I am no First Amendment attorney, but I find it curious that this opinion would have dismissed the case based, at least in large part, on the notion of Zimmerman being a public figure - I would certainly not consider him one for purposes of a defamation claim.
I have always felt the greatest deficiency of the case was damages, since it seems unlikely to me that NBC's editing (which was certainly irresponsible) caused Zimmerman any harm. He was already a highly controversial figure (he was, after all, an admitted killer and on trial for the murder of a minor), vilified by many, when they aired their story, and frankly I don't think the editing materially affected anyone's perception of Zimmerman in a way that caused him any damages. What probably did harm him was the false portrayal of Martin by the media as a skinny 13-year-old honor student, but that is not actionable by Zimmerman.
I am amused, if unsurprised, that people are still predicting a life of wealth and privilege for Zimmerman despite all the evidence to the contrary. The NBC case, even if it's successful, will at best earn him enough money to pay off his criminal lawyers. No publisher will give him a significant advance on a book, and if he publishes one it won't sell. If any publisher thought otherwise, the book would have emerged by now. I would be surprised if Zimmerman ever achieves becoming middle class, much less wealthy.