Florida's Murder 2: The unlawful killing of a human being, when perpetrated by any act imminently dangerous to another and evincing a depraved mind regardless of human life, although without any premeditated design to effect the death of any particular individual, is murder in the second degree
http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/FileStores/Web/Statutes/FS09/Ch0782/Section_0782.04.HTM
Instead, committing an imminently dangerous act with a depraved mind means committing an act an ordinary person would know is reasonably likely to lead to death or serious injury, doing so with ill will or evil intent (but not intent to kill), and doing so in a way that demonstrates a complete indifference to human life. This is known in other parts of the country as depraved indifference homicide or depraved heart murder.
http://www.aedmiston.com/tampa-bay-criminal-defense-lawyer/homicide/second-degree-murder.html
Yes, Woods, I think there is evidence for a murder 2 conviction, and you are wrong that the "critical" point is that Trayvon attacked Zimmerman.
Prosecutors charge the highest crime upon which they think they can convict. She has the option adding the lesser crimes as an alternative any time before trial. If she goes for a "depraved heart" claim, she will need to prove that Zimmerman engaged in conduct that showed extreme disregard for human life, but she does not need to prove premeditation. The prosecutor will need to prove a mens rea (mental element) of "recklessness." The jury will weigh whether Zimmerman was "reckless" in his decision to follow Trayvon, despite being told not to...whether he was reckless in refusing to even verbally identify himself to Trayvon.
If the jury says yes, it does not matter whether Trayvon attacked Zimmerman or not because Zimmerman would have been deemed as creating the situation..."but for" Zimmerman showing reckless disregard, no one would have died. If he creates the situation, he cannot then legally claim self-defense.
This is one example where the media worked as a 'watchdog' because this crime definitely should have been charged, though I certainly do not condone how they manipulated the audio tape, etc. The audio manipulation bothers me much more than any claim that they tried to hide that Zimmerman is Mexican. That is important to white people because they lump blacks and Mexicans into the same category: minority (non-white). Mexicans and blacks, however, have long had deep-seated racial animosity towards each other, as us Californian natives understand.
More of them are forgeeting an even more important piece of evidence: No one here actually knows what happened that night.
It is a rare trial indeed where anyone "actually knows" what happened. That's why we do not have a legal standard of proving something beyond ALL doubt. The jury is supposed to make reasonable inferences; that's their job. And 'circumstantial' evidence is very good evidence. An inference, based upon circumstantial evidence, combined with another inference, based on circumstantial evidence, combined with another inference, based on circumstantial evidence, etc.=beyond a REASONABLE doubt.