If Zimmerman was chasing or pursuing Martin, the “Stand Your Ground” rule is not really applicable. It would not then have been a question of whether Zimmerman could have avoided the confrontation by retreating. It instead would be a question of whether Zimmerman precipitated that incident by his pursuit.

And again, this is a clear misreading of the law, especially considering the case history. Is the contention that the pursuit itself was illegal, or it put Zimmerman in a place he was not allowed to be?

If not, the pursuit itself is irrelevant.

The law is written to define the right to defend ones-self as it exists at the moment of the ‘attack’. It is not written to consider elements outside of that— it would be reasonable if it were, but it wasn’t.