No, it isn't ironic. I think it's evidence that the leftist narrative on Zimmerman - that this was a testosterone-fueled Rambo wannabe who, for no discernable reason sought out a confrontation with St. Trayvon of Da Skittles, just so it could end the way leftists claim all such confrontations do - is just as big a steaming pile of bullshit as the narrative on the thug Trayvon. I think in reality, George Zimmerman was observant and recognized suspect behavior patterns and body language when he saw them, which is why he stuck on Trayvon's case, instead of letting the cops deal with it when they got around to it.
Apparently, the events were more at. . . .
When informed that the police were on the way and that he should return to his vehicle, Zimmerman said, "Okay."
Then the operator asked, "Where is he [Martin] now?"
Zimmerman didn't know because Martin was now out of his line of sight. Zimmerman turned and briefly walked in the direction in which he had last seen Martin, got sight of him again, reported that and then headed back toward his car. In other words, there was an unintentional conflict of instruction here and an attempt to comply within the framework of that conflict.
We know from the forensic evidence, gun powder residue and the bullet's trajectory for starters, that regardless of what transpired between the two after Zimmerman turned again and headed back toward his car, Zimmerman was on the ground face up with Martin on top of him when Martin was shot and killed.
