That affidavit has some serious flaws in it.
First off, Zimmerman did not confront Martin. According to the 911 recording, Zimmerman stated he had lost sight of Martin and was returning to his vehicle to await the police. Martin then confronted Zimmerman. This is a factual fallacy in the affidavit, which is a sworn document and the investigators may be charged with perjury for falsifying information in it.
Also, didn't the father of Martin say that he did not believe the voice calling for help on the 911 tape was Martin's? I'm fairly sure I read that somewhere.
There are also opinions made, such as Zimmerman had "profiled" Martin. This is an opinion and uses charged language and should not be in a probable cause affidavit, unless Zimmerman had stated to officers that he had "profiled" Martin.
This entire affidavit sounds like it was written by the attorney for Martin's family. A probable cause affidavit should contain only facts, not opinion and conjecture.
“I’m all in favor of keeping dangerous weapons out of the hands of fools. Let’s start with typewriters.” - Frank Lloyd Wright
"Both oligarch and tyrant mistrust the people, and therefore deprive them of arms" - Aristotle