From the beginning press coverage of this case has routinely conflated these issues, implying that Florida’s definition of self-defense is so broad that it gave Zimmerman a license to kill in circumstances that did not justify the use of deadly force. The New York Times has been one of the worst offenders in this respect, running one story after another that either obscured or misstated the legal issues while suggesting that both Martin’s death and the delay in arresting Zimmerman somehow hinged on the absence of a duty to retreat. Now the Times is implicitly admitting that its reporting was based on a fundamentally mistaken premise.
One word: Duh!
Turn Zimmerman loose and hang Maj. Hasan !
Fire all involved for refusing to call what Hasan did as TERRORISM and delaying the trail.
Those people involved SHIT on those murdered by Hasan, the survivors and families.
The problem is the Times is still “implicitly admitting that its reporting was based on a fundamentally mistaken premise” , not explicitly admitting it – saying “we were wrong” “we deliberately misled you”.
It’s nice they say the SYG law isn’t involved in the case at all, but they have way too much dirt to clean up with just that one admission.