By Mike Appleton, Guest Blogger
“However, law is not color-blind. Law, as the great Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes famously said, is about experience. Culturally competent law practice requires that one understand societal realities and experiences and the legal implications they evoke. To do otherwise is to engage in wishful thinking at best.”
– Wendell Griffen, “Lessons from Florida v. George,” wendellgriffen.blogspot.com (August 1, 2013)
The best man at my wedding in 1968 was, and is, a gay man. We were roommates as freshmen and he became my best friend in college. He has had a very successful career and has been in a committed relationship for many years. We don’t see each other often, but we remain good friends to this day. And if you had told me in 1968 that forty-five years later there would be preachers urging that homosexuals be confined behind electrified razor wire, or politicians lobbying for the death penalty for the “crime” of being gay, or pseudo-therapists insisting that sexual orientation is a “lifestyle” choice amenable to counseling, or seemingly rational people arguing against full legal equality for all human beings, I would have dismissed your opinion as absurd fantasy. And I would have been wrong.
But I would likewise have rejected in 1968 any suggestion that almost fifty years thence racism would still permeate American society. After all, most of the landmark victories in civil rights had occurred by that year. The courts had issued decrees ending the legislated segregation that had successfully held a race in bondage for a hundred years following the abolition of slavery. Martin Luther King had cajoled and shamed a nation into adopting laws prohibiting discrimination in education, employment, housing and public accommodations. The right to vote, that most fundamental guarantee of participation in the life of the nation, had finally become real for millions of citizens. Racial intolerance would be forever buried with the bodies of its then living adherents. And I would again have been wrong.
The election of Barack Obama as President in 2008 was heralded by many as the dawning of a new age, the age of post-racial America. In his 2004 speech at the Democratic National Convention, then Sen. Obama had declared, “There is not a Black America and a White America and a Latino America and an Asian America-there’s the United States of America.” Liberals wanted to believe that the election results had validated that speech. The political right argued that the election of a black President meant that racial equality had become a reality and demanded an end to affirmative action and other programs deemed oppressive to whites. The Supreme Court under John Roberts has been happy to oblige conservatives, steadily eroding the foundations of race-based preferences and, most recently, virtually emasculating the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
Contrary to the hopes of liberals and the beliefs of Justice Roberts, the notion of a post-racial America remains a dream. If anything, the Obama presidency has brought into clear focus the extent to which racism remains a core feature of society. We saw its ugliness in both election campaigns. Throughout his time in office, the President has been castigated as a socialist, a Muslim (or Muslim sympathizer), a despot and an illegitimate pretender. An Associated Press poll taken in October of 2012 found that anti-black attitudes had increased among whites from 51% to 56% between 2008 and 2012. When he arrived in Orlando two days ago to speak to a Disabled American Veterans convention, the President was greeted by a number of protesters, some of them bearing signs reading “Kenyan Go Home.”
But for me the most telling reminder of the sad state of race relations in this country was the recently completed trial in the case of State of Florida v. George Zimmerman. I know. The demands of due process were satisfied. The jury has spoken. As a lawyer, that ought to be sufficient for me. Anyone who has tried cases before a jury has had the experience of winning a losing case and losing a case that ought to have been won. The system has been crafted over hundreds of years to enable decisions based upon relevant evidence of facts and reasoned principles of law. We strive for the approximation of justice, because that is the best that we can do.
Yet the verdict in the Zimmerman trial is disturbing. I cannot bring myself to accept the result as approximate justice. And I am not alone. Recent polling by the Washington Post disclosed an even split of opinion among Americans on the verdict. An overwhelming majority of black Americans disapproved of the jury’s conclusions, and only a slim majority of whites supported it.
The sides lined up long before the trial even began. Blacks widely portrayed the death of Trayvon Martin as an act of cold-blooded murder. Supporters of Mr. Zimmerman in turn described Mr. Martin as a teenager out of control, a thug with a history of violent fantasies and an attitude prone to trouble. The public was certain that the case was about race. And despite the efforts of Mr. Zimmerman’s lawyers to eliminate race as an issue, it was in fact the unspoken them of the entire defense. I say this because the legal justification for Mr. Martin’s death was predicated upon a series of assumptions that are fundamentally racist. Consider the following themes:
1. As a resident of the subdivision and a self-styled neighborhood watch captain, Mr. Zimmerman had a right to be present in the neighborhood that was superior to that of Mr. Martin.
2. Because Mr. Martin was an outsider, Mr. Zimmerman had a right to question the legitimacy of the former’s actions.
3. Mr. Martin had a duty to justify himself to Mr. Zimmerman.
None of these assumptions was seriously questioned in the course of the trial. The defense created a foundation which wholly lacked any consideration of reciprocal duties. The jury was told that Mr. Zimmerman had a right to follow Mr. Martin. The jury was told that Mr. Martin had a responsibility to explain himself. Why? Mr. Martin had neither a legal nor moral obligation to account to Mr. Zimmerman for any reason. Yet Mr. Zimmerman was somehow clothed with quasi-official status.
Moreover, Mr. Zimmerman created the conditions which directly led to Mr. Martin’s death. First, he unilaterally determined that Mr. Martin was likely preparing to engage in criminal activity. And the evidence for that conclusion? Mr. Martin was black, was wearing a hoodie and was walking down the street after dark. Second, Mr. Zimmerman continued to follow Mr. Martin after being told by a sheriff’s dispatcher that he should relent until the police arrived. Does anyone seriously believe that a black 17 year-old walking down unfamiliar streets at night while being followed by an unknown person in a vehicle might not have reason to become alarmed? Third, Mr. Zimmerman was armed, a blatant violation of the rules under which bona-fide neighborhood watch volunteers are supposed to operate. Mr. Zimmerman crossed the line from vigilance to vigilantism. The fact that Mr. Martin may have initiated the physical altercation is both understandable and pathetically deficient as a justification for homicide.
The response to the verdict was also predictable. The black community compared the case to Emmett Till, the black teenager viciously murdered in Mississippi in 1955. Many whites shared the views of Ann Coulter, who routinely reminds us that a substantial investment in an elite education does not always produce beneficial results, and who concluded, “Trayvon committed the first (and only) crime that night by assaulting Zimmerman.”
The truth is that Mr. Zimmerman was in the best position to prevent the death of Trayvon Martin. But he made a series of faulty assumptions based upon race. As a result he became a predator who, when confronted by his prey, killed him. Racism provided the occasion of Mr. Martin’s death; a dangerous extension of the law of self-defense provided the justification.
We legislate morality, but we cannot legislate moral thinking. The elimination of statutory racism and the election of an African-American President are important milestones, but they are only steps in a long journey. Trayvon Martin was not Emmett Till. His death was not the result of institutionalized and state approved violence. He was instead the victim of the racism of profiling, the racism of generalization and false assumptions. It is racism once removed from the protection of the law. But it is a racism which still kills.
@OtterayScribe:
And thank you for all the name calling! But rather than just call me names, here’s maybe how you can make a real difference! Get you a basket of Skittles and Arizona Tea, and head down to your local poor black housing project on a Friday or Saturday night. Tell all the poor innocent yutes there that you have come for a big group hug, and have candy for them!
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
There is nothing wrong with SYG. In fact every state should have more concealed carriers. Crime rate would go down.
Also please stop using racism as an excuse for why people hate Obama. It cheapens real criticism of him. THIS is why hes hated.
SF, thank you for being such an obliging example of the kind of racism we were discussing upthread. Your doggerel is a perfect example of how the self-blinded bigot operates.
Thank you Mike,
I totally agree with everything you wrote. We have seen those who deny their racism via sophistry at the same time they make bigoted comments.
They have learned the technique of the big lie as taught by the disciples of Goebbels, like Frank Luntz and Pat Buchanan. They call anyone that questions their bigotry by calling them racists. Is it stupidity; Is it viciousness? Is it ignorance? Is it fear? I don’t care which because its result is unvaried. Their bigotry is a blight on peoples lives and it is a disgrace to our humanity.
This white person agrees with everything you posted. My biggest issue is the 800 pound gorilla in the room: The ALEC/NRA sponsored “Stand Your Ground” law.
Although this was not part of the Zimmerman defense, it certainly appeared to be on the juror’s minds.
I think Zimmerman should have been the adult in the situation, he wasn’t. I believe the 17 year old probably mouthed off to Zimmerman – that’s what 17 year old boys do. Instead of tamping the situation down, Zimmerman escalated it.
Zimmerman was told to wait for law enforcement and not pursue the kid – he did anyway, he is a wannabe cop, denied (lied) knowing about the SYG law, (though he took classes on it), had a carry permit and wanted a legal way to fire it. He found it.
As a Floridan for more than 30 years, it’s horrifying to witness how insane this place has become. I wake up daily and wonder, “Will we back on the national radar again today?”
Great post.
Well, since it is Sunday night still, I will offer up a prayer for all of those who are busy flagellating themselves over this!
My Goodnight Prayer
Now I lay me down to sleep,
I pray the Lord my soul to keep.
And if my liberal friends get mugged,
Please let it be a young Black thug!
So when they get a busted snout,
And all their brains are running out,
They’ll gently go to those good nights
As Champions of Civil Rights!
Amen.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
elaine I never said racism doesnt exist. I will say however that its equally shoveled out by black and white.
but the fact of the matter is, if blacks do not want to be profiled then they need to clean up their community and stop committing an absurdly high percentage of the crimes.
anon
Well and truly said, Mike Appleton. We must, each of us, do our own little bit of good from where we stand. Change comes about as those little bits combine.
Why does profiling exist? Take a look at the FBI statistics on crimes by race and you will understand.
btw I am willing to bet that Martin if he had lived would have gone on to commit violent crimes in his life. He already had.
Mike,
Thanks, Mike! We’ve had some contentious discussions about this subject on this blog.
I read the following article the other day. I think you may find it interesting:
George Zimmerman’s Biggest Defender: A Racist With a Criminal Past
Frank Taaffe, Zimmerman’s unofficial media emissary, is a convicted criminal who recently appeared on The White Voice, a virulently racist podcast.
—By Mariah Blake
Aug. 8, 2013
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/08/frank-taaffe-george-zimmerman-racist-white-voice
Excerpt:
In April 2012, two days before George Zimmerman was arrested for the shooting death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, he huddled with a fellow neighborhood watch volunteer, Frank Taaffe. According to Taaffe, who disclosed the meeting on Fox News, Zimmerman asked him to share “several talking points” with the media. Taaffe obliged. Indeed, as Zimmerman’s legal drama unfolded over the next year and a half, Taaffe emerged as his most visible and outspoken defender. He gave hundreds of interviews to media outlets, ranging from the New York Times to Fox News to CNN, and made near-daily appearances on cable news shows during Zimmerman’s trial.
Taaffe used this platform to cast Martin as a drug-addled hoodlum and Zimmerman as a community-minded do-gooder (“the best neighbor you would want to have”) who had every reason to suspect the black teen was up to mischief. He also railed against Zimmerman’s critics, whom he accused of staging a witch hunt. “It’s really sad that he has already been convicted in the public media and has already been sentenced to the gas chamber,” he lamented in an interview with NBC’s Miami affiliate last year.
Taaffe was hardly the ideal person to be weighing in on a case suffused with racial angst—or commenting on criminal-justice matters, period. A Mother Jones investigation has found that the 56-year-old New York native has a lengthy criminal record that includes charges of domestic violence and burglary, and a history of airing virulently racist views. Just last Sunday, he appeared on The White Voice, a weekly podcast hosted by a man named Joe Adams, who has deep, long-standing ties to white-power groups and has authored a manual called Save The White People Handbook. (Sample quote: “A mutt makes a great pet and a mulatto makes a great slave.”)
During a previous White Voice appearance, on July 27, Taaffe argued that whites and blacks have no business mingling. (“They don’t want to be with us and we don’t want to be with them.”) Taaffe also opined that if Zimmerman had racially profiled Martin, he was justified in doing so because “young black males” had burglarized homes in their neighborhood. “What if I—a middle-aged white man—wore a hoodie and went through Trayvon Martin’s neighborhood?” he asked defiantly. Adams replied that “no sane white person” would dare walk down their “local Marcus Garvey Boulevard.”
“I’d only be there for one or two things,” Taaffe shot back. “And I’m sure the vice squad would want to be interested in that.”
Later, Taaffe accused African Americans of committing “self-genocide” by failing to address the “ills and diseases that are festering” in the black community—especially the absence of black fathers, which “leaves young black males growing up without direction.” And he bemoaned the fact that some white women choose to date black men, saying that they invariably end up becoming single mothers. “Guess who winds up paying the tab on that? You and me and the rest of America,” Taaffe grumbled. “It’s called entitlement, man. It’s called food stamps. It’s called welfare.”
By the end of the show, Taaffe was so worked up that he was calling for a revolution. “This trial is waking up white America, man,” he said. “I’m fed up with the bullshit and the glad-handing to this one group of people who now control what we do and say. Come on, man, wake up America!”
OS,
I like everyone until I have a reason not to associate with them any longer…. I don’t care what color the skin…. But then again…. Most people are veiled…. I’ve learned the harder they scream…. Make noise…. Are the ones you have to look out for….
Peon should have been person….
I think Gene at one time stated manslaughter or at least 2nd degree…. I may be wrong…
Raff,
That would have been the reasonable peon standard…. I agree totally… I think Zimmerman was guilty of 2nd degree murder….. The prosecution messed this case up…. Is Zimmerman guilty of racism… I’m not sure…. Is he guilty of profiling….absolutely…. Would’ve the end result have been different if it had been a white guy instead of a black guy…. Under the circumstances…. I don’t think so….. But I don’t know for sure…
We’ve been seeing that a lot around here recently, OS.
Even worse, we’ve been seeing people who not only want their bigotry accepted but accepted as some kind of principled rational stand when it is neither.
What raff said. We have racism inflicted on us daily and the sad thing is, most of those who are the most racist cannot see their own bigotry, becoming puzzled and angry when it is pointed out to them.
AY,
Since Zimmerman was the only one armed, wouldn’t the reasonable man just brandish the gun and get away without shooting the unarmed victim?
Well said, good sir, well said.
Well done Mike. Racism is alive and kicking. You just have to read some of the responses on this site to see racism in action.
Excellent post Mike A….
I hear you…. And understand what you’re saying…. But, how can stupid be prevented…. Zimmerman made many missteps in his actions… But how could the result have come out differently than it did…. There were many, many missteps by the prosecution…. I think from over charging to withholding evidence….. Mr Martin did not deserve to have his life taken… And neither o others…. How coud the result have come about differently….
I think people should be treated with equal justice under the law….