The George Zimmerman Verdict and the Conversation We OUGHT to be Having

[malasadas.livejournal.com]

Since the jury acquitted Mr. Zimmerman, I have read it asserted far more vigorously than before that Trayvon Martin violently assaulted Mr. Zimmerman first and that resulted in a legitimate use of the firearm in self defense. It is certainly a POSSIBILITY that Mr. Zimmerman's telling of the story is absolutely true, and it is clearly not possible to fully refute it. It is also an important technicality to note that "not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt" does not mean the jury fully believed Mr. Zimmerna -- it means that there were reasonable doubts about other scenarios and the prosecution failed to establish them to that standard of proof. In American criminal law, that standard is properly seen as incredibly high and for very good reasons -- the idea is SUPPOSED to mean that it is better that many guilty people go free than for one innocent person to be jailed. We fail that standard too often, but the high burden of proof within a court of law is absolutely the correct one to use.

However, outside of a court of law, it is actually permissible for citizens to draw their own conclusions and high profile cases that dominate media outlets practically invite our inexpert opinions. I will openly stipulate that this is my inexpert opinion.

I don't believe Mr. Zimmerman's account in its totality because, while it matches some of the scant evidence of which act followed which, his version is embellished with what I believe to be cartoonish fictions. Mr. Zimmerman's account, which was released in his reenactment, includes Mr. Martin telling Mr. Zimmerman "You are going to die tonight" and, upon being shot, "You got me". It is my perogative to find this ridiculous, and I do. It brings to mind classic cartoon characters clutching the heart, rolling around on the ground, bending up and down and finally coming to rest with a lilly in one hand and a little halo of birds in flight.



I also think it is important to remember that when the dispatcher asked Mr. Zimmerman if he was following Mr. Martin, it was at 7:11:59 according to the timeline. His call with the police lasted until 7:13:41 and the 911 call about a fight in the walkway area between units was at 7:16:11, and Mr. Zimmerman's account is that he was attacked by Mr. Martin in that area of the complex, not at his truck. Given the location of the fatal encounter and Mr. Zimmerman's truck:



It is fairly obvious that if Mr. Zimmerman WAS returning to his truck it was either minutes after his call ended with the police or he returned to the truck, changed his mind and went looking for Mr. Martin again. While it is true that Mr. Martin did not run all the way back to the unit he was staying in in the time he had, it is also true that Mr. Zimmerman did not simply return to his truck and wait there until he was attacked by Mr. Martin.

Given what I consider Mr. Zimmerman's embellished description of his fight with Mr. Martin and given his agitated statements about assholes always getting away, I find it very likely that he was not waiting for the police by his truck as he said he would in the call but that he was still out looking for Mr. Martin for several minutes after his call with the police dispatcher ended.

What happened at that point is, as most people with a reasonable perspective admit, disputable. Is it possible that Mr. Martin then approached Mr. Zimmerman, exchanged hostile words and violently attacked him as Mr. Zimmerman contends? Yes, it is. It is also plausible that Mr. Martin approached Mr. Zimmerman, exchanged hostile words and that Mr. Zimmerman tried to keep Mr. Martin from leaving and prompted the fight. It is also plausible that Mr. Martin was still talking on the phone (the call that went dead between 7:16:00 and 7:16:59) and Mr. Zimmerman, without provocation, tried to detain him and that prompted the fight.

I do not know which one happened, although I do not believe Mr. Zimmerman's account can be taken at face value. But that disbelief does not establish the other accounts to a reasonable doubt which was the prosecution's burden.

I will leave the section, however, with a reminder: to those who have spoken and written as if it were PROVEN that Mr. Martin violently assaulted Mr. Zimmerman FIRST, you are wrong about that level of certainty. What you are certain about is that the prosecution could not prove that Mr. Zimmerman initiated that fight within a reasonable doubt. Conversely, if the criminal proceedings were different and it was Mr. Martin who was being prosecuted for assaulting Mr. Zimmerman, you would have to accept that there was reasonable doubt in that eventuality as well. Namely, the evidence that permitted Mr. Zimmerman to be acquitted would also require that Mr. Martin be acquitted of assaulting him.





As I wrote above, I do not fully believe Mr. Zimmerman, but if his version of events is questionable to me, there is not another version that can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The police investigation was not especially solid. The other real eye witness is dead, so there is no counter narrative by a credible witness to events. If multiple scenarios are actually plausible, the presupposition in our system is supposed to favor reasonable doubt. Fair enough.

Further, the jury instructions may have left the jury with no choice but to acquit. I do not like linking to The Huffington Post, but the author here is qualified and it is not one of their awful lead stories. If this analysis is correct, the judge declined to instruct the jury that they could consider if Mr. Zimmerman had provoked the final confrontation with Mr. Martin. Contrary to popular belief, Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law does not permit someone to provoke a fight and shoot his way out. There is an "initial aggressor" limitation to the law that disallows someone who provokes violence to claim self defense unless he flees or, in essence, cries uncle.

The prosecution wanted the jury to be instructed in that limitation to the Florida law, and the judge declined to do so. With that, the jury was instructed in the parameters of the Florida law that allowed Mr. Zimmerman to claim a legitimate self defense and were not instructed on the limitations of that claim. Without that instruction, the jury could not consider if Mr. Martin felt legitimately threatened by Mr. Zimmerman or if they did not believe that Mr. Martin was the first to make the confrontation physical. Absent those consideration, Mr. Zimmerman's being on the losing side of the fight legitimizes his claim of self defense regardless of any doubts about his account that someone might have. If I were on that jury, even with my belief that Mr. Zimmerman made up at least some of the conversation in his version, if I were faithful to the judge's instuctions, I would have to acquit.





As reaction to the verdict has unfolded, it is abundantly clear that the conversation has remained deeply centered on the disputed events of that night -- so much so that I am front loading this entire post with it to stake out my multiple takes on it in the hopes that a more important conversation take place. Lengthy, back and forth, yes-yes-yes vs. nope-nope-nope arguments over the disputed facts of that night distract from a vital question that is at the very heart of why Mr. Trayvon Martin is dead at the hands of Mr. Zimmerman. At the heart of it is why did Mr. Zimmerman suspect Mr. Martin in the first place?

It may be true that Mr. Zimmerman's neighborhood in Sanford, FL had been subject to a run of break ins by young black suspects. It may be possible to conclude that Mr. Zimmerman's phone call to the 911 dispatch was acceptable given that context and given that Mr. Martin was not known to him although I will get to that momentarily. It is clear to me that Mr. Zimmerman was far more than interested in the actions of someone unknown to him a neighborhood subject to burglaries. He commented to the dispatcher about "assholes" who "always get away". He got out of his vehicle and was still out of his vehicle when he claims Mr. Martin assaulted him tens of yards away and between the rows of units. Far more than being suspicious of Mr. Martin's presence in the neighborhood, Mr. Zimmerman was obviously quite intent that this particular "asshole" was not going to get away. This is not mere watchfulness; this is anxiousness. And if he had followed the actual guidelines of real neighborhood watch organizations, he would not have been on his own and he would not have left his vehicle. He would have called the police, told them what he saw and waited for them. If you conclude that Mr. Zimmerman was being responsible in his watchfulness despite this, I do question your judgement.

Further, I dispute the reasonableness of assuming Mr. Zimmerman was right to suspect a young man who, ultimately, was simply walking through the neighborhood to the home of a resident. The problem is the one that exists with most applications of profiling, specifically racial profiling. Take New York City's Stop and Frisk program. Now it is sadly true that criminal suspects in NYC are roughly 80% black and Hispanic. They also make up roughly 62% of victims of criminal activity. Some might then argue that the 87% of stop and frisk stops that are black and Hispanic were justified. But that misses a crucial point: just because a criminal demographic is heavily concentrated in a certain racial profile does not mean that most members of that racial profile are part of the criminal demographic. It is, in fact, racist to subject huge members of a racial profile to suspicion of criminal wrongdoing based upon the minority of that profile who are criminals. And the numbers on stop and frisk back that up -- 89% of those stopped in 2012 were entirely innocent out of more than 473,000 stops. That's over 420,000 stops that were an insult to the dignity of each and every person stopped. That's 420,000 stops that put a strain on the relationship between police and the community. That's 420,000 stops that make it LESS likely that people who live in high crime neighborhoods will trust that the police see them as law abiding citizens in need of police help rather than as automatic criminal suspects.

Profiling and the ability of many people of otherwise good character to participate in it, contributes to a system which perpetually tells young blacks, especially young black MEN that it is not enough for them to be as good as their white peers; they must be better. To be held above suspicion means eschewing any outward sign that one may fit a white person's stereotype of a black man intent on commiting criminal mischief. Geraldo Rivera's anti-hoodie comments in the immediate wake of the shooting is a particularly offensive and clownish example of that.

But it goes beyond that -- this element in our society has led many black men to have to go to extraordinary lengths to legitimize themselves in the face of law enforcement and other citizens, even if that black man is a national treasure like Levar Burton:

It is hard to tell if Mr. Burton is laughing or crying when Tim Wise recalls the time a police officer, without question, helped him break into his own car.

This is reality. This is life for millions of law abiding black people. This is racism. And if you argue that Mr. Zimmerman was entirely and unequivocably correct to suspect and follow Mr. Martin simply because Mr. Martin could be seen to fit a profile of previous criminals in his neighborhood, then I question not just your judgement but your wisdom.

Finally, a truly ugly side has emerged more prominently since the verdict. And it is the post-mortum character assassination of Mr. Martin. I've read almost triumphant declarations that Mr. Martin was a "thug" based upon the misbelief that it was proven in court that he assaulted Mr. Zimmerman without provocation. I point out again that this is absolutely not the case. Worse are accusations that Mr. Martin was clearly out for no good because of some of his high school suspensions. While these may be true, it takes a particularly desperate desire to see Mr. Martin as an awful stereotype to take up a less than perfect high school record as evidence that he was a bad person or prone to violence. Even worse is the resufacing of alleged content from Mr. Martin's Facebook and personal email accounts -- that originated with the claim of hacking from an avowed White Supremacist posting on the carbuncled ass of the Internet. This material leads to accusations that Mr. Martin was involved in drugs, especially a concoction made up of cough medicine, candy and fruit drinks, that he was proud of fighting and presented himself as a "thug". Considering the ultimate source for these accusations, I stand by my assessment that they are part of a corner of society that is not content with Mr. Zimmerman being exonerated -- they want Mr. Martin to have "deserved it" much as the citizens of Omaha, Nebraska believed Will Brown "deserved it":







I am deadly serious on this point. The posthumous assault on Mr. Martin's character has three negative effects: First, it clouds the issues of the night in question because even if all of these accusations about Mr. Martin were true, Mr. Zimmerman had no way to know them on that night and they could have played no role in his decision to suspect Mr. Martin of wrongdoing. Second, it sets up an irrelevent morality play that insinuates that even if Mr. Martin was doing nothing wrong that night, then we should not feel quite so sorry about his death since he was "one of them". Finally, it plays directly into a relic of America's White Supremacist past -- a past that generations of heroes, both black and white, have struggled, bled and died to abolish -- that relic is the belief that any black man must continuously prove himself to be better than anyone else, possibly better than anyone can be, or to face scorn and suspicion that is justified in the minds of the people holding him suspect by vicious stereotyping. There is an effort to shoehorn the young Mr. Martin into a narrative where no black man can be viewed without suspicion.

I do not know the full depths of Mr. Zimmerman's heart. I do not know or have evidence that he is hardened racist and I suspect that he is not. I do believe that he allowed widely held stereotypes of black men to suspect Mr. Martin. I do believe that he allowed himself to become agitated at the thought of another "asshole" getting "away with it" and that agitation prompted him to violate sensible guidelines of community watch volunteers that would have avoided the deadly confrontation altogether. I do not condemn him as a hardened racist for this, but I note him as a contributor to a racist system in our society, as many of us are.

The people who are so intent on making Mr. Martin fit into somer version of the black brute stereotype -- an intent entirely unnecessary to acquit Mr. Zimmerman of murder -- those people are seeding the conversation with some of the most vile aspects of our national past, a past that, to this day, we largely refuse to talk about. They are possibly doing a service by being so obvious in their intent as it demands that we stop thinking this thought process is entirely a relic and entirely encapsulated in the American Deep South. White Supremacism was so mainstream in American society a mere 50 years ago that citizens of communities across the nation rioted rather than integrate their schools. And it is still with us today in the need some of us have to assert not merely Mr. Zimmerman's innocence beyond a reasonable doubt but to assert the assumed badness of Mr. Martin.

If you have found those protrayals compelling, then I do not merely question your judgement and your wisdom -- I am worried about your soul.

Comments

[notmrgarrison.livejournal.com]

Are all your times correct?

the 911 call about a fight in the walkway area between units was at 7:16:11
It is also plausible that Mr. Martin was still talking on the phone (the call that went dead between 7:16:00 and 7:16:59)

[malasadas.livejournal.com]

Yes. The call went dead during that minute and I haven't a source that can pinpoint the SECOND.

The 911 call about the fight was made at 7:16:11.

Glad out of this entire post, that's your first stab....trying to poke a hole in the ambiguity of the final confrontation, I figure that is good for at least 300 comments without a single discussion of profiling and racism.

[dexeron.livejournal.com]

I agree with you, especially in the last parts of your post, about the conversation we should be having. What's gotten me so riled up the last few days is not disagreement over legalities, or versions of specific events, or even really the question of what was morally right and wrong in the situation: it's the insistance on not merely establishing legal exoneration for Zimmerman, but the complete character assassination, the othering, of Martin. For too many, I fear, it's not just about wanting to see Zimmerman aquitted, it's about justifying feeling good about Martin's death.

[malasadas.livejournal.com]

I have to agree whole heartedly with your last point. I can, after a lot of thought, conclude that the acquittal was necessary under the law, but I doubt that most people who insist they KNOW Mr. Martin initiated the violence would apply the same legal standard if the case that concluded was Mr. Martin's for assault. After all, it isn't that the blame for the final confrontation is impossible to properly assign, it is that Mr. Martin ABSOLUTELY attacked Mr. Zimmerman without cause.

It speaks to a real need for Trayvon Martin to fit into the "black brute" stereotype so the outcome is acceptable. And the people leading the charge on the drug angle? They need some real time in spiritual counseling because they have their feet firmly planted in America's most ugly relics.

[peristaltor.livejournal.com]

Yes. Well put.

[the-rukh.livejournal.com]

100%. It's monsterous.

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

Its been a process of watching Zimmerman become The Noble Victim and then The Hero.

[pastorlenny.livejournal.com]

One element I would add to this is the seeming total incomprehension certain racially privileged individuals seem to have regarding the psychological impact of being personally and demographically othered day in and day out for one's entire conscious life. Many such people can barely handle a single act of passing rudeness on a supermarket checkout line or on a local thoroughfare. They are in no position to judge the range of emotional responses a black teen male might have to the umpteenth personal insult by someone willfully or unconsciously abusing their authority. This is not to excuse any true assault and battery ZImmerman might have suffered. But let's get real. It is a bit unrealistic to expect someone like Trayvon to respond to unwarranted harassment by a wannabe punk with "No, suh, I ain't up to no good at all, suh. Yes, suh, Ah will be on my way suh."

[malasadas.livejournal.com]

You, sir, cut to the quick. Can't quibble with that.

[jonathankorman.livejournal.com]

I second malasadas. Spot on.

[dwer.livejournal.com]

QOTD.

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

Thank you Pastor.

[tigron-x.livejournal.com]

Is it possible that the media wants a riot, and they're trying to manipulate people's emotions?

[malasadas.livejournal.com]

No.

[rimpala.livejournal.com]

And don't forget the girlfriend's testimony, people like to ignore it because they want to concentrate on her being "uppity" or something apparently, (seriously this is what I've been hearing about people when they talk about the trial around here, all truly irrelevant to the case of course.) but the phone call described clearly that Martin was getting suspicious of Zimmerman following him around the complex, enough so that we turned to face him because he didn't want him following him back to his house.

And she did have a point, "They already had the person that shot him".

[musicpsych.livejournal.com]

You have a good point. To try to see it from Martin's perspective, on top of what pastorlenny said above, Martin may have thought that Zimmerman was targeting him with bad intentions, which could have included violence, vandalism/destruction of property, etc. He likely didn't know that Zimmerman was part of the neighborhood watch.

[aviv-b.livejournal.com]

Thank you, thank you, thank you. I am so sick of hearing that he was on the way to make a dangerous drug because of tea and skittles in his possession. Or the trace of THC in his toxicology report. Or him doing stupid things on Facebook. Show me a teenager who hasn't done some stupid stuff in their lives. To quote George Bush Jr. "When I was young and stupid, I was young and stupid." Well that's just fine if you're a rich white kid like GB, but not so good if you are a young black man in Florida.

The character assassination that has been going on, not only in the right wing media, but repeated by people in this community who really should know better is disgusting. This young man is dead. Killed in cold blood. And the plain truth is that regardless if he was a 'thug' or not, regardless if he was going to make drugs out of tea and skittles or not, regardless of his hoodie, regardless of trace THC found in his blood, he'd be alive if Mr. Zimmerman had exercised a minimum of caution expected of a responsible adult. Zimmerman failed to exercise what most places without 'stand your ground' laws consider to be reasonable actions to avoid harm to himself and others.

We'll never know who approached who, who started the fight, but we sure know who ended it. And the other side can't testify because dead teens don't talk. Everyone seems to miss the point that if someone is following you around, you also have the right to 'stand your ground' and tell that person to f'k off. Martin had every right to be where he was, doing what he was doing and he didn't need to explain that to some wanabee cop.

[cheezyfish.livejournal.com]

to those who have spoken and written as if it were PROVEN that Mr. Martin violently assaulted Mr. Zimmerman FIRST

I hope you aren't directing that at me? I certainly don't know who attacked who first, but I did make a strong claim in the previous post that the likely scenario was that Martin went to confront Zimmerman, not the other way around, and I don't remember anyone claiming Martin for sure attacked Zimmerman. Also your map is a little bit off. The location of the shooting was farther north near the "T" in the sidewalk. The video of Zimmerman's account puts it up there and there is news video of the crime scene where the yellow tarp covering Martin's body is just barely visible from the east to west section of the sidewalk, near the street. Although, I agree with those possibilities you present, one thing that makes me doubt the scenarios that Zimmerman was trying to detain Martin was something the lead investigator said he bluffed during the investigation:

At one point during his interview with Zimmerman, Sanford Police Officer Chris Serino bluffed that Martin's cell phone may have captured video of the incident.

"I believe [Zimmerman’s] words were, 'Thank God, I was hoping somebody would videotape it,'" said Serino. "Either he was telling the truth, or he was a complete pathological liar. One of the two." (http://www.hlntv.com/article/2013/07/02/george-zimmerman-trial-trayvon-martin-day-7)

[rowsdowerisms.livejournal.com]

I would think given Zimmerman's involvement in his wife's perjury charge would lend credence to a pathological diagnosis.

What to believe.

[gillianinoz.livejournal.com]

Things I've heard since the trial ended in no particular order:

Black shooters with white victims are 11 times more likely to be convicted than white shooters with black victims.

George Zimmerman was not officially recognised by the NSA as member of the Neighbourhood Watch.

10 000 black people have shot each other since Zimmerman shot Martin.

Martin's father lived in the gated community.

Zimmerman's father was a magistrate and Zimmerman skated on several charges over the last decade including assaulting a cop.

Zimmerman has been accused of sexually assaulting of a woman for 10 years starting when she was 6 years old.

Martin attacked Zimmerman without provocation - armed with the sidewalk.

Only in the US can a black man be killed by a Hispanic man and white people be blamed.

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

Only in the US can a black man be killed by a Hispanic man and white people be blamed.

http://isteve.blogspot.com/2012/12/quiz-can-you-pick-out-white-hispanic.html

[musicpsych.livejournal.com]

I agree that we should be having the conversation you mentioned in your third part, but we can't. It's too emotional. There are too many "scare words" I've seen, too much history to dredge up that doesn't reflect where we're at in 2013 (like the Will Brown picture you posted in part 3 - by the way, I'm not a mod, but adding a warning or spoiler-cut for that picture would be appreciated). The latest "scare term"/accusation I've seen thrown around is "white supremacy." (Oh, I just finished your post - you used it, too.) Why would anyone engage in a conversation in which they might be accused of being a white supremacist, when they might well be compared to the KKK? It just seems so loaded to frame the debate that way. Does it still count if you win an argument in an echo chamber?

I think a lot of Zimmerman's motivation that night was a mixture of machismo and a desire to play wild west town sheriff, like he was emulating a TV/movie character who fights crime. Can we really compare Zimmerman's profiling with the NYPD's profiling, or is the Zimmerman case being used as an opportunity to bring up the NYPD profiling? It seems like such a different scale, to even compare NYC with the small community where Zimmerman lived. I wonder how big the neighborhood was. Because it's not simply the fact that Martin was black, but also because he was someone Zimmerman didn't recognize as being part of the neighborhood. If he had been a long-time resident, would Zimmerman have followed him?

I don't doubt there has been some character assassination for Martin, but some of the things brought up are relevant in the case in determining what we each individually believe happened that night. In court, we judge witnesses and the accused based on their character, right? So why wouldn't it be relevant to bring up the school suspensions, or the drugs? They didn't factor into what Zimmerman knew about that night, but they may affect how we believe Martin acted that night. It's not a choice between an extreme reading of the evidence, or nothing. There is a middle ground to take. To me personally, I think it helps to get a realistic look at both men, without vilifying or sanctifying either.

(By the way, Is your link correct in this sentence? "Some might them argue that the 87% of stop and frisk stops that are black and Hispanic were justified." Or should that say "were not justified"?)

[malasadas.livejournal.com]

White Supremacy is not a scare word: it is a legitimate explanation of our past, and not our far distant past either. It was legislatively defeated but its effects and repercussions are not yet gone, and some portion of our population still adheres to it. If we don't name it for what it was and what of it is still resonating in our society, we dishonor and undercut the struggle to defeat it. Our national narrative on our Apartheid period and what of its effects still afflict us is infantile

[policraticus.livejournal.com]

Good post. I don't really want to rehash this anymore, to be honest. I don't think this is much different than the OJ verdict. People read onto it whatever prejudice or agenda they want to promote. This article, though, is worthy, I think, of your attention and the attention fo the wider forum. FWIW, I think it is one of the best and most clear headed explications of the case's wider importance.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/frame_game/2013/07/trayvon_martin_verdict_racism_hate_crimes_prosecution_and_other_overreactions.html

[malasadas.livejournal.com]

Good article, thanks for the link. Certainly, a clearer headed take than many.

I will remain heavily dismayed by the investment some seem to have made in the notion that Martin can be properly declared a punk and what that implies about their affinities.

[mahsox-mahsox.livejournal.com]

Zimmerman certainly seems to be lying his butt off, but that by itself to me doesn't mean there is no reasonable doubt to be found for a defendant. A lot of people lie under stress in situations where they don't really need to. To me "reasonable doubt" can mean there is a possible alternate story consistent with the evidence that makes you say "yeah that sort of stuff happens too sometimes, it really does... it is much less likely to have happened but it also isn't bizarre that it could have happened... and it is understandable how no further evidence exists to support it in this case"

Regardless of whether the verdict was jusitifed (I haven't watched all the case so I'm left with a sense of dissatisfation and rather vague notions of whether the verdict was correct) I can't help but feel there should have been some other law in play there additional to just murder/manslaughter as the court instructed the jury to consider them. Some sort of endangerment or even a public order offense? Or assault? Behaving in a threatening manner can be seen as assault in some circumstances. Maybe chasing a scared person down the street is a form of assault if there isn't compelling evidence they were in need of arrest? Or a form of disorderly conduct? Being a public hazard? Maybe Zimmerman can still be prosecuted for some of that, even if double jeopardy rules put him beyond the reach of the law for the actual act of putting a bullet in Trayvon. I don't think double jeopardy covers people for crimes they committed in the lead-up to the crime they were actually tried for. Does it?

I don't know. I suspect it would be clearer if my legal knowledge was better.

[brother-dour.livejournal.com]

There is one, singular thing that casts huge doubt on Zimmerman's version of events which you are forgetting to mention, OP: he has absolutely zero incentive to tell the truth.

[notmrgarrison.livejournal.com]

If Martin attacked him, he has 100% motivation to tell the truth.

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

Now, isn't that much better?

[malasadas.livejournal.com]

[flcadam.livejournal.com]

I'm fatigued from talking about the details of the Zimmerman case over the last year, but I actually have come to agree with Zimmerman's version of the story. I always felt that his actions were justified under the laws of Florida, and after watching the evidence presented in the trial, I think that Zimmerman is telling the truth about what happened that night with perhaps an embellishment or two thrown in for good measure. I found the jury's verdict to be a relief because after being viciously attacked online for my opinions, I finally received some confirmation that I'm not totally insane and that I was seeing the facts of the case in the correct lens.

As for the conversation on race, this case has soured race relations in my opinion. I'm not white, but I do not like diehard racial justice types. Sometimes I want to just relax and enjoy my life rather than having people run around and bombard me with obnoxious comments about "privilege" and "oppression" all the time. I imagine that after being called racist nonstop over the past year for merely trying to support what they believe to be true, many whites are now turned off of racial politics. Why on earth would anyone want to have a discussion with someone who makes it clear from the get go that they don't really care what you think and that their only goal with the discussion is to force their opinions on you? My prediction is that those who are inclined to care about racial politics will continue to discuss race within their own circles, but they will fall flat when it comes to reaching out to the rest of the public. The Zimmerman case made discussing race seem about as pleasant as going for a root canal at the dentists.

Anyways, I'm glad this case is over and hope that we get at least a two year spacer between the next time that Al Sharpton creates a circus around racial politics and makes a fool out of himself.

[paft.livejournal.com]

Most of the African Americans I know aren't complaining about being "bombarded" with "obnoxious comments about 'privilege' and 'oppression' all the time." Most of the African Americans I know seem to consider the issue of race, white privilege and the oppression of black Americans valid areas of concern, especially given recent efforts at suppressing the vote and gerrymandering black districts to the point of powerlessness. The Trayvon Martin case, far from making them tired of the issue, has in fact galvanized many into speech and action.

[yelena-r0ssini.livejournal.com]

Just wanted to say this is an absolutely superb post and I'm coming back to it later tonight after work.

For the record, though, I think we'd still need to be having the conversation about race that you say we should be having even if there were absolutely conclusive evidence that Martin initiated the physical altercation. Because the fact is that the confrontation would not have happened at ALL if Zimmerman hadn't found a young black man walking at night to be inherently suspicious. That's why the derailment into the character assassination of Martin bothers me to much - whatever he did or didn't do "wrong", Zimmerman had no way of knowing about it. What he knew was that a black kid was walking at night, and that was enough for him to raise the alarm.

[notmrgarrison.livejournal.com]

What he knew was that a black kid was walking at night, and that was enough for him to raise the alarm.

No. You might try listening to the first 911 call.

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

Excellent post. Impressive to be sure to be able to manifest the energy to think about this so astutely. Thank you.

Racism can manifest itself with a broad sympathy for some and a broad skepticism for others, I heard that on Maher this week. Its relevant here.

Call me crazy but what I see is yet another fistfight averted by guns. There are over 1 million concealed carry permits in Florida versus the 35,000 in California. What could go wrong? The NRA sends their condolences to Mrs. Martin, I'm sure.

How do we comfort the mothers of people who wear hoodies and have dark skin? How do we look them in the eye and tell them their child wont be the next Oscar Grant or Trayvon Martin? Who will assuage their despair, terror, and hopelessness? How do we look them in the eye and say they wont be grieving for their own son in four years? How much are we lying to these mothers?