I should have known better and not set my standards high. So disappointing.
Truth is by nature self-evident. As soon as you remove the cobwebs of ignorance that surround it, it shines clear. – Mahatma Gandhi
The fact of the matter is that race has indeed played a role in the case that followed the death of Trayvon Martin. The problem that lies behind this fact is so few actually know the truth. Americans, along with the international community are outraged by Zimmerman’s acquittal. After all, he was guilty long before the “open and shut” case was even scheduled to commence. The collective over-reaction to the verdict has been laden with misinformation, ignorance, racist undertones, conjecture and denial; a reaction so immaturely visceral that Martin Luther King Jr. was inappropriately and ignorantly donned in a hoodie and record unfriendings and blocks slowed Facebook servers. Unfortunately, where we are today with the Zimmerman verdict has little to nothing to do with how the verdict came to be. We are here because we, as a populous, refuse to self educate and only allow ourselves to be “informed” by a bias and now fully divisive, progressive media machine. We believe that if the news and media provide information on a given topic, that information must be true and thus goes completely unchallenged. Take for example the racist “White Hispanic” George Zimmerman. Originally, Zimmerman was described as White, which was updated to White Hispanic. We never asked ourselves the obvious because the racial undertones of a White gunning down an unarmed Black youth appealed our basic insecurities with issues of race. What we failed to learn on this aspect of the case alone was that Zimmerman’s lawyer is suing NBC Universal Media for defamation over the news outlet’s editing of the taped 911-call Zimmerman made upon encountering Martin in order to ensure he was viewed as a racist and to further advance the Obama Administration led anti-gun agendas. NBC released the following:
Zimmerman: This guy looks like he’s up to no good. He looks black.
However, the unedited version reads as follows:
Zimmerman: This guy looks like he’s up to no good. Or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around, looking about.
Dispatcher: OK, and this guy — is he black, white or Hispanic?
Zimmerman: He looks black.
Thus, White Hispanic was deemed necessary to assert the tone of racism the media was determined to achieve.
The full 911 transcript follows. Judge for yourself.
The public has been deluded into finding Zimmerman guilty long before he went to trail. To many, it was an issue because someone identified as White shot an innocent and unarmed Black youth. Beyond that, little truth was sought; any other aspect of the incident would not comply with the predetermined prejudices that were already well at work. It is this racial phenomenon of predetermination that fueled sentiment against Zimmerman no differently than how the accused is socially guilty of sexual assault against a woman, or how we tend to vilify a teacher based on the accusation of misconduct against a student – before any facts are presented, (even then, it is the accusation that has a more impacting response than do the facts – just ask Herman Cain). Again, it is these prejudices of predetermination that skew our perceptions of reality.
Behind the case
To better understand the entire picture we must travel back both to and past the incident that took young Trayvon’s life. Following the shooting, Tracy Martin, Trayvon’s father, sought legal advice from his sister in law and attorney, Patricia Jones. Jones in turn referred the Martin family to Benjamin Crump and Daryl Parks of the Crump law firm. The duo needed an “offensive strategy” to build a case against Zimmerman. Here is where things not only go south, they get downright ironic!
Crump and Parks reached out to Orlando attorney, Natalie Jackson, who is a member of the Legal Redress Committee and Seminole County NAACP Board Member. To develop the offensive strategy, Jackson obtained the assistance of Ryan Julison. Jackson and Julison had previously worked together on the Sanford, Sherman Ware case. Julison ran the media campaign to support Ware. Ware, a homeless Black man, was struck from behind by Justin Collison, the son of then Sanford Police Lt. Chris Collison while trying to break up a fight outside of a local bar. Ware was knocked unconscious and taken to the hospital with a concussion and broken nose, Collison was not charged.
Sadly, that is not where the irony ends.
When the Zimmerman family learned Julison, Jackson and the NAACP were involved in the case, they felt a sense of comfort because George Zimmerman had established a good rapport with them during the Ware case. However, they treated Zimmerman in an obfuscatory manner while fully knowing they were slanting public opinion against him in spite of his past assistance in a very racially charged incident and supporting a cause in the name of racial equality.
Clearly, there was a lot going on behind the scenes of the case the media refused to address because the race baiting tactics are so highly effective. When referring to the Ware case, it is important to note the Sheriff’s investigation found no preferential treatment, but the social predeterminations of prejudice award civil damages. It is not that the Sanford Police were not in the wrong; it was that that case being developed against Collison and the Sanford Police Dept. was aimed not at criminal prosecution, but a later civil outcome. Here, we have Zimmerman acquitted of both the murder and manslaughter charges. Already, there is talk of a civil case. See the pattern yet?
Clearly, as strongly inferred above, a conviction may not have been their means to an end. Think about it for a second. What lawyer would make such poor witnesses key to their prosecution? Tracy Martin, Trayvon’s father, who had repeatedly stated that it was Trayvon screaming for help during the altercation, later told police that it was not his son screaming for help on the recording. A witness by the name of Good was definitely not a good witness; at least not for the prosecution! It was Good who had the best view of the fight between Martin and Zimmerman. In his early statements, he described Zimmerman as the man on top during the fight. Upon cross-examination, he described Martin on top. His description in fact enhanced under cross-examination stating Martin was punching Zimmerman “MMA style.” Rachel Jeantel who was on the phone with Martin when he encountered Zimmerman changed her story and admitted she had no idea what happened between the two men. Forensics supported Zimmerman’s testimony, but the only time forensics supported the prosecutions positions were when the prosecution’s witnesses turned and gave testimony that supported the defense. With such weak witnesses, a prosecution will turn to the Rule of Law and (get this) the U.S. Constitution and not such facially subjective witnesses who would assuredly prove weak under cross-examination. Hence, it was never posed; “Under what authority did George Zimmerman have to restrict the constitutional freedoms of Trayvon Martin after the authorities directed him to stand down?” Not only was the case lost, this gross failure allowed some jurors the freedom to determine Zimmerman’s actions to confront and attempt to restrict Martin’s freedom was “going above and beyond!”
The fact of the matter is that Zimmerman had no authority under which to restrict the freedoms of the young Martin. Dare I say that had Zimmerman not been armed, he would have followed the direction of the authorities and not exited the vehicle. This was not directly challenged by the prosecution and the only basis they had to win the case was simply never heard. But then again, a jailed George Zimmerman would have difficulty paying off the Martin family and NAACP for shooting the unarmed and unconstitutionally confronted Martin. The civil case though, will hear the argument that was not adequately posed in the criminal case. Perhaps, “justice” in cases like this are defined by some in terms that are determined not by judicial but civil proceedings.
A strong argument can be presented that the intent of some is to deliberately undermine the judicial system by playing and preying upon the public’s predisposition to socially convict on grounds of racial bias. The media has deliberately misrepresented virtually all aspects of this incident knowing common public response would be to react and not self educate. Because of this, the verdict in favor of Zimmerman came a shock. What must be understood is what the media reported to the public about the incident has little (if any) resemblance to what actually came to light during the trail.
The trail did not see Trayvon as the child pictured in the press. The trail did not see Zimmerman as the gun wielding racist Ryan Julison and NBC made him out to be. The prosecution completely (perhaps even deliberately) sabotaged their own case against Zimmeran and the public was foolish enough to be duped into supporting the wrong things for the wrong reasons.
Your ground is worth standing
To bring this full circle, let us not forget the President himself who once thought it wise to use Trayvon Martin to push his gun control agenda. Shortly after the story broke, Obama described the young Trayvon with the most personal and intimate of references. Words he very poetically recanted following the verdict. The Obama Administration jumped onboard the anti-Zimmerman bandwagon in hopes the incident would find fault in Florida’s Stand Your Ground Law. Though Obama is still seeking to attack the law with his crony led DoJ, the law was not used to defend Zimmerman, or his actions that rainy day. There was a reason for this. The authors, sponsors and signatories of law publicly explained how the law was not designed to protect those who acted in the manner in which Zimmerman had. Sadly, the Obama minions socially attacked the law while blaming its existence at least partially, if not fully responsible for Martin’s untimely death. Is the law so demonic that it would have granted Trayvon the legal right to gun down Zimmerman for following him as Obama recently insinuated? Take 90 Seconds and read the pertinent section of Florida’s Stand Your Ground Law and judge for yourself:
There are few things in the world as dangerous as sleepwalkers. – Ralph Ellison