I read the accounts and find them useless as the Zim's wanabee analyses, phone calls to the law, his past record of violence and his financial lies.
All we have is Zim's self-serving account as to the initiation of the incident.
Zim's best defense is the guy who says he saw Martin on top of Zim.
Even if in the worst case, Martin was Hannibal Lecter walking down the street with a bottle of Chianti and a take out container of Fava beans, we don't know if Zim started it and then started to lose the fight.
Zim had taken martial arts - that makes him obviously aggressive and wanting to fight a gansta. Oh - maybe that analysis is baloney. He was carrying a gun and studies show that exposure to guns make you aggressive. Thus Zim must have started the fight. Or that's baloney and no way to say. But it has as much validity from research as the gangsta posts.
I do know Zim should have stayed in his truck. Objectively, without real knowledge of the fight start - it is projection on to how it started. I don't value Zim's testimony on that.
If he gets off, it is because of a hold your noise reasonable doubt as compared to him being a poor, soft victim.