Below is today’s column on the Zimmerman trial, which is a close follow-up to the web column from the night of the acquittal. As expected, it appears that we have lost a few regulars upset with my opinion of the case. I am always sorry to lose people on our blog. However, this has never been an echo-chamber blog that maintains a party line or ideological view. While we remain fervently pro-free speech and civil liberties at this blog, we often disagree about the outcome of trials or the merits of cases or policies. We try to maintain a site where civil but passionate disagreements and debate can occur. As an academic and a legal commentator and columnist, I have always tried to be fair and call these cases as I see them regardless of how unpopular those views may be. At the same time, I have enjoyed reading the opposing views of others on this blog who often make fast and lethal work of my opinions. I realize that the killing of Trayvon Martin is loaded with social and racial meaning. Yet, this site is dedicated to tolerance and diversity of views in discussing the legal and policy issues of our times. I hope that those who stated that they would leave the site will return and rejoin our discussion. This is a blog that values differing opinions and free thought. This is a chorus not a solo performance and it is the variety of voices and views that makes this blog so unique.
Here is today’s print column:
The acquittal of George Zimmerman in the death of Trayvon Martin was not minutes old when an outcry was heard over racial injustice and demands for yet another prosecution by the Obama administration.
With the verdict, the Zimmerman case entered the realm of legal mythology — a tale told by different groups in radically different ways for different purposes. Fax machines were activated with solicitations and sound bites programmed for this moment.
Criminal cases often make for easy and dangerous vehicles for social expression. They allow longstanding social and racial issues to be personified in villains and victims. We simplify facts and characters — discarding those facts that do not fit our narrative. Zimmerman and Martin became proxies in our unresolved national debate over race.
Many have condemned this jury and some even called for the six jurors to be killed or demanded that they “kill themselves.” The fact is that this jury had little choice given the case presented by the prosecutors. This is why I predicted full acquittal before the case even went to the jury.
Before the case is lost forever to the artistic license of social commentary, it is worth considering what the jurors were given, or not given.
State attorney’s misstep
The problem began at the start. Many of us criticized State Attorney Angela Corey for overcharging the case as second-degree murder. While Corey publicly proclaimed that she was above public pressure, her prosecution decisions suggested otherwise. Investigators interviewed a key witness at the Martin home in the presence of the family — a highly irregular practice.
The decision to push the second-degree murder charge (while satisfying many in the public) was legally and tactically unwise. The facts simply did not support a claim beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman acted with intent and a “depraved mind, hatred, malice, evil intent or ill will.” Had Corey charged manslaughter, the case might have turned out differently.
The prosecutors then made that bad decision of charges worse by overplaying their evidence to overcome the testimony of their own witnesses.
For example, the prosecution inexplicably decided to lead the case with testimony of Martin’s friend Rachel Jeantel. Jeantel was a disaster, admitting to lying previously under oath and giving conflicted testimony. She also stated that just as Zimmerman was accused of calling Martin a derogatory name, Martin called Zimmerman a “cracker.”
The prosecution’s zeal for conviction seemed to blind it to the actual strengths and weakness of the case. It also led to allegations of withholding key evidence from the defense to deny its use at trial, though Judge Debra Nelson seemed to struggle to ignore the alleged misconduct.
Some questions unanswered
Ultimately, we had no better an idea of what happened that night at the end of this trial than we had at the end of that fateful night. Jurors don’t make social judgment or guesses on verdicts.
While many have criticized Zimmerman for following Martin, citizens are allowed to follow people in their neighborhood. It was also lawful for Zimmerman to be armed. The question comes down to who started the fight and whether Zimmerman was acting in self-defense.
Various witnesses said Martin was on top of Zimmerman and said they believed that Zimmerman was the man calling for help. Zimmerman had injuries. Not serious injuries but injuries from the struggle. Does that mean that he was clearly the victim? No. It does create added doubt on the use of lethal force.
A juror could not simply assume Zimmerman was the aggressor. After 38 prosecution witnesses, there was nothing more than a call for the jury to assume the worst facts against Zimmerman without any objective piece of evidence. That is the opposite of the standard of a presumption of innocence in a criminal trial.
Even for manslaughter, the jury was told that Zimmerman was justified in the use of force if he feared “great bodily harm.” That brought the jury back to the question of how the fight unfolded.
The acquittal does not even mean that the jurors liked Zimmerman or his actions. It does not even mean they believed Zimmerman. It means that they could not convict a man based on a presumption of guilt.
Of course, little of this matters in the wake of a high-profile case. The case and its characters long ago took on the qualities of legend. A legend is defined as “a traditional story sometimes popularly regarded as historical but unauthenticated.”
People will make what they will of the murder trial of Zimmerman. However, this jury proved that the justice system remains a matter not of legend but law.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University and a member of USA TODAY’s Board of Contributors.
July 15, 2013
sonofthunderboanerges,
Yeah, well, I followed your unsub-analysis to a logical conclusion and don’t use the age thing on me … I’m 68!
BTW … the term, mestizaje, might be helpful when trying to explain things to the white privileged mind set.
Sono, you say “Ralph Adamo – NOWHERE can I find where Sling and Betty Kath saying ANYTHING about Kel Tec PF9 recoil hitting GZ in the face.”
Sling and bettykath explored this theory on Prof. Turley’s Zimmerman article immediately preceding this one.
I am now thoroughly convinced that they are correct and that Dr. Vincent DiMaio was wrong and that most of Zimmerman’s facial injuries were caused by the recoil when he fired his 19mm automatic and his own hand then struck his own nose. When Martin pounced on Zimmerman, Martin did not attempt to strike Zimmerman and simply remained on top of him, taking a much needed snooze after his late-night search for candy and ice tea.
I am also now thoroughly convinced that the prosecution was not actually stupid or lazy in failing to get a qualified forensic pathologist and gunshot wound expert of their own to refute Dr, DiMaio obvioulsy incorrect conclusions. They simply couldn’t find such an expert.
These kinds of experts are very difficult to find. For example, long ago, when JFK was assasinated, the US Government was desperately searching for a forensic medical examiner so that an autopsy could be performed in one of the most important murder cases of all time. But they could find nobody qualified, and had to make do with Capt. James J. Humes, who had absolutely no experience whatsoever with gunshot wounds before, and the JFK assasination was his first. However, it was a great learning experience for him, and though he made a lot of mistakes, it didn’t really matter because, after all, everybody knew that Oswald must have done it because the US Government said so, and they would have no reason to lie.
In any case, such experts as Dr. Dimaio are really hard to find, and I’m sure that the prosecution did all they could to try to find somebody to testify. They may have even tried to get in contact with Capt. James Humes himself for assistance, but, unfortunately, Capt. Humes died in 1999. Thus, the prosecution was hamstrung, and unable to even present Sling’s YouTube video shown above as compelling, cogent, and undeniable evidence supporting the prosecution because they couldn’t find anybody to authenticate it.
Dammit’ girl get off my frequency! (LMAO)
I did not think of that! You are absolutely right. I don’t even follow my own unsub-analysis! That’s age-related I think. (LOL)
http://globalgrind.com/news/travon-martin-george-zimmerman-case-looks-reverse-photos
A picture might be helpful to see a color reversal. I don’t know how to show the picture here.
I sympathize with folks who are considering abandoning this blog. As one commenter asserted, the “neo-confederates” have moved in.
For me, it’s not the blog posts, which are overwhelmingly intelligent and articulate. It’s the readership.
Reading the racial/ethnic/whatever-you-wish-to-call-it, fear and hatred expressed by a growing number of commenters is not conducive to mental health and well-being.
I am filled with revulsion at the antebellum attitudes I see here. I’d rather not be so angry. Lashing out at stupidity and racism probably doesn’t help.
The hideous situation in Florida is used as an excuse to express very thinly-veiled contempt upon the descendants of former slaves. No veil at all, in some cases.
Justice Roberts, who wrote that the South has changed, should read the comments here. It’s not just the South, of course. The cancer has spread.
davidm2575 – I don’t disagree with you. Either I misstated my position or you misunderstood my posting. I’m actually criticizing uninformed people who call GZ Hispanic implying that he is not 99.9% Caucasian. I know what the Hispanic ethnonym means and how the feds interpret it too. They (and I) don’t say it’s related to race but Spaniard or Latin-American origins.
GZ’s mom, Gladys Meza, was from Lima(?) Peru. Her ancestors are Spainard Conquistadors (whites) and the Andean-Incas (native American) who hid from them in Cuzco mountains in 15th or 16th century. GZ has never been to Peru. Judge Zimmerman is not a native speaker like his wife is. If GZ did speak Spanish he probably only spoke to his mom with what little he knew. He didn’t have much practice in the real world as GZ was known as a English speaker. I’m pretty sure he’s not fluent but can carry on a broken-Spanish conversation. In Florida the dialect is based on mainly Cuban and/or Carribean Spanish. Mexicans and Peruvians have trouble in understanding Spanish slang words developed on the US Eastern seaboard. For instance “cabron” has a totally different connotation to Mexicans and Peruvians. The word is the same but the “insult” is taken or not taken based on your location in USA.
All I’m saying is that GZ is mainly Caucasian. Ashkenazim Jews are originally from that area of the world too… the Caucasus region of Russia, not Israel as some falsely think. Dad is 100% Ashkenazim. They are NOT middle-eastern by origin, as other Jewish ethnic groups are.
Reblogged this on euzicasa.
My mother, my mother-in-law, and myself were all born in the same hospital in San Juan, PR. I don’t not have a Spanish sir name, and people are often surprised that I have this background. My wife, after watching the testimony of Zimmerman’s mother and uncle quipped, ” Too bad for him he didn’t have his mother’s maiden name when all this started.” I think she’s more than a little right. I assume one of the civil suits that Zimmerman my pursue as a plaintiff, which his attorneys alluded to the other day, would be against the network that purposely edited an early phone call to make Zimmerman appear patently racist. There are much broader protections for the media in defamation suits but I can’t see any justification for the edit than to purposely and recklessly portray Zimmerman as a racist.
Ever since the major networks merged their news and entertainment divisions their primary goal has been to sensationalize the news. This has been going on for 2 decades now and people seem to forget that the public is not viewed as a vessel to be enlightened but merely a demographic to be marketed to the media buyers at add agencies.
Many outraged posters on this blog and elsewhere have speculated what would have happened if the race of Martin and Zimmerman were reversed. This is always presented as black and white. As of today I’ve read articles that reference Zimmerman as “:identifying himself” as Hispanic. They can’t get off the white vs. black narrative. The closest they will now come is describing him as “white Hispanic” (will they ever say Obama “identifies himself as African-American”?, or ridiculously call him white African-American?) La Raza has been (not curiously at all when you think about it) practically silent on the issue. Smart to sit this one out me thinks.
What I think would be more interesting is not to switch the race of Zimmerman and Martin, but to simply ask what would happen if Martin was white. I can see some of the usual suspects coming forth at that point to say, hey Hispanics have a right to defend themselves. With his school history and apparent participation in a “fight club” the he’d be called Tyler Derden, and Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and crew would be pointing out that the gang problem is not just a black problem, because you see here’s a white thug who jumped a decent Hispanic man who was just trying to protect his neighborhood, and smashed that poor Hispanic man’s face in.
I won’t say I “know” this would happen, or I’m “certain” this would happen. Too many people have made fools of themselves on this blog saying it’s absolutely certain that Martin couldn’t have been on Zimmerman, or it’s absolutely certain the recoil of the gun cause Zimmerman’s injuries, or it’s absolutely certain Zimmerman is a racist stalker etc etc etc.
Today it comes out that the prosecutor in this case has fired the person who leaked to the defense that the State was knowingly withholding evidence. Great. The Supreme Court in the last year has made certain that prosecutors are virtually immune from any personal liability for this. This entire episode would have been less of a farce if a mob had just thrown Zimmerman into a volcano. Today while driving to court I had to hear from the professional martyr machine how this case illustrates the open season on young black men. I left the criminal court building in Chicago about an hour ago and I can tell you for “certain” that 99% of the men killing young black men are other young black men.
But we are geniuses in this country at pointing out the demons in others while ignoring our own. A Jew? White? Hispanic? Is now the boogie man and newest poster child for violence against young black men. While politically correct it’s morally (and mathematically) ridiculous.
At the time the president made his famous statement about Trayvon looked like his hypothetical son, I defended him to those who accused the president of race baiting. The problem was at the time the nation had been told by the media (who had been spoon fed there info by the Martin family’s attorney’s p.r. machine) that Zimmerman was never arrested and had no injuries. We now know he was in handcuffs within seconds of the police arriving and had injuries consistent with being beaten. I suspect the president might have stayed out of this one had he had better info.
Richard Faust 1, July 15, 2013 at 8:47 am
Shut up, Dredd! …
====================================
If you say so there fiesty.
“Some of my best friends are …”:
(Leahy Says “Stand Up To Hate Crime” – 3). What hate crimes Wally?
“Another abuse of tax-payer dollars as he is NOT actually a Federal witness but a potential federal defendant with international flight-risk.” (sonofthunderboanerges)
Unless (she whispers), he’s giving somebody up.
Remember the black woman who was sentenced to 20 years in prison for firing a gun into the air to ward off her husband when she felt threatened:
(Huffington Post).
Dredd quoted: “The Florida criminal justice system has sent two clear messages today,” Brown said afterward. “One is that if women who are victims of domestic violence try to protect themselves, the `Stand Your Ground Law’ will not apply to them. … The second message is that if you are black, the system will treat you differently.”
Which is a very bad analysis based upon bigotry against white leadership and an inappropriate appreciation for the Stand Your Ground law (which I support fully as a very good law for the average citizen). In the past, when someone attacked you, you had a good chance of going to jail just for defending yourself or someone else. The Stand Your Ground law allows justice to take place, as in this case with Zimmerman.
In Marissa Alexander’s case, it is clear that the Stand Your Ground law works. She retreated only to return again with a weapon and use it against someone who was begging her to put down the weapon.
I do not agree with the mandatory minimum sentencing for this or any other crimes. The whole purpose of having a Judge is because laws are not just when they are blindly applied to all circumstances. The minimum sentencing laws come about because people get tired of inadequate Judges who are too lenient with dangerous criminals, and when that criminal goes out and hurts or kills someone else, much of society gets upset about why that person was released in the first place. Minimum sentencing laws are IMO the legislature usurping the role of the Judicial branch of government.
sonofthunderboanerges,
I loove it! The white privilege folk are popping out of the closet. They thought all those bad laws they put in place in 20 some odd states were going to help maintain the status quo keeping the invisible folk invisible.
Legal rationality is as distinctive (when it is done critically and objectively) as a Medical diagnosis and prognosis…like it or not, here are the material facts: and what decisions can be made from them directly. This does not call for conjecture and speculative insinuation. Black individuals know all too well how courts can distort facts, but they also well know that the truth becomes very relative in regards to the most desirable outcome.
It is unfortunate that some people can not tolerate objective concerns and continue to discuss or oppose them intelligently without attacking the person (ad hominum fallacy). The mass trend has been not only to personalize this socially with abject condemnations and broad sweeping allegations of race being the only single issue in this tragic event. From the start there was an outcome waiting for a trial, and as the trial ended it is clear that there is an appeal to higher justice that borders upon something far greater than this single event. The country is cooking under austerity and poverty, crime as well as extreme violence is epidemic as weapons marketing and illegal gun running have become domestic industries.
It would be interesting to see an accounting of how many teens have been shot in the past year without provocation or unjustly. I am certain that the numbers would speak loudly as to how deeply this problem really has become. It is not just racially biased, it is demographically, economically and politically disconnected and distorted at its very base by crime and prejudice (of all kinds).
Rafflaw:
“This case is an example of what happens when the wrong people have hand guns in their possession.”
Could you explain who the right people might be? Or at least what the universe of wrong people would include?
chill1184,
Your claim is based on a premise that was proven false in five short words: Hispanic is not a race.
@Blouise – As you and I probably already know… the FBI SAIC (Ibison [Tampa Field Office]) has already taken GZ (and wife Shellie) into P.C. under the USMS WITSEC program (authorized by USAG Holder). Another abuse of tax-payer dollars as he is NOT actually a Federal witness but a potential federal defendant with international flight-risk. I’m sure their passports were lifted again. He’ll be allowed to keep the Kel Tec as his life isn’t worth a plumb nickel right now (See Malik Zulu Shabazz in the news – another GZ bounty in the works?).
I’m sure they have him squirreled away in a safe house in West Bumf**ck USA. His new name is probably John Q. Public or something now. I hope he behaves himself unlike Sammy “The Bull” Gravano didn’t do under WITSEC – (LOL)
http://www.thenation.com/blog/175260/white-supremacy-acquits-george-zimmerman#axzz2Z8D9fGPZ
RTC,
It’s not ok to criticize blond blue eyed white adults for insulting a Black teen.
It’s ok to dismiss the Black teen’s testimony when she lied about her age b/c she wanted media protection and why she didn’t go to the funeral out of respect for the victim’s mother, while at the same time not offering a word of criticism about the white killer’s multiple lies.
It’s ok for the white killer to stalk the Black teen b/c it’s legal to follow you neighbors. Would JT make the same argument if it were his daughter in Trayvon’s place? Would she have the right to ask gz why he was following her? Would she have the right sucker punch him? (This does not suggest that I believe Trayvon did.) Would she have the right to pull a gun and shoot him? (Trayvon didn’t have a gun).
How so betkath….. I’m interested to hear your take on that statement…. There are lots f fair weather folks around….. I hope you’re not one of them….
What a lot of folks have missed and it seems fairly obvious….. This case was not about race…. Race had nothing todo with it….. It was the carrot…. If I take all of the facts into consideration…. It was a case about gun rights…. And the stand your ground laws….. I am not a proponent of stand your ground by any stretch of the imagination….. The castle doctrine works for me….. But to turn it into race…. Come on….. It’s a carrot….no one wins when you race bait…. People dig in their heels and say come on….