by Tanada » Sun 14 Jul 2013, 22:22:33
Clearly many people choose to focus on the skin color of the two men involved in this case. If we would be able to follow Martin Luther King's expectation and look at each of them based on the content of their character instead of the color of their skin what would we see?
A man sees another man walking through peoples yards on a rainy night in a neighborhood where there have been several recent burglary's. He follows the second man while calling the authorities to report what seems to him to be suspicious behavior. The second man is talking to his girlfriend on the phone when he realizes he is being followed. The authorities tell the first man he should stop following the second man. The second man tells his girlfriend he is going to confront the first man using a racial expletive in the process. The second man confronts the first man striking him in the nose and then kneeling over him continuing to pummel the prone first man. The first man has his head slammed into the concrete sidewalk at least twice. The second man at this point has no injuries except to his knuckles where he has been using his fists on the first man. More than one person who hears or sees the altercation calls 911 during this period of the altercation. A third man is an eye witness and testifies that man #2 is kneeling over man #1 and pummeling him. A woman on the phone with 911 is close enough for screams and cries pleading for help to be recorded by the 911 system. Man #1 on the ground being pummeled manages to pull his pistol from the holster and shoots Man #2. A police officer arrives on the scene and renders first aid to Man #2 who shows indications of a gunshot wound penetrating the plural cavity and causing a sucking chest wound. Despite the best efforts of the police officer and the paramedics who arrive soon after Man #2 dies from the gunshot wound. Police officers question the witnesses on the scene and Man #1, including taking photographic evidence of his injuries. It was a dark night with occasional drizzle and miserable weather to be outside.
A jury of six women spend considerable time listening to arguments by attorneys for the Prosecution and Defense as well as reviewing the timeline of events and many pieces of physical evidence. After a day and a half of deliberation in the Jury room they acquit man #1 of all charges by reason of self defense.
In the 14 months between the death and the trial numerous media personalities and politicians express their belief that racism was the motivating factor. The only racism testified to in the trial was the racial slur used by Man #2 in his phone conversation with his girlfriend.
I very much wish that either Man #1 or Man #2 had managed to avoid the confrontation that lead to the injuries to Man #1 and death of Man #2. However wishing will not change anything. Saying that if only Man #1 had done X or Man #2 had done Y might make you feel better, but it doesn't change a thing.
Everyone can play that game, for example what if Man #1 had been knocked unconscious from the repeated blows to his head, or had suffered a severe closed head injury leaving him crippled? Would the authorities have ever captured Man #2 for the assault and battery leading to great bodily harm? The odds are very good Man #2 would have escaped capture simply because nobody knew who he was, and it was a dark rainy night making hiding easy. The story would have been a one day blip in the news even if Man #1 had died from head injuries because assault is a common crime and assailants frequently elude capture. Counter example What If Man #1 drew his weapon while following Man #2 and threatened him with it to keep him from doing anything until the police officer dispatched earlier arrived and resolved the situation?
You can play out a thousand scenarios, but only one of them actually took place.
The fact that the media chose to interpret events in a racially biased manner and repeatedly used photographs of Man #2 when he was a pre-teen and young teen instead of as he appeared at the time of the confrontation can be seen as an attempt to mislead the public as to the nature of the confrontation. Having politicians and media personalities proclaim that the confrontation was Murder from very early on also slants the opinions of anyone who does not review the actual facts of the case as I laid it out above. Justice is depicted as blind folded because justice is perfect when the facts decide the outcome of a trial, not emotional appeals by either the defense or the prosecution.
Martin Luther King would be proud of this jury, they did their best in an emotionally charged situation. Today President Obama said$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he death of Trayvon Martin was a tragedy. Not just for his family, or for any one community, but for America. I know this case has elicited strong passions. And in the wake of the verdict, I know those passions may be running even higher. But we are a nation of laws, and a jury has spoken. I now ask every American to respect the call for calm reflection from two parents who lost their young son. And as we do, we should ask ourselves if we’re doing all we can to widen the circle of compassion and understanding in our own communities. We should ask ourselves if we’re doing all we can to stem the tide of gun violence that claims too many lives across this country on a daily basis. We should ask ourselves, as individuals and as a society, how we can prevent future tragedies like this. As citizens, that’s a job for all of us. That’s the way to honor Trayvon Martin.
Calm, compassion, understanding. Bravo, Mr. President, Bravo!