Sunday, March 25, 2012

This should start the healing

Wow. Just wow:

 The U.S. Justice Department could bring a hate crime charge against the shooter in the killing of black Florida teenager Trayvon Martin if there is sufficient evidence the slaying was motivated by racial bias and not simply a fight that spiraled out of control, legal experts and former prosecutors say.
I wouldn't trust any U.S. Justice Department, whether you have Holder, or Reno, or Ashcroft or Gonzales at the helm, to be able to determine what a "hate crime" is.

There's one other thing that's interesting about this paragraph. Did you catch the "not simply a fight that spiraled out of control" part? Based on what I've been reading, I would have thought that the shooter, one George Zimmerman, basically blew young Mr. Martin away in cold blood. There was a fight?

Actually, you could have learned that if you'd been reading the foreign press. The Daily Mail had a much better account of the state of play in this case than anything I'd seen in our local paper.

Meanwhile, back to the AP report and the testimony of an expert on hate:

Civil rights activist Al Sharpton, who has been appearing at rallies with Martin's parents to call for an arrest, said the Justice Department should investigate the case as a hate crime.

"Any time you have a pattern of engagement based on someone's having a particular group in mind, that qualifies for hate crime inquiry," Sharpton told The Associated Press.

Yep. Ask an expert.

So what should we conclude? Based on what I can tell from approximately 1000 miles away, my tentative conclusion is this:

1) Zimmerman was out of line, at least initially. It appears he started the fight and he's therefore likely to get in some trouble.

2) Having said that, once the fight was on he did have a right to protect himself.

3) The grand jury that will convene in the case should get enough evidence to determine whether Zimmerman should be charged. If I were to guess, the charge will be manslaughter.

4) No matter what the grand jury decides, someone is going to be pissed off about it.

5) And the chance that this case will further the cause of understanding and healing is approximately zero.

10 comments:

Gino said...

its an election year, and Obama needs to rabble up his base.

this is why DOJ is looking into it. that, and because Trayvon looks just like Obama's son would look like, if he had one... because we all know they all look alike anyway.... even Obama believes it.

Brian said...

If you start a fight, nothing you do in that fight is self defense. By definition.

Mr. D said...

If you start a fight, nothing you do in that fight is self defense. By definition.

I'll take your word for that, Brian. Which is why a manslaughter charge is the likely outcome here. The question for the grand jury will be who started it.

Night Writer said...

"Any time you have a pattern of engagement based on someone's having a particular group in mind, that qualifies for hate crime inquiry," Sharpton told The Associated Press.

Doesn't that statement pretty much describe Sharpton's behavior for the last 35 years?

Bike Bubba said...

NW; my thoughts exactly.

Brian nails it on this one; if Mr. Zimmerman started the fight, he's not entitled to shoot his way out of it. Basic principle of lethal force, really.

That said, "if."

Regarding the DOInjustice; seems to me that they need to make darned sure that they have actual cause for an investigation before talking about it to the press.

Brian said...

I am definitely concerned that opinions have outstripped the facts of the case on all sides, here. Mr. D is right that it hinges entirely on who initiated the confrontation, and who made it physical.

If Zimmerman started the fight (and like Bubba said, if), then this is manslaughter at a minimum. Even a stand your ground law (setting aside for the moment whether that's good policy or not) doesn't give you the right to chase someone down, provoke them, and then shoot them in "self-defense".

Not a fan of hate crimes laws, personally. Nor am I generally a fan of the feds swooping in to right perceived wrongs of local law enforcement without a damn good reason. This *may* be a case in which there is a damn good reason. It is pretty much inconceivable that if Martin had been white and Zimmerman black that Zimmerman would have gotten the same deferential treatment from the local cops. I'd rather be wrong about that, but I don't think I am.

DOJ could certainly be handling it better on the PR end of things.

Gino said...

DOJ could certainly be handling it better on the PR end of things.

yeah, by staying the fuck out it.

it looking to me, at this point, as if the president make have injected himself too soon, and making it personal just makes it worse..

what if zimmerman was following him, as part of his 'watch' activity, trayvon thought he was facing imminent attack, and engaged in a preemptive strike?

such attitude would be common in an urban environment, especially one with a appreciable black population. maybe even wise.

that said, a choir boy would be more likely to run for safety as opposed to pre-emptively striking.

personally, if all i was armed with was a pack of skittles, i would see running as the wiser course of action.

Brian said...

Most anyone who teaches self defense will tell you that your first and best option is always to run like hell if you can, if you think you are in danger.

(At the risk of contradicting myself), your next best option, if genuinely cornered, is to strike first, decisively (gouge eyes, punch the throat, kick the crotch)...and then run like hell.

It's very hard to actually be that disciplined in the heat of the moment (which is also a pretty potent argument against carrying a gun for self defense, frankly.)

I think that figuring out what actually happened is going to be very, very difficult. There seems to be physical evidence that there was a physical confrontation. That tells us exactly nothing about the sequence of events. So it probably comes down to the word of a guy (potentially) facing charges against that of a dead person.

In the absence of solid evidence of wrongdoing on his part, that means Zimmerman should probably not face criminal charges. I'd probably have a hard time swallowing that if Trevon were my friend or family member, but there it is.

What doesn't seem (at least at this point) to be in dispute, is that Zimmerman followed him, and he didn't have to do that. In fact, that he did so against the advice of a 911 operator. If he hadn't done that, this would not have happened.

I think that makes a pretty strong case that Zimmerman should be open to a wrongful death suit, regardless of what happens on the criminal side.

Mr. D said...

I think that makes a pretty strong case that Zimmerman should be open to a wrongful death suit, regardless of what happens on the criminal side.

Actually I kinda doubt that, because there wouldn't be any real benefit to doing so. From what I can tell, Zimmerman doesn't have any money and the cost of pursuing the case will hurt Martin's family more than anything else.

If my Facebook feed is any indication, there are a lot of people who are extremely bitter about the current trajectory of the case. I don't know what that means, but it will be interesting to watch.

Gino said...

everything Brian said, but i want to add:
slamming somebody's head into a cement sidewalk, if it happened, is the use of deadly force.

if, just IF, say zimmerman was attempting to detain or whatever he should not have done... and ended up with his head meeting pavement, repeatedly, what should he have done, when armed with a gun?

it happened to to me. i thought i was going to die. luckily, my lil bro showed up out of nowhere and delivered a three brutally decisive blows with what can best be described as weapon of opportunity.