I have been asked about the Zimmerman trial a lot. Not because I know more than anybody else
regarding the facts, but because I am a prosecutor. But I’m also a mom. And I’m also a human.
And the case breaks my heart.
As a prosecutor, I knew this would be the verdict. Not because I think our system is
corrupt. I love our system. The justice system is imperfect, as is our
society, but in a democracy we must have trial by jury. Otherwise, one person will be judge, jury and
executioner. And that is dangerous. And would result in many opinions much worse
than what happened in Florida.
So why did I know this would happen? Because “beyond a reasonable doubt” is a
ridiculously high burden to meet. We
need to have that high burden to ensure that innocent people do not lose their
liberties. However, I also think that in
cases like this…the high burden results in the wrong decision.
To explain myself, I have personally been involved in very
difficult “no charging” meetings. In many instances, prosecutors must tell
victims “we can’t file charges in your case”.
Otherwise stated, we must tell them we know what happened, but we can’t
prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. We
get the reasoning. Our investigators get
the reasoning. But the victim who knows
it happened? How can they ever
understand it? They can’t. And that’s what makes the meeting so
difficult.
Am I saying that the Zimmerman case should have never been
charged? Absolutely not. I don’t know all the facts in the case, and I
haven’t read the reports and talked to witnesses. There’s nothing that annoys me more than
people not involved in a case telling those involved what should happen. You know the types. The anonymous commentators on the Rapid City
Journal, or the individuals loudly talking in the hallway about how so-and-so
doesn’t know what they’re doing. Or the
Facebook posters saying things like “I know what happened, and the jury must
decide………or they are morons.” Well,
actually…you don’t know. Thanks.
So when I say this is my opinion, I am not Monday Morning
Quarterbacking, and I am not smack talking any parties. Because I am well aware that I am a citizen
that lives in Rapid City, South Dakota.
I was not involved in the trial, and I don’t know the intricacies of
what went on…both on the day Martin died, and throughout the days of the
investigation, preparation and trial of Zimmerman.
And when I say my opinion, I am well aware that it is based
on what certain media outlets chose to report.
And certain outlets (I am talking to you, Fox News and MSNBC) presented
their “unbiased journalism” either for or against Zimmerman. That’s another
blog post entirely, and I’m not going down that road.
So here is what I have to say:
What George Zimmerman did was wrong. He profiled a child based on his physical
appearance. He was a wanna-be cop who
had a history of calling the non-emergency number to dispatch to report
suspicious people. Or as he called
Martin one of several “fucking punks”.
What if Trayvon Martin was walking back to a house with
skittles and a juice drink? What if that’s
all that he did?
What if he started to run because he was being
followed? Stalked? Profiled?
What if he was scared?
Or, what if he turned around and told Zimmerman to fuck
off? Although rude, it’s not illegal.
And what if Zimmerman, the wanna-be cop, decided he needed
to teach a mouthy kid a lesson?
And what if he attacked first? (after ignoring instructions
from a dispatcher to wait for a law enforcement officer)
And what if Martin defended himself?
And what if he got the upper hand?
So Zimmerman can now argue self-defense because the person
using self-defense got the upper hand on him?
And what if the only thing Martin did was scream “help”?
But what if that was Zimmerman who yelled “help” after
Martin defended himself?
That’s a lot of what ifs.
And what ifs poke giant holes “beyond a reasonable doubt”. Therein lies the problem in this case. That’s why I believed the verdict would go
this way. There were too many what ifs,
and the prosecution couldn’t answer them.
The only person who knows what actually happened is
Zimmerman. A man who called
non-emergency dispatch regularly, who grouped young people into “fucking punks”,
who gained 100 pounds on his muscular physique before trial and who connived
with his wife to speak in code about hidden money for bail and legal defense
while incarcerated and waiting for trial.
But was he a victim?
I don’t see him in that manner at all.
I think he created the situation.
So did the jury get it right? Based on how the evidence was presented to
them, I think they came to the only verdict that they could. There was too much doubt and unanswered
questions. And that makes me sad. And I get why people are angry about it.
Do I understand this anger?
No, I personally don’t. And I never
will. Because when my two young sons go
outside to walk down the street to get ice cream, visit their friends or go
play to the park, they will always just be wearing hoodies. And they will get to their destination.
And the fact that I have friends who worry that their sons
might not, because of how they look, really makes me sick.
