I dont have an opinion as to George Zimmermans guilt or innocence. (The usual method of arriving at such a judgment seems to be to take a look at the party affiliation on ones own voter registration card, but it didnt work for me.) But the latest argument against Zimmerman strikes me as pretty silly.
The claim is that Zimmerman must be a liar because he claimed not to be familiar with the legal concept of stand your ground, despite having once taken a course in which that concept was explained at length in class.
I mean seriously? One thing Ive learned in over two decades of teaching is that explaining something at length is no guarantee that anyone in the class even the best students will remember anything about it.