The jury yesterday acquitted George Zimmerman of 2nd degree murder charges in the death of Trayvon Martin. Thus ended a trial characterized by media malfeasance, and political elites meddling in what should be a local matter for the people of Sanford, FL.
We know the media committed several acts of malfeasance in this case. First they portrayed George Zimmerman as "white" when he is Latino. It shouldn't matter, but to the racists in the media trying to create a certain narrative, it does. Here's how the Washington Post covered this:
The national media doesn’t do stories on black-on-black crime. . . . They don’t do stories on black-on-white crime. . . .
The New York Times, in almost a caricature of a liberal media, refers
to George Zimmerman as a ‘white Hispanic.’ I guarantee you that if
George Zimmerman did something good — if he finished first in his high
school graduating class when he was younger — they wouldn’t refer to him
as a white Hispanic, he’d just be a Hispanic. . . . He’s only a ‘white Hispanic’ because they need the word ‘white’ to further the story line, which is, White, probably racist vigilante shoots an unarmed black kid.
We also now that the media intentionally re-edited audio of Zimmerman's 911 call to make him look like he was racially profiling TM.
Here's what the actual 911 conversation went like:
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.”
But the following clip shows what NBC actually aired. Note how the picture of Trayvon is of a sweet young boy rather than the strong young man of 17 that he was:
That re-editing got the producer fired, but we can only speculate as to whether it was because of what he did or because a scapegoat was needed.
The media decided early on that this was the story of a white wannabe cop that shot an unarmed black kid. When we get the truth, we see that shooter was only partially white (which probably only serves to make him "partially racist" to the media since white=racist). We see that Trayvon Martin was not an innocent young boy, but rather a young man of 17, six inches taller than Zimmerman. Trayvon was actively suspended from school at the time of the shooting.
Given these facts, the whole narrative of white-wannabe cop collapses. What we see instead is a neighborhood watch volunteer who calls 911 because he sees someone suspicious at a time when the rash of recent crime in the neighborhood has created a propensity for suspicion. The first words of Zimmerman on the 911 call relate to that fact-- they've had a rash of break-ins.
There are many, MANY more misconceptions about the case and the events that led to it, but I will refer you to this excellent article cataloging them.
It was only after being incredibly (and at times, deliberately) misinformed about what happened that much of the public made their judgements about the case.
One Facebook commenter said she felt "the justice system failed us." I assume from the comment that she was saying all black Americans were failed by the Zimmerman verdict. But could one really feel that way if they had a true presentation of the facts, rather than the half-truths the media was presenting?
But the justice system didn't fail all black Americans. It didn't even fail Trayvon Martin. In a just world, Trayvon Martin wouldn't have been an out-of-control teenager dabbling in drugs, vandalism, and guns. Yet we know from his toxicology report that he had done marijuana in the weeks before he died. We know from school video that he was a vandal and a suspected thief-- which is why he was suspended from school. We know from his cell phone that he was texting with friends about trying to get a gun.
These are things neither the justice system nor George Zimmerman played any role.
What about the trial?
The trial revealed that the initial decision to forgo filing charges was the correct decision. There was simply no evidentiary basis to support a conviction for murder. The prosecution lost because they had no real cards to play.
That's not to say they didn't play some others. The shenanigans of including a lesser charge of manslaughter at the last moment, and the judge's open hostility to the defense on several key rulings only served to strengthen the impression that this was a show trial whose outcome was intended to be a forgone conclusion.
Despite the judicial misconduct and the presecutorial ineptness, the jury was able to see that the case simply hadn't been made.
Why where charges filed so long after the event happened? I personally think that the charges were filed only because the national media bullied the local prosecutors into filing them.
Even Alan Dershowitz(!) thought the case was flimsy and didn't even rise to the level of probable cause.
I'm glad the trial is over. Perhaps now the President can get back to his job instead of opining on local cases. Perhaps the media can now find a new thing to make something out of. Perhaps we can focus now on things that matter more.