Unlike Lizzie Borden in which there remains a doubt about her innocence to this day, we know that George Zimmerman killed Trayvon Martin. The question is intent and circumstances. It is like a glass half empty or half full. Perhaps, the correct jury verdict should have been the third choice that is used in Scotland: “Not Proven.” One can make a movie on the “Rashomon” model in which the story is told from different perspectives so that we have to decide who is telling the truth. We don’t have the dead person’s side of the story. We only have George Zimmerman’s version. The judge wisely excluded anything about the character of the victim so the trial did not revolve around trying the victim instead of the accused. If we are to believe the spin not put into the trial court record, both parents individually tried to do their best to help their troubled child. Trayvon Martin had been suspended from high school in Miami, and this was not the first time. He had been in constant trouble. Perhaps, we had two very nervous people – Zimmerman and Martin -- giving vent to their worst fears. The cell phones telephone conversations are very telling. Zimmerman was calling 911 for help while Martin was boating of becoming a hoodlum. If Trayvon Martin had not been a troublemaker, the prosecution would have sought to have demonstrated that an "innocent" indeed had been executed and therefore Zimmerman should have been damned for killing such a wonderful kid. The case did not revolve around the stand your ground defense in Florida State law. I believe that law should either be abolished or permitted under very limited circumstance in the home itself. The defense team did not use this law but simply pleaded regular self-defense. Perhaps the prosecution’s case was in trouble from the start when the police originally did not find circumstances warrant charging Zimmerman. The police chief was fired. A special state prosecutor was appointed to try the case and she did not go before a grand jury to charge the defendant. There was some indication that some exculpatory evidence was withheld until almost the last moment by the prosecution. The prosecution might have been better off trying George Zimmerman on a lesser charge from the beginning instead of doing this at the very end when the state of Florida permits either side to suggest a lesser charge. The prosecution banged the table because in the end they had no real evidence. Given the black-white background of race relations in this country, perhaps this show trial was inevitable. The federal government could try Zimmerman on civil rights grounds but given that the state prosecution could not prove any racial bias on the part of Zimmerman this would be an uphill battle. The parents of Trayvon Martin could sue but the best I can see for them is getting a hung jury in a civil case. One thing for sure was the drive-by bias by the media in presentation of the case. George Zimmerman was found guilty by the media back in 2012. They were hounding Florida justice to lynch him. NBC even edited the 911 tape in effort to show he was bigot and this I believe was no accident. THE NEW YORK TIMES invented a new ethnic term “white Hispanic” when it turned out that George Zimmerman was a minority. This did not fit the liberal elite scenario of another white guy shooting another black guy. He had a record of helping people regardless of ethnic background and had not been heard to utter any ethnic slurs. The media really demonstrated how drive-by they are Politics drove the case. People protested. People wanted action. The State of Florida acted. In the end there was no lynching despite the mob atmosphere. Justice was delivered when the jury spoke. I agree with the verdict. Nevertheless, a child is dead. The media is guilty of fanning prejudice, hate, and suspicion. spectator.org/archives/2013/07/15/a-vile-show-trial-ends
Posted on: Mon, 15 Jul 2013 16:33:57 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015