Zimmerman Trial Reflections

Last night, George Zimmerman's brother, Robert, said it best when he said that this was no time for high-fiving. There were no winners last night and those, like me, who believed that a conviction was not justified, must remember that the Martin family has lost a son and feels let down by the system-as do many African-Americans.

I spent a lot of time last night and this morning comparing and contrasting the reactions on CNN, Fox and MSNBC. True to form, the MSNBC talking heads were almost unanimous in their opinion that justice had been betrayed. Some (correctly) felt that the prosecutors were not up to the task, but the general consensus was that they could not fathom why Zimmerman suffered no punishment when it was he who initiated the incident, he who was armed,  and that Trayvon Martin had done nothing wrong, but was merely walking back to the house where his father was living.

Indeed, that very point is what seems to divide Americans of all races.To be specific, many believe that Zimmerman started the whole thing by surveilling Martin, getting out of his vehicle (as he was talking to the 9-11 dispatcher) and following Martin or at least trying to pinpoint his location for the responding police. Others, like me, point out that that, while perhaps ill-advised for a neighborhood watch member, it was hardly illegal, and the the first illegal act was when one person threw the first punch at the other. The evidence tended to support Zimmerman's claim that it was Martin who initiated (and was winning) the physical encounter.

Even if you don't believe Zimmerman's account and want to accept the prosecution version (whatever that was), you have to ultimately concede that the state failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman's account was false and that he had no basis for feeling his life was in danger. Yes, the state pointed out some inconsistencies, but such inconsistencies were, in the minds of some of the police news commentators, normal under the circumstances. At the end of the day, the state did not prove its account beyond a reasonable doubt. Not even close. In fact, what they put before the jury -at least in the final summation- were suppositions and assertions that they asked the jury to consider-plus a whole lot of emotional statements. Their witnesses were terrible (Rachel Jeantel, Valerie Rao, Shiping Bao) or tended to exculpate Zimmerman. In the end, the state was having to challenge the testimony of the two chief investigating witnesses (Singleton and Serino). There was plenty of reasonable doubt as to the self-defense aspect of the case. Most of the evidence indicated self-defense. Perhaps, it was only self defense against losing a fight, which would not have justified a shooting, but who can say what was in Zimmerman's mind? Whoever was the person screaming that night, that sounded like a person who felt his life was in danger. The preponderance of evidence was that it was Zimmerman's voice.

Beyond that, we are left with the lingering residue of this trial. Zimmerman is free and many are angry. There were predictions of riots if Zimmerman were acquitted. At this point, the only violence and vandalism has occurred in Oakland, the city that has led the nation in Occupy violence. There have been protests and marches already in several cities, but they have been peaceful so far. I hope that continues. I have read some pretty vile comments about blacks in general on the Internet in connection with this trial, and I would prefer not to see those statements given credence. However that does not mean that people like Al Sharpton and the New Black Panther Party get off the hook. Their actions have been irresponsible from the start. Even last night, Sharpton could speak only of bringing a civil suit and pressuring the Justice Department to charge Zimmerman  for a civil rights violation. That would be an outrage. Even Angela Corey, the State Attorney who ramrodded this case to court by-passing a grand jury, said last night that this case had nothing to do with race even though in the next breath she repeated the charge at Zimmerman "profiled" Martin. Left out of the entire discussion was the fact that profiling behavior-as opposed to race- is perfectly legitimate as any Customs or DEA agent can tell you-or any law enforcement veteran in fact.

Corey also personifies the questionable decision at higher levels to overrule the local prosecutor and police in bringing charges. There were many questionable actions on the part of her and her team. Why did they by-pass a grand jury? Why did they take the deposition of Rachel Jeantel in the home of Martin's mother with her and other family members present? That invites undue influence. Was Jeantel coached to add a couple of statements by Martin and Zimmerman  to her cellphone call account? Why was the entire Martin family allowed to listen to the 9-11 call with the screams together-after Mr Martin had first indicated it was not his son's voice (or he couldn't tell)? Why, at the last moment, did the prosecution try to add a lesser-included offense that included child abuse? And perhaps most troubling, what is the story about those texts and images pulled from Trayvon's cell phone? Yesterday, as the jury was still deliberating, Corey fired her chief of the Information Technology section chief Ben Kruidbos because he blew the whistle and testified that the state had withheld this from the defense. Corey was asked about that at her press conference last night. She referred the questioner to a previously-issued statement then changed the subject. Yet, CNN's Chris Cuomo told us this morning that she answered the question clearly that the Kruidbos was fired over incompetence. Period. Not in the press conference I was watching.

As to the media itself, Mark O'Mara, a most diplomatic man, told the media at the end of his press conference that they had treated his client badly in running with a false picture of Zimmerman. I have to agree.

Which brings me to a statement made on MSNBC last night by commentator Melissa Harris-Perry. Her statement was to the effect that the verdict sent a message that the lives of black teenagers don't matter. I disagree. Trayvon Martin may have or may not have begun the assault that led to his death. He may have or may not have been on his way down the wrong path in life. Yet, if so, he had a long life ahead of him in which to turn it around. The lives of these young people do matter in 21st century America, and they definitely  matter under  the law. (BTW: Those widely-disseminated Internet photos supposedly depicting Martin in full gang pose with tattoos even on his face were not of Martin.)

Ms Harris-Perry's second comment was to the effect that all over the country, 11-year-old black children would be crawling into bed with their parents for protection. That may be true, but it is not against some George Zimmerman that they need need protection; it is against the crime and violence that lurks right outside their bedroom windows. How many black children have been killed by other blacks just since this trial began-in Chicago alone, for example? To be fair, Harris-Perry did allude to the fact that most of these killings are being committed by other blacks. But the implication that black youth are under siege from white vigilantes on the prowl in 2013 America  has to be refuted.

I also heard the name Trayvon Martin linked by some to those of Emmett Till and Medger Evers. That is a false comparison. Both of the latter were victims of deliberate and planned murders in the Jim Crow South for purely racial reasons with no hint of self-defense. Defendants in state trials were given sham trials and quickly exonerated (The Evers case ended dead-locked and only decades later was the killer tried and convicted.). This was no such trial.

Legally speaking, it now comes down to a civil lawsuit, which is the right of the Martin family. It also remains as to what the Justice Department will do. Now is a time when President Obama and his attorney general Eric Holder can help things by closing the criminal books on this case. The six female jurors who considered this case by all appearances, have done their job well. They deliberated for over 16 hours when they could have decided it much much more quickly.  Instead they gave the state  and the Martin family all due consideration. For the Justice Department to step in and bring a charge of civil rights violation would be to say Trayvon Martin did not receive a full examination of this case and that the verdict was not just. Were Holder (an African-American) to conclude that this does not merit a civil rights charge, I feel it would help heal the scars more quickly. He, of course, will consult with Obama on this matter, you can be sure. However, if the decision is to placate the NAACP and Al Sharpton types out there, it would be a travesty and keep the possibility open that Zimmerman might still spend decades in prison for political purposes and no legal basis. If reasonable doubt and self defense carried the day as to 2nd degree murder and manslaughter, they should carry the day in a civil rights charge that caused the death of Trayvon Martin.

God only knows what President Obama and his activist Justice Department will do. My best guess is they will continue to accommodate their base and continue to divide the nation.