Trayvon

As sad as this story is, there are really only 2 things that bother me about this event. Neither of the obvious reasons: 1) A person would want to murder an innocent person they see walking down the street because the color of their skin makes them suspicious; or 2) that you can do this and not go to jail.

I expected the acquittal the day Zimmerman was charged with 2nd degree murder versus manslaughter. The evidence was too circumstantial especially considering the defense team that Zimmerman had at his disposal. The fact that the prosecution tried to offer manslaughter just prior to jury instructions is almost grounds for malpractice. In this case the prosecution played right into the hands of the defense attorneys. Selecting an all female jury expecting maternal empathy. Failing to realize people don't see Black male teenagers as children or some one's son. They see them as "THUGS." In addition, they argued semantics of the exchange between the two men, which effectively put Trayvon Martin on trial when he had done nothing wrong.

All that being said, none of that really bothers me. As one person put best on twitter, the jury in the Zimmerman case reminded Black Men of what they already knew to be true.

So.....What really bothers me is that there was such a dissenting opinion about the outcome of the trial. For some reason when I first heard the story I thought the outrage was universal. My naivety would not let me accept that people feel they have the right to just walk up and kill someone they find suspicious. When I consider the course of events, I empathize with Zimmerman, if I saw a guy walking in my neighborhood at night that I did not recognize. I would be suspicious, but its quite a leap to go from being suspicious to killing the guy.

I would call the Police like anyone else. At the end of the day no crime was being committed, and the Police even told him to stand down. His comments and reaction clearly show the intent he had when approaching Trayvon was not just a concerned neighbor.

I know many are claiming he was in his right to defend himself. I am just having a hard time determining how they arrive at that conclusion, and bypass that the person he attacked is dead, innocent, unarmed and committed no crimes and that Zimmerman pursued the victim. Not sure what type of reaction Trayvon is supposed to have when an armed man attacks him at night in the middle of the street.

Secondly, I became bothered again as I am reminded by the protests that began as a result of the verdict that there never would have been a trial had it not been for pressure through national media, social media, protests, and the DOJ. The fact that a tragedy like this can happen is chilling, the fact that this can happen and is acceptable without having to stand trial is horrifying. I am all for Zimmerman claiming he did this in self-defense. I would say the same thing if I killed someone, but I would fully expect that I would have to prove that action in court, not that an investigator is going to take my word for it. I would expect that much if I shot someone in my own house, even more so if I chased some guy down the street and killed him.

When I took my Concealed Handgun License training, one of the lasting impressions the instructor made on me is that shooting someone should be the last resort. He was simply trying to reiterate that killing someone is a BIG DEAL and to carry a gun calls for great responsibility. I guess he forgot to mention unless you are shooting a Black person, then nobody really cares....