The Zimmerman trial is more than just a murder trial. Authorities
charged George Zimmerman with second-degree murder, which means the state prosecutors
believe he engaged in an intentional act with ill will, hatred or spite. In
addition, in Florida, this means that only six jurors are required and not the
usual 12 jurors, which in turn means that even though it is capital case, the
death penalty is off the table.
At first, the news that the Judge seated five white people and
one Hispanic as jurors seems upsetting; however, the racial composition is
within reason according to demographics. According to the 2005 census, the
population is 60.1% white and 18% Latino. Although, Florida has one of the largest
African-American populations in the country, their distribution through out the
state is not uniform; sixty percent of six rounds out to four and 18 percent of
six rounds out to two. What seems out of balance is that all six jurors are
women. Although it is extremely difficult to know the mind of a person, I would
think it would be a sign of unfair jury selection if six middle aged or older,
southern white men were selected—a shadow of the so-called “black-codes” of
1800 - 1866. They may have been overruled on the law books by the Civil Rights
act of 1964 but not in the minds of men—and women. Like religion, closet racism
is difficult to determine. Because of the stigma attached to antitheism and
racism, people are not only willing to lie about their positions but we expect
them to lie. The enigma is that lie detector tests, galvanic skin responses, are
not admissible in American courts, and if they were, they would be unprecedented
in jury selection. The selection of six people
of the same gender may suggest imbalance, the redeeming feature is that both the
prosecution and the defense, with the judge as arbiter, selects the jury.
Before the trial even starts, the media has turned it into a
one-ring circus with everyone watching every move. This is not wrong; this is
America and this is an important trial because of the times. In one sense, the circumstances of this murder
are putting civil rights on trial. Ironically, the trial is starting the same
week that the SCOTUS is about to announce its decision that might over turn the
voting rights act. Although the criminal act was committed trial in Seminole
country, which is not under voter rights act scrutiny, five other counties in
Florida are subject to surveillance, which indicates it is a state with a
current history of racism.
In addition, there is the current of gun rights legislation
debate: every jurisdiction that has Republican control of a law making are making
ridiculous laws concerning where you can or cannot have guns; bars, state parks
federal parks, on the streets open carry or hidden, etc. The “stand your ground
laws” is one of these that has grown out of the rights to defend oneself from violence;
however, to shoot a suspicious person and plead self-defense is not one of them.
Of course, everyone has the right to
defend him or herself, but where does it stop? Can anyone defend his or her
family or his or her business, or his or her friends or neighbors, or even their
property? The answer is simple; we have police to do that. Gun rights advocates
exploit the small dark area of what to do when police are not available. Led by
the NRA, funded by gun manufacturers, a small minority magnified this by generating
mistrust of the police. O. J. Simpson walked after a jury found him innocent of
killing two people. A smart attorney uses the mistrust of the police on trial
and a guilty man walked free.
Did a white racist with a legally owned big pistol wan-a-be
cop kill a black youth with a can of ice tea and bag of snacks? Did the well-dressed,
overweight, neatly groomed young self-appointed security guard, like the young
man we see in court, really fear for his life and decide to stand his ground to
protect other people’s property? Did he
stand his ground like a “real man” against a criminal wearing a hoodie? The
answer is simple; Trayvon did not challenge Zimmerman; Zimmerman profiled and
then challenged Trayvon.
What the trial outcome should be is obvious. What should a
young black man do when an unknown individual without a uniform, badge, or anything
else to identify him as an authority figure, stopped and questioned him on the dark
street? Should he have cowered in front
of a white man and acted like Uncle Tom; after all, Florida is the plantation south.
That is the message a not guilty verdict
will send across America. Trayvon Martin chose not to do that; he said loud and
clear, I am not 2/3s of a man, and it cost him his young life.
URL: firetreepub.blogspot.com Comments Invited and not moderated
No comments:
Post a Comment