And The Verdict Came In…
This weekend we actually snuggled on the couch as man and wife and watched a movie on Netflix. My phone lit up and I looked down to see a CNN push notification that on a Saturday night the jury in the Zimmerman trial was coming back with a verdict.
I got that old familiar itch and I looked to my sweet husband. He said, “No, we’re not watching it live! We’re watching a movie.” Dang, you can take the girl out of the newsroom… We kept watching Bradley Cooper play a bipolar Philadelphia Eagles fan until I gasped at my phone when I saw this…
For the last few days I’ve been watching all the coverage and reading all the tweets. I watched Anderson Cooper exclusively question the controversial, shadowy figure that is Juror B37. I haven’t written about it until now because I’ve been thinking long and hard about this verdict. I want to write about it now, before the Royal Baby is born and the media forgets about the civil rights woes of Sanford, Florida.
Yes, I believe that racism was part of what fueled George Zimmerman’s behavior that led to the sad death of Trayvon Martin. I’m a white woman, so no, I’ve never been a victim of racism and feel it would be inappropriate for me to comment on this case as if I had experienced racism. But, two other things stick out to me that I think should also be part of the conversation.
1. I am an adult and I was once a teenager, so I CAN comment on this. In this case George Zimmerman was the adult and Trayvon Martin was the child. Zimmerman should have done what police told him and got back in his car, gone home and let law enforcement do their job. Instead, he acted like a juvenile vigilante and a youth in his community died because of his actions. That young man was 17-years-old. He was a kid! Zimmerman was the 29-year-old grown-up. I applaud any adult for participating in their neighborhood community watch programs, but part of being a community watch volunteer means you allow authorities to do their job. You do not take the law into your own hands.
Alright, so he didn’t listen to police. He still could have stopped this. Some might argue that evidence showed Martin started the fight. Okay, then I say again, Mr. Zimmerman you were the adult! Don’t fight back and definitely don’t pull out a gun! You are the adult. Stop this behavior. Maybe Martin would have gotten in some trouble for assault, trespassing or fighting or something. Okay, that stinks, but he would still be alive.
2. I think the Stand Your Ground law goes too far. From what we have heard so far, it sounds like the jury based their decision on the Stand Your Ground Law, believing their verdict was in keeping with Florida law. I don’t have a problem with the 2nd Amendment. I understand it. I personally do not want to carry a gun, but I would never take away the right of another American to own one. My worry is that law will continue to fuel citizens like Zimmerman to take the law into their own hands.
Okay, I got it out. Phew! I feel better. Am I off base here? What do you think? Hurry up and respond! Our attention will soon turn to London when the royal waters break across the pond.
Spread it around:
Amy I think you are EXACTLY right. I am right there with you on BOTH points. I have some other feelings in/on this case but the very fact that he completely ignored what the 911 operator instructed him to do makes him the one that set in motion the chain of events that lead to Trayvon’s death and I’m sorry, for me that cannot and should not be overlooked.
Thanks. The sad thing is. No one won in this instance. It was a true tragedy.
I’ve watched this case very closely. I streamed the entire thing while at work. I’m no expert on all the ins and outs of the case, but I do feel like I have a good take on what the jury was able to see evidence and law wise. I was so addicted to it because I knew it was so emotionally driven and I wanted a good opinion on it. One I could back up. I think it is such a shame that this young man lost his life. My heart hurts for his parents. I can’t imagine that kind of loss. But I truly don’t think the jury had another choice in this case. Had he been tried in another State, maybe the outcome would be different. Had they brought the manslaughter charge up in the beginning and the state worked to prove that burden instead of a murder charge they had no hard evidence to prove, maybe it would be different.
Zimmerman did get out of his vehicle but in listening to the non-emergency dispatcher conversation, she asked him where he was. He got out to get an address. Saw him again. When asked if he was following, he said he was. Dispatcher said we don’t need you to do that. He said ok, and according to him (and seemingly by the evidence of where the fight occurred and watching the police interviews and the crime scene video interviews) began making his way back to his vehicle. The confrontation began and we all know the outcome. Did he HAVE to kill him to defend himself? I don’t think so, but none of us truly know how far this fight would have gone. And I think that is where the divide comes. It is all in perception. He perceived that his life was in danger. I think if someone hit me and broke my nose, I’m seeing stars, I’m getting hit again, I feel concrete cutting my head (he said slamming- but again that is perception) – in the situation, I can see where he could assume that he wasn’t going to stop and that the altercation he was involved in could lead to the end of his life or great bodily harm.
When you review the law that the jury was given (after HOURS of arguing from both sides) to judge him by, that is the bottom line. The perception of your life being in danger. They were able to prove that through injuries sustained.
Race has been a huge factor in this. Was he profiled – yes. But I don’t think it was based on his race. I believe it was based on the prior break ins in the community, a friend having her home broken into while she was home alone with her 19 month old and trying to enter the room she was in with him while on the phone with 911 telling them to please hurry, and the fact that (according to Zimmerman interviews with police) he was weaving in and out of homes and looking in windows. Sadly, he fit the description of prior culprits that got away. I think the fire is being fueled in many political and social arenas unjustly. I don’t believe that Martin Luther King Jr. would approve of many of the ways in which some of us have chosen to obtain justice for Trayvon. The rioting in the streets (not the protests that have been peaceful or memorializing Trayvon), the looting, the attacking of others saying ” this is for Trayvon”. *Black Panther offering a bounty on Zimmerman’s head. *Spike Lee giving out Zimmerman’s address (which was incorrect) and inciting a riot at the home. The later actions have never met any kind of criminal charges. And aren’t we doing the same thing that we are trying to stand against when we call him a vigilante cop wanna be? Aren’t we profiling him to fit into a nice little box that makes him guilty of something? You may say that you are basing those assumptions on past history – but wasn’t Zimmerman seemingly doing the same thing? Basing his assumption on past history? Or for that matter if we are going to put Zimmerman in the box of the racist guy that wanted to kill a kid, can’t we put Martin into the box of a racist in your face punk that had a history too (drugs, burglary tools found on his person, fighting constantly)? I just don’t think it is as simple as him being a racist. In a way, that would make this much easier. If he was a point blank racist, I’d say hang his ass! But there are outside factors that weigh heavily on the situation that took place that night. Too many to ignore. Which probably also fueled his perception that his life was in danger.
As far as the stand your ground going to far – I think that is based on perception as well. I don’t know why Zimmerman obtained a conceal/ carry license, but he did have one. So, he did have every right to carry that. Many persons with conceal/carry, are carrying all the time. It is the same as carrying their wallet. When they go out, they carry. No intention to use necessarily. His perception in that situation was he needed to defend himself in order to survive. Would we deny the right to stand their ground to a woman who had been raped and decided to carry a gun and shot someone in an altercation where she believed she was about to be raped again? She didn’t know that she was going to be raped again, she felt that her life was endangered.
All that to say that in a case such as this, there is no true justice. A fight happened, a young man was killed. Nothing will ever take the place of that life. But under the law the burden of proof was not met by the prosecution and there was so much room for doubt on both parties, I don’t think there was another option for the jury to consider. I believe they wanted to. I believe with all my heart they wanted to convict him of something. But there was just no law that fit the scenario beyond a reasonable doubt. And no doubt that if the jury did get it wrong, God will judge Mr. Zimmerman far more harshly than a life sentence in prison.
Well said. Thank you for responding. No true justice. No one won in this case. Terrible.
I agree with you. I wish he had been tried with something he could have been found guility of. Trayvon should be alive because he never should have continued following him.
This was a truly tragic case. No one won in this case.