Details seem a little too sketchy for a definitive conclusion here.
Much like the Martin case though, the initial reports certainly favor a manslaughter case. Of course, we all know how unbiased the media reports this kind of thing.
I don't think you get a jury to convict him, though, not at 2 a.m. in Louisiana, inside the guy's fence and next to his back door.
The key is if he imposed an immediate threat. I don't think he did. From what I gather:
- Kid was standing next to shooters car in his gate driveway after he hopped the fense.
- Kid has history of burglaries and his brother even calls him a professional theif
- Kid did not have a gun
I don't think he had legal justification to shoot the kid, but getting a jury of 12 people to all believe that is a challenge. You break in to people's property and steal stuff, you put yourself at risk. Zimmerman was a slam dunk acquital. This one will be close.
ETA: Seems there is an
unidentified witness whose story conflicts with the shooter. Depending on what the witness saw, it may be enough to convict, even deep in the south.