you with a can or bottle of Arizona Green Tea, I might add) has nothing to do with self defense or not, as the media and family are playing this up as. I could kill you with a can of tea, I doubt I could with the Skittles.
If a Californian man, carrying a gun, confronts another man and that man charges and attacks him and the first man shoots him dead that is self defense. If the man does not have a permit to carry the weapon then he will be convicted on carrying without a permit, not manslaughter; that does not even enter into it. Maybe guilty of some other trivial civil infraction like disturbing the peace or discharging a firearm in the city. He acted in self defense, and would be acquitted and discharged providing he convince a juror that he thought his body or life were in danger.
Anyway, the story the girlfriend on the phone tells backs up that hypothesis that Martin dropped his phone and then assaulted Zimmerman. If Zimmerman would have just shot him in cold blood, then the girl would have heard the gunshot before the phone was dropped and disconnected. And all of this will come out in the trial, which will obviously be played out in the media just like the OJ trial, so we will be able to form our opinions more accurately then. With the facts as they stand right now, this would clearly be self defense in California. You can't just imprison Zimmerman now just to prevent Blacks from rioting when he gets acquitted.
Ps, I contrast California for three reasons, one I don't know what Florida law is nor care to learn. Two, I know that Florida is a much more gun tolerant state and a more Conservative state with respect to self defense and gun laws. Three, I live here and have no intention of visiting or moving to Florida.