This trial has received national attention because it involves two very sensitive, social issues in the United States: race and guns. On February 26, 2012, there was a confrontation between Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman which ended with Zimmerman shooting and killing Martin. The incident occurred in Sanford, Florida at a gated community. Martin was a 17 year old African American male. He and his father were visiting his father’s fiancée who lived in the community. Martin went to a 7/11 to get an AriZona Iced Tea and a bag of Skittles. When he was returning home, he was talking to a female friend on his cell phone and noted that an individual was following him. The person following Martin was Zimmerman, who was part of the neighborhood watch of that community. The community had endured a number of break-ins and a shooting in the year leading up to the incident. As such, Zimmerman had suspicions about a stranger in a hoodie walking around the neighborhood and called the police. As Martin was afraid of being followed, he ran and Zimmerman followed. The dispatcher advised Zimmerman not to follow and to meet with an officer. However, Zimmerman got out of his car. A confrontation between the two individuals ensued and those details are the only facts we know to be 100% true. Zimmerman claimed self defense. He noted that Martin punched him and was slamming his head against cement. As he feared for his life, he had no choice but to shoot Martin.
When I first heard about this story, I was outraged as I could not understand why there was no trial when an unarmed teenager was shot and killed. Moreover, he was followed by an individual with a gun. While I agree with the presumption of innocence until proven guilty, I believed that it needed to go through the judicial process so we justice can be served no matter what the outcome may be. Eventually, public outcry put attention on that matter and we had a trial.
The Verdict
I waited all of Saturday to see the results of the verdict. I was not present at the confrontation between Zimmerman and Martin so I do not know what happened and cannot conclude whether Zimmerman is truly innocent or whether he committed a crime. No judicial system is perfect. As such, our system is set up to assume someone is innocent until proven guilty. As such, it is the burden of the state to prove Zimmerman guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Our society believes it is better to allow a guilty person to be free than an innocent person to be imprisoned. While it obviously does not always function that way, our system is setup the best it can to weight the percentages in that manner. I completely agree with this philosophy. Consequently, Defense Attorney Mark O’Mara was absolutely correct in his closing argument when he plead with the jury to “”Do not give anybody the benefit of any doubt except George Zimmerman” As such, I was ready to accept whatever verdict the jury reached as I respect our judicial system and the rule of law.
Based on the evidence that was presented, I definitely do not think Zimmerman was guilty of second degree murder beyond a reasonable doubt. That charge requires the defendant to have a depraved mind with no regard for human life. As he called the police before the incident, I definitely do not believe he had any intention to kill Martin before their confrontation began. Moreover, the prosecutors did not do a good enough job on proving a depraved mind beyond a reasonable doubt. However, I would say the prosecutors had a tough case to build. There were no witnesses at the scene. There were residents of the communities that heard screams but no one appeared at the scene until after the shooting. As such, there were only two people that know for sure what occurred on that night and one of them is deceased. There was only one point the prosecution could have made to disprove self defense. Zimmerman had his gun concealed near his back. If he was pinned as he stated, it is a legitimate question to ask how he was able to draw the gun. Was it already drawn already? Did Martin reach for it and start pulling it out? We have no way of knowing for sure and did not come closer to knowing the truth after the trial. Regardless, the burden of proof is on the prosecution and it was not able to meet that burden.
In terms of manslaughter, it is less of a burden: “the killing of a human being by the act, procurement, or culpable negligence of another, without lawful justification”. The facts are that Martin was killed and Zimmerman killed him. As such, the only question is whether he had lawful justification, which is self defense. Based on Zimmerman’s account, it is good case of self defense. One can question whether Zimmerman should have left his car. However, one cannot assume that there was no situation that developed where Zimmerman needed to defend himself. As such, there are too many assumptions one would have to make to conclude that Zimmerman did not act in self defense without a reasonable doubt. While Zimmerman made some politically incorrect statements about Martin to the dispatcher, it does not have any bearing on whether Martin was the aggressor or severely assaulted Zimmerman. As there was no convincing evidence otherwise, I would have came to the same conclusion the jury did in acquitting Zimmerman.
Trayvon Martin’s parents may eventually file a civil suit against Zimmerman. In that case, the burden of proof would be significantly less and assumptions can be made against the defendant that is not permissible in a criminal case. Moreover, he may testify and defend himself against accusations since he will no longer have the fear of jail time because of double jeopardy. If a civil case occurs, we may get more information on what actually occurred that night.
My Response
As I stated above, I agree with the verdict based on the Florida law. However, I am also not convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman acted in self defense. I cannot prove he is innocent but I can definitely not prove he is guilty. As such, I just do not know without more information. Nevertheless, I believe in how our system is setup and accept that Zimmerman is an innocent man. I would also plea that we should all believe in the rule of law and accept that Zimmerman is an innocent man unless proven otherwise. We should not be rioting nor should we try to be vigilantes. To be realistic, not everyone will feel the same way and someone may try to take the law into his own hands. I believe Zimmerman should be able to live in peace and no longer be vilified unless there are facts or subsequent admission from Zimmerman that prove otherwise. Unfortunately, he has a lot of reason to fear for his safety for the rest of his life because of his notoriety after this trial.
However, I do think that Zimmerman had poor judgment. First, he incorrectly profiled a teenager as a criminal. It was not a racial profile but he was definitely making a criminal profile. Moreover, I believe he acted as a vigilante by following and pursuing Martin and based on the dialogue Zimmerman had with the dispatcher. He called the police and should have allowed them to handle it. He should not have pursued and should not have left his vehicle. While what he did may not be illegal, he does have some culpability in initiating the confrontation regardless of what occurred afterwards. We do not know the details from Martin’s side as he is deceased. Martin knew someone was following him. While Zimmerman may have reasons to be suspicious of strange individuals because of the history of crimes in his neighborhood, Martin would have a reason to be concerned about his safety when someone is following him for the exact same reason. There may have been reasons Martin feared for his safety in his confrontation with Zimmerman and needed to defend himself. To be fair, we also know Martin profiled Zimmerman. Regardless, I think Zimmerman made some poor decisions that put him in a situation where he needed to defend himself. On the other hand, Martin could have fled home and called the police. Both individuals were put in a situation they should not have been in and it is a situation that was avoidable.
In the end, it is a tragedy for all parties. Martin lost his life when he was unarmed and just trying to get iced tea and skittles. On the other hand, Zimmerman was on the neighborhood watch and just wanted to protect his neighborhood. He was also frustrated with the crimes committed against his neighborhood. He had good intentions but it ended with a terrible result. His life will never be the same as he needs to live with the fear of retribution from misguided individuals and the guilt of killing a human being, who he now knows was just a teenager and not trying to commit a crime.
Social Issues and Future
First, we should not hold George Zimmerman responsible for our social problems. Nevertheless, the trial did bring up a lot of issues we need to discuss as a society. In simple terms, we need to do better. A child should be able to go to a store and return home without being profiled and stopped without a legitimate reason. Our law assumes innocence before being proven guilty and gives our citizens that benefit of the doubt. As individuals, we need to apply the same principles. We cannot be acting as vigilantes, profiling individuals, and concluding on whether someone is guilty. While I am not suggesting Zimmerman acted as jury, judge, and executioner, it is a scary thought that someone can potentially bring a gun, initiate a fight, and kill the other person in the name of self defense if there are no witnesses. For the African American community, I do not blame them for being very concerned about the potential precedent. In New York, the laws would not have permitted bringing a gun to a fist fight. Nevertheless, each state needs to have its own discussion on what changes, if deemed necessary, need to be made to laws and what changes we need to make as society to move forward on the race and profiling issues.
On the other hand, Martin also profiled Zimmerman as he noted he was a “Creepy Cracker”. As such, we need to look at the problem at both ends. Racism goes both ways. We have made significant progress as a society but we are naïve if we believe that racism no longer exists. However, I believe racism has become subconscious rather than conscious. As racism has become unacceptable in our culture, most people do not purposely discriminate against other people. However, we still have our individual biases and perceptions of other groups. As it is more convenient to extrapolate our assumptions of a group to every individual within that group, it is difficult for us to fight to those natural assumptions. After the trial, I concluded that Zimmerman probably did not profile Martin because he was black and he hated black people. However, I definitely do think he had a perception of what a criminal looked like subconsciously applied it to Martin to conclude he was suspicious. In my opinion, the best way to end these biases is for interaction between different groups of people. The conversation should be around how to can increase exposure to other ethnicities so our judgments are based on first hand experiences instead of television, word of mouth, or interactions with a small sample of a group.
While it did not become a “Stand Your Ground” case, the law also became a topic during this case. There is a lot of objection to the law. Opponents against it suggest it is giving individuals a license to kill or creating a trigger happy culture. Laws should be shield and not a sword. Floridians will have to evaluate on whether its state’s laws have become a sword for potential criminals rather than a shield for the public. Nevertheless, each state should discuss its stance on self defense. While this trial gained national attention primarily due to race, the real issue was self-defense.
My Thoughts (Matt Cargile)
Pat approached me about writing this article last week, prior to the verdict. I personally had my opinions on the case, but Pat being Pat, handles the details much better. So who better to cover an intricate case with a lot of details. I won’t claim to know all the facts or have a complete understanding of the law in Florida. And I think the less concerning thing is that one man went free after killing another, and more concerning is how and our reaction to such situations. I’ll start with the how part as it’s a bit more pragmatic. We’re a gun loving country. To the point that the amount of guns and who has them has itself become an argument for some people to own a gun themselves. When the result itself becomes the cause, you have to realize logic has faltered somewhere. I’m not sure if the gun laws alone allowed George Zimmerman to end someone’s life and walk free, but they certainly were a catalyst. And as this country has deteriorated from a land of numerous and colorful opinions to that of a place with simply binary and black and white opinions, it’s hard to get anyone to debate anything without adhering to their side of the aisle first and foremost. I say this cause I think most could agree in the one off situation, that this is not what they wish to protect when they stand to protect the right to bear arms. But because of the fact that we think of all political debates, large and small, as bargaining chips for future debates, very few who support guns, will speak out against this. I don’t support guns, as to me the ability to end something so precious as life with a single pull of a trigger is too heavy of a burden for any one man or woman to handle. And that’s what gets me most about this trial. As the verdict neared I was surprised to find people who saw his acquittal as a sign of justice. Look we can debate the law and whether he technically is innocent or not by current standards in Florida, but from a very unofficial position, can we just admit this is heinous. That regardless of what laws and mandates say, this man still killed a young adult who was completely unarmed. That even in the worst possible scenario, even if Trayvon Martin pursued him (which isn’t what happened), and attempted to beat him up. Even in that situation, can we all agree a gun, and more so, someone’s death can in no way be considered justice and instead should be considered quite the opposite.
About Pat Wong
Patrick is a contributor for Rookerville. He is an avid sports fan. Before joining Rookerville, he was part of a defunct New York Yankees message board, NYYankeefans, where he was its top poster and was inducted in its Hall of Fame for his contributions. Patrick is also a passionate fan of movies. He has enjoyed reading movie reviews over the years and is excited about the opportunity to review movies.