I never wanted to write a post about the Trayvon Martin trial. In fact, I did not intend to. Many of my close friends and associates wanted, or at least expected me to do so. Secretly, I thought they were wrong…and I was prepared to prove it.
I usually try to direct readers’ attention to some current event. George Zimmerman shot and killed Trayvon in February 2012. The media has inundated the public with coverage of the case since that time. There just could not be, in my view much more to say. Rest assured, even in discussing it, I will make no effort to retry the case, nor provide anything resembling a blow by blow of pertinent details.
So I was poised to ferret out another topic. However, then…I listened to an airing of a portion of the Defense’s closing argument. It went a little something like this:
After presenting about an
hour and twenty minutes of his closing argument, Mark O’Mara, the lead Attorney for the Defense, orchestrated a
break. He set a timer for four minutes. After the time on the device expired, Mr. O’Mara said, “That’s how long Trayvon Martin had to
run. About four minutes.”
With that one
matter of fact comment, I knew immediately, “That…is
a bloggable moment!” Not to worry; I
will make this an endless diatribe, or interminable rant.
That
statement, with or without the theatrics of the timer was, in my opinion, the Neutron Bomb, of the case. If in fact, you see whatever unfolded, in the
manner in which Mr. O’Mara explained
it in that comment, you must also believe, in effect, that no matter where he
is, if a black man is being followed by a white man, he better run. Why?
Because to do otherwise, is to place his life in jeopardy; he could be
killed, and it would simply be deemed self-defense.
In this encounter,
Trayvon Martin, who was seventeen years old, apparently had one
advantage, the opportunity to run. Even though:
- Trayvon Martin was
walking (to his father’s fiancée’s)
home from the store; by most reasonable accounts, occupying space for
which he had every right to be in
- Trayvon was unarmed,
except for a bag of Skittles and
a can of soft drink, be it tea or other flavored drink
- Trayvon was profiled; you may say it wasn’t
racial, but he was followed because of how he looked
- Through all of this, Trayvon, it appears from the
rationale put forward by the defense, and ultimately accepted by the jury,
is accorded no rights…not of self-defense,
not of standing his ground, not
even of walking home from the store
Over the past two nights, CNN’s Anderson Cooper
interviewed Juror Number B37. The network maintained her anonymity during a
nearly hour-long interview conducted on Monday,
in which she answered an array of questions that left this writer, and many
others, with the impression that her view of Mr. Zimmerman, of Mr. Martin,
and of the case, was practically a mimeograph
of the Defense’s collective
arguments. According to her, the other
jurors’ outlook was relatively consistent with hers.
On the face of
it, this is a scary prospect. It would
be even scarier, had the other jurors not distanced themselves from her
comments. I have no idea whether the
denials are a function of really having different views, or if they just desperately
wanted to avoid any link to the views articulated by Juror B37. No doubt, that
was especially true after those views
immediately garnered so much negative feedback from across the digital spectrum.
Reaction was
swift and negative! So much so, that Juror B37, who had revealed on Monday, plans to co-write a book about
her jury experience, recanted Tuesday,
saying she decided not to pursue the book.
In a separate account, floating around the digital universe and reported
by the Washington Post, the Literary Agent pulled the deal. It does not really matter. Either way, this bit of “compelling history” will have to wait for an appropriate vehicle.
What
observations did Juror B37 make
during her interview with Mr. Cooper?
She expressed
several opinions some might consider more than a little controversial. A few that rise above others include:
·
The jurors considered the Stand Your
Ground Law…even though the defense did not use that law as part of their
strategy
·
Race played no part in the case; nor of
Zimmerman profiling Trayvon
·
Trayvon was equally responsible for his
death along with Zimmerman
·
She felt sorry for Trayvon (in the
situation he was in)…and for Zimmerman (because of the situation he got himself
into)
·
Juror B37 had no doubt Zimmerman feared
for his life
·
The voice on the tape was “definitely
George”
·
George Zimmerman learned his lesson
about going too far, and he should still serve as a neighborhood watchman…and
he should get his gun back
·
Zimmerman was guilty only of using poor
judgment; he was egged-on by the 911 Operator
·
Zimmerman’s history of reporting black
men to the police, and his decision to follow Trayvon had no role in the
verdict
OK, let us
just go ahead and stipulate, if someone
believes the assertions in all of the bullet points above, it is easy to see
how that particular someone would arrive at a “Not Guilty” verdict. If one
accepts all those assertions as facts, it is virtually impossible to conclude
otherwise.
Not
surprisingly, there has been considerable post-verdict
interest in the case. Many media outlets
as well as casual observers predicted there would be violent fallout from a Zimmerman acquittal. For the most
part, this negative, but oft-repeated expectation has failed to
materialize. There have been numerous
protests across the country, but little violence to date.
On Sunday, President Obama issued a statement on the outcome of the case. In it, he noted that the jury has spoken, and
called for Americans to honor Trayvon by respecting the calls for calm
reflection and by asking ourselves how we can prevent tragedies such as this in
the future.
Here is the
statement in its entirety:
“The death of Trayvon Martin was a
tragedy. Not just for his family, or for any one community, but for America
There remain
various views about this case. These
views include:
- Mr. Zimmerman, his family, the Defense and those who sided with it,
insist, “Justice has been served.”
- Mark O’Mara contends that anyone who does not just accept the
verdict and move on is disrespecting the process
- Fox News host Bill O’Reilly characterized those who are upset about
the Zimmerman verdict as falling into one of two camps: 1) “Those who hate
America; 2) Those who believe their country is racist
·
Blacks receive longer sentences than
whites for having committed comparable crimes
·
Blacks are convicted by far more often when
the jury is all white, versus a more diverse panel
·
Whites are far less likely to be
convicted in a case involving a black victim when the jury is all white, than
when the panel is diverse
Justice is a
complex concept and it often has a complicated array of moving parts. Undoubtedly, that was part of the fractured
narrative accompanying this case. I
admit I watched far too much of the Trial.
Consequently, the verdict did not surprise me.
I would be disingenuous if I said I said I did not
find the verdict disappointing; but surprised, I was not! The vast majority of the analysts I saw
and/or heard contended the Defense
was Storming the Castle on the
prosecution. So many Prosecution witnesses buttressed the Defense’s case with their testimony, combined
with the State abandoning its version
of events regarding which of the two men was on top, assured that the
handwriting on the wall was so clear, even Rachel
Jeantel could read it. In fact, she
pretty much said she did, in her Monday
evening interview with CNN’s Piers Morgan.
I hoped for a
different outcome. Until…I heard that
sobering segment of Mr. O’Mara’s
closing argument: “Four Minutes!” “That’s
how long Trayvon Martin had to run.”
I’m done; holla back!
Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.com
or http://thesphinxofcharlotte.blogspot.com.
A new post is published each Wednesday.
To subscribe, click on Follow
in the bottom right hand corner of my Home
Page at http://thesphinxofcharlotte.com;
enter your e-mail address in the designated space, and click on “Sign me
up.” Subsequent editions of “Break
It Down” will be mailed to your in-box.
For more detailed
information on a variety of aspects relating to this post, consult
the links below:
Posts
1 comment:
True to the presentation of twisted facts, the verdict was not surprising. It helps tremendously all of the family connection to the "justice system" Zimmerman has with daddy being a judge and mommy connected in Washington.
I wonder if that defense would hold if Travon's dad could have 4 minutes with George?
Post a Comment