I’m
glad the
Zimmerman trial is over. Now we can learn what else is happening
in the world.
It’s not that the trial was unimportant, but that I knew the
ending to the
story. There was no way he was going to be, or should be,
convicted beyond a
reasonable doubt of second degree murder for a shooting that
took place during
a fight. A guilty verdict would have made pariahs of the six
jurors who
rendered it in Seminole County and well beyond. This says
something of a trial by
a jury of one’s peers. I say that if justice is a concern these
peers should
come from diverse parts of the country. This point is
demonstrated precisely by
the trials of Rodney King’s beating by local police and of O.J.
Simpson, whose
trial was a mirror image of Zimmerman’s. I’d say that in this
case the prosecution
left something to be desired. At times I suspect the second
degree murder charge
was to make it harder for any kind of conviction.
My
feeling about
the trial doesn’t mean that I believe justice was done. An armed
man who violates
police orders by getting out of his car, leading directly to the
fatal shooting
by that man of another, clearly deserves incarceration.
The
trial is
now history. But it should raise again the perennial question of
who enforces
our laws. As I understand it amateurs have a legitimate role in
vigilance
although Zimmerman clearly violated its limits. But the purview
of pulling triggers
belongs exclusively to professionals who have been trained for
the job. Putting
one’s hand on a rock, looking to the sky and saying “I am a cop”
doesn’t
qualify. Had this propriety been observed in Sanford the killing
would never
have taken place.
As
Zimmerman
said in the last words of his cell phone call to the police,
“they always get
away.” It looks as if this also applies to deluded racists like
himself.
No comments:
Post a Comment