zimmervon the zimmerman/trayvon case is only interesting in one sense: the point of view the jury takes. i explain. i'm a minority who's been getting the short end of the stick from the man all my life. i'm just walking down the street. when some other minority asstard gets all up in my grill. the sumbitch just wouldn't just let me be. so i pop him one. he goes down. and i walk away. or would have. except he goes for a gun. so do i. cause i really don't want to get shot. except i'm too slow. shit. on the other hand. this is my neighborhood. and i patrol it to keep the shits out. who's that? hrm. he might be a shit. let's find out. i'm all polite. but this kid's got serious attitude. why won't he just answer my damn question. fine the cops are coming. let them deal with him. and i walk away. or would have. except the next thing i know i'm eating pavement. and the kid's still screamin at me like he's going to kill me. and i go for my gun. cause i don't want to get my head beat in. he attacks. i shoot. he's dead. and i'm alive. i did the right thing. you can say otherwise. but i'd be dead now if i hadn't. yeah okay. simple no? the problem is, the jury's never going to hear trayvon's side. cause he's dead. they're going to have to make something up. maybe not in the courtroom. but certainly in their minds. it'll be interesting to see what story they tell themselves. for me though, it's a bit simpler. it was a stupid situation that resulted in a death. culpability lies with the person who created the stupid situation. which appears to be zimmerman. but it could be a nearly impossible thing to prove. on the gripping hand, it might be as simple as what you should have learned on the playground at recess: you can't go crying to teacher cause johnny hit you back.  ¶ 8:00 AM