So it is over, almost…
The trial is over anyway and now the dust is beginning to settle. Let’s review what really happened here.
Two points need to be made here and I will say first that my affection goes to both Zimmerman and Martin families. But not to George Zimmerman.
Was this Justice ? … Yes and No …
The first point is that a jury is instructed to judge the evidence presented and apply the law to it as it is explained to them. So no fault to the jury that I can see here. They did there job under the law. So, Yes, that is Justice.
Second, The system worked but it is working with a flawed law. This is the BIG issue here. It allows anyone to pick a fight and use deadly force if you fight back and get away with it. So, No, This is not Justice.
Why is the law flawed? It is poorly written without thought to varying circumstances. Read the FL law here. Also General US stand your ground info from Wikipedia.
Let’s walk through what the law intended.
If you were approached by a person aggressively, you may use force and even force above what is applied to you in defense of yourself.
The problem here is Trayvon Martin was the one who had been approached in a harassing way. Most likely Mr Zimmerman was a bit braver that he should have been because he was carrying a gun. Surely Trayvon did not know this.
The question is who was out of place here. Who had a reason to be where they were.
Imagine yourself walking back from a store and someone comes up to you and starts asking you who you are and why your were walking on a public sidewalk and where were you going. And soon became physical with you as you tried to ignore him to the point you got physical back with the individual to continue on your way. And things get totally physical at this point, and if you were winning this fight, the individual then decided to use deadly force on the fight he started.
If Trayvon had the gun and used it on Zimmerman, That would be what the law intended.
Only he was a minor. Probably would have spent time in the pokey for it.
Zimmerman was not on or near his own property. Nor was he on his way to or from a area. He was “looking for trouble” and was not trained to do that. He was told by the police not to pursue his suspect. And at no time did Zimmerman convey information that Trayvon had done anything wrong.
Had Trayvon been noticed doing something wrong to person or property, that would have changed this scenario and justify Zimmerman’s’ actions. This just was not the case. Trayvon was simply traveling from point A to point B.
But the way the law was written, it does not spell it out in that specific way. It was left open for bad interpretation. Thereby allowing the aggressor to pick a fight and use the law in defense.
I can only wish those who are demonstrating in the street would continue demonstrating but only at the State House where a re-write of the law is needed before it is used poorly again. Just like the O.J. Simpson case, the problem here is that there was not enough evidence to convict Zimmerman of breaking the law and in this case, only because of a poorly written law allowed a loophole.
So, yes, the jury did the right thing. They applied the law. They did not have to like the law, just apply it as it is written. You can not judge the law on what you think it should say but by what it said at the time of the crime.
As is always said… “If you don’t like the law, Change the law”
Those that are upset, need to focus on the above in memory of these events. Time will be wasting by just demonstrating in the streets.
I feel for Trayvon as it could have been me instead. I would have put up a fight to continue on my way as he did. Trayvon was standing his ground as I would have. And that is what the law “intended” to protect.