I think I agree with that.
Which is even more evidence that you're an idiot. Edit a tape, you should be arrested. Kill a person after stalking them down the road, you should simply be believed that it was self defense and that you did nothing wrong to provoke a bad situation. Stick to sucking the welfare teet, you're much better at it.
Emotions are not law.
Unless it can be proved that the reporter edited the tape to somehow aid or conspire in a criminal act, which cannot be proved, no criminal offense has been committed.
Zimmerman's position is he was not "stalking" Martin. Instead, he was following him to maintain a "watch" on his conduct and report it, which he was doing.
And contrary to a popular notion, he was not "ordered" by the 911 dispatcher to stop following Martin. He was
advised that it wasn't necessary for him to do so (
"We don't need you to do that!"), which implicitly made following or not following Martin optional. And if Zimmerman was acting as an officially sanctioned neighborhood watchman (due to recent crime activity) he was perfectly within his rights to follow Martin.
You may not like the way that sounds but that's the way Zimmerman's lawyer would present it to a court.