Will Justice Be Served in Zimmerman’s Trial?
By Anthony Gregory • Thursday April 12, 2012 12:32 PM PDT • 15 Comments
It is hard to imagine how George Zimmerman could get a fair trial. Where do you find a juror who has not heard of this case, and would you really want someone like that on a jury anyway?
For weeks, most of Trayvon Martin’s champions have called for the arrest and trial of Zimmerman. Although I sympathized with some of their grievances, I did not add my voice to that chorus. Indeed, while some folks were neutral on the whole matter, and said that a trial would finally determine guilt, I was not so optimistic about that point either.
I should explain the extent of my sympathies with the pro-Trayvon side of this controversy. It seemed to me that his shooting was probably disproportionate, at best, for any threat he was likely to be posing; that Zimmerman, a man who had wanted to be a police officer and was known for calling 9/11 in the midst of dubious threats, had acted in an overzealous manner; that the police had unfairly favored Zimmerman and not bothered to even find out who Martin was before letting Zimmerman go. There seemed to be truth to the accusation of a double standard, since the police are often very willing to arrest and jail people even in cases that appear to be clearer cut acts of self-defense than what happened here. A black man shooting and killing an unarmed white or Mestizo man would have likely been jailed.
But should a black man in such a situation be jailed? That’s the question that alluded most of Zimmerman’s detractors, particularly to ones more bent on seeing charges pressed than in finding answers. So loudly were many people identifying this double standard that they did not always think about which side of the double standard was most unfair—the non-arrest of Zimmerman or the allegedly likely arrest of blacks in similar circumstances. Can we expect truth or justice to be served by the criminal justice process when the facts are ambiguous, the police reports’ veracity is questioned, and the evidence is scarce?
Many assumed the worst about Zimmerman while others assumed the worst about Martin. The country became polarized over a violent incident that involved two people with a couple of witnesses at most. I took a more nuanced view. At the time, the most pro-Trayvon narrative seemed a little unbelievable to me—that Zimmerman was a racist who hunted Martin down and murdered him because he was black. But the most pro-Zimmerman defense also seemed absurd—that Trayvon Martin was a drug-addled gangster who jumped on Zimmerman and threatened to beat him to death until Zimmerman barely escaped with his life by shooting Martin.
Yet something approaching either of these extremes could have been true, for all I knew. Millions of Americans, however, chimed in with opinions that seemed to serve a proxy battle for their own political alliances rather than an attempt to find the truth about this case. Many said that the problem was Florida’s Stand Your Ground law, when presumably the act was either self-defense, criminal homicide, or perhaps some terrible tragedy that could be characterized another way, but in any event had nothing to do with that law. People on both sides played the race card. Some said teenagers should stop wearing hoodies, which seemed completely bizarre to me. I wore a hoodie for many years as a teenager, and it forced me to wonder if I was not profiled so much due to this attire because of my race.
In any event, I still don’t think anyone truly knows what happened between Zimmerman and Martin. Moreover, I have my doubts that the calls for arresting and trying Zimmerman, now that they have been heard and answered, will solve anything. Instead of a deep reflection on the racial politics of policing and its possible double standards, which I think is a perfectly legitimate exercise, the upshot is now the precedent that the police will be even more likely to arrest people. They will be terrified not to arrest someone in the killing of a black person, even when there might be some doubt as to the malicious nature of the act or who did it, meaning far more arrests, probably mostly of minorities. One more Latino behind bars who cannot possibly get a fair hearing—and this is supposed to be a victory against institutional bigotry?
I was sympathetic to those outraged at the police handling of the Martin killing, but what I found most frustrating was this idea that the police and prosecutors are insufficiently vigilant. The attempt to repeal Stand Your Ground is just another attempt to empower the police state, which is not nearly as reluctant to arrest and jail people as many well-meaning Americans concerned about racist police practices think.
To make our neighborhoods safer and Americans less suspicious of one another, the government has plenty of options, almost all of them involving pulling back from the virtual warzone it has created with its drug and victim disarmament laws, stopping its erosion of public morality though the school system and welfare state, ending the massive wealth destruction it unleashes upon the poor through regulations and labor restrictions, and refraining from being such a terrible bad example morally in its foreign and domestic policies.
What is the solution for the tragedy at hand? That’s a tough question with no perfect answers, but a highly charged trial is likely to fail as well as any other remedy. It is just as likely that a guilty Zimmerman will be let go or a largely innocent Zimmerman will be disproportionately punished as it is for justice of any kind to win out.
Tags: Civil Liberties, Civil Society, Criminal Justice, Culture, Law, Racism, The State 
Good piece Anthony.
FYI, you’ve mixed up Martin & Zimmerman in a few places –
(a) Fourth paragraph from bottom, second line: “In any event, I still don’t think anyone truly knows what happened between Zimmerman and Martin. Moreover, I have my doubts that the calls for arresting and trying *Martin*, now that they have been heard and answered, will solve anything.”
(b) Last paragraph:
“It is just as likely that a guilty *Martin* will be let go or a largely innocent *Martin* will be disproportionately punished as it is for justice of any kind to win out.”
HV | Apr 12, 2012 | Reply
Whoops! Thanks much. I fixed it.
Anthony Gregory | Apr 12, 2012 | Reply
Thanks, this is the kind of editorial that should have been published early on. Perhaps it might have made some more cognizant of their own bias and warn of what results from such emotionally charged outbursts in the public square.
angie vandemerwe | Apr 12, 2012 | Reply
I think you still forgot to fix up the last paragraph.
Currently reads:
It is just as likely that a guilty Zimmerman will be let go or a largely innocent *Martin* will be disproportionately punished as it is for justice of any kind to win out.
Should read:
It is just as likely that a guilty Zimmerman will be let go or a largely innocent *Zimmerman* will be disproportionately punished as it is for justice of any kind to win out.
Christopher | Apr 12, 2012 | Reply
“A black man shooting and killing an unarmed white or Mestizo man would have likely been jailed.” I think that your over looking a huge point here the police know Zimmerman they have had numerous interactions with him. I think had this been a black man in the exact same situation someone who has a existing ongoing relationship with local officers would also be let go. This was not just your average person off the street, who the police have no idea who they are or what kind of person they are, and are left to guess at the intent of a stranger. A relationship tells them a lot about who they are dealing with. They would know if he had a vigilante personality, if he was raciest, if he was reckless, if he would kill someone if he had not seriously feared for his life or not. I am not saying they did the right or wrong thing I was not there and do not know the person who decided he could go home was. However I know there is not much chance Zimmerman can get a fair trial. Not when the grand jury step has been bypassed, not when people know if they end up being chosen for the jury Spike Lee may tweet their addresses if they decided Zimmerman is innocent. Mike Tyson calls for them to be drug behind a car. An innocent verdict will lead to riots and more killing that is for sure.
Holly Perry | Apr 12, 2012 | Reply
I guess the witness has been discounted,after all it was just one unbiased person who ran with fear for his own life when he saw Martin try to beat Zimmerman to death.
Grey | Apr 12, 2012 | Reply
Good article, divide and conquer; that’s the plan. The media is trying to start a race war and the govt. has a conceal and carry patsy to promote gun control. Thousands of people get shot on the streets everyday, some younger than Martin. Why are their lives less important? They don’t have hours of time devoted to them on MSM. It only takes one good story to get us citizens fighting amongst ourselves, divide and conquer.
bob ross | Apr 13, 2012 | Reply
There are a couple of possible outcomes. Maybe Zimmerman will be found innocent. I doubt that. Once Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton got involved we had to know there would be blood. Who in his or her right mind would want to serve on such a jury? Who would want to find Zimmerman innocent? Jackson and Sharpton have “established” guilt and that’s that. The last thing we need to do now is establish guilt or innocence. Zimmerman may or may not bd guilty, but that doesn’t really matter. We need a sacrificial lamb and Zimmerman will do.
I think I’ll look through my video library for “Breaker Morant” and “The Ox Bow Incident.”
Phil Dillon | Apr 13, 2012 | Reply
Moreover, I have my doubts that the calls for arresting and trying Zimmerman, now that they have been heard and answered, will solve anything.
The same could be said of any crime committed. Surely convicting a robber of robbery will not solve the problem of future robberies.
I can only imagine the uproar if someone in Martin’s family simply executed Zimmerman.
There seems to be quite a bit of racial and political bias on the part of those rooting for and against Zimmerman. I am most disturbed by the idea that an armed vigilante is exercising his rights when he stalks and confronts someone he merely suspects may commit a crime and then, standing his ground, guns down the unarmed suspect.
It reminds me of Obama. Yet, I doubt many who are rallying to the defense of Zimmerman support Obama’s right to kill those who suspects may be a danger.
Tom Blanton | Apr 13, 2012 | Reply
Because the Arrogant Zimmerman was following a man with his gun, with out any sort of identifying Uniform, Zimmerman was in the Wrong! The Law Enforcement Officers should be replaced with Peace Officers!
XENO7777777 | Apr 16, 2012 | Reply
I am so sick and tired of ppl like you, supposed intellectual progressives that bend and twist black related incidents to inject other agendas. Any discussion of added socio-political or legal issues are done at the expense (and on the incident), of an unjust killing of a black young manchild. How dare you and others like you, why don’t you find and forward your own causes independently and apart from black suffering. You master manipulators, is that even possible?
Crystalz | Apr 17, 2012 | Reply
Well with that outcome it would be necessary...
Crystalz | Apr 17, 2012 | Reply
I’ve seen no one wonder if “stand your ground” applies to defending yourself with a gun, why wouldn’t it also apply to defending yourself with your fists if confronted with an un-uniformed threatening questioner when you were returning from a trip to the store?
John Mason | Apr 18, 2012 | Reply
I appreciate your even handedness. Strengthening the police state is not a desirable thing. However, I think fixing a law that is so lax that it allows a person to kill another person in the dark then hide behind a loose self-defense law does not seem the wrong thing to do. I want both the law changed and an end to racial profiling. I can’t say if Zimmerman used his expertise to try to look like a hero or make an example of Trayvon. I only know TM did nothing to bring Zimmerman upon him. Nobody else would feel less passionate protecting their own children from being followed and killed.
SirReginald of Loxly | Jun 11, 2012 | Reply