Zimmerman trial was never about "justice"--but of vengeance

Before I get to the main topic, there is finally news in the Daniel Adkins case. According to a story in the Denver-based Examiner.com, Cordell Jude’s trial on second-degree murder charges is set for August 14. The cynicism in relation to how George Zimmerman was treated in the media is thick as  reporter Renee Nal notes that “Court papers indicate that Jude ‘hangs out with known gang members who are currently committing drive-bys’”—but remains free on his “own recognizance.” This past May, “Jude tested positive on a drug test. Instead of being thrown in the slammer, he must undergo ‘ramped-up’ supervision…It seems that as long as Cordell Jude has a driver's license, he is also still allowed to leave his property.”

Back to the Zimmerman trial. Zimmerman chose not to testify in his own defense, likely on his attorneys’ recommendation. I wholly agree with the decision. Despite all the help from trial judge Debra Nelson—she exposed her bias once again when she refused to allow evidence that Martin had a propensity for fighting, and then ludicrously asserted that the animation created by a defense witness did not “conform” with the “evidence” that she apparently personally chose to believe—the prosecution’s sad showing left them with the one card they had left: To turn the trial into a three-ring circus, focused on minor details of memory that are easily explained by the traumatic nature of events, but do not alter what the totality of the evidence shows: That Trayvon Martin was on top of Zimmerman, striking him repeatedly until Zimmerman used his weapon.  

Nelson--who has a reputation of being a "prosecutor's judge"--did her best to intimidate Zimmerman in an accusatory tone into taking the stand, “suggesting” that he could use his “right to remain silent,” insinuating that Zimmerman had something to “hide.” The defense repeatedly objected to the judge’s questioning of Zimmerman, which was a blatant attempt to strip Zimmerman of his right to take advice from his own attorneys, and force the defendant to do her bidding. Naturally, Nelson overruled every objection. Despite the fact that this trial is being televised nationally, Nelson seems blithely unaware--or extraordinarily arrogant--by the fact that her obvious and unethical contempt for the defendant and the defense was noted, if not by the mainstream media and Martin partisans, but by millions of viewers with no horse in this race. Even Zimmerman's parents were barred from courtroom, Nelson claiming that they were "witnesses." Yet this apparently did not apply to Martin's parents who also testified--a blatant and contemptible effort to give a "human face" only to Martin.

Zimmerman’s defense  case was simply more convincing in almost every aspect, and anything other than an acquittal in this case is a mockery of our justice system, suggesting that it is subject to outside pressure (such as promises of “retribution” and “rioting” if Zimmerman is not convicted—which, of course, didn’t happen when O.J. Simpson was acquitted of  double murder by a mostly black jury). Five witnesses who testified that it was Zimmerman’s voice on that 911 call did something Martin’s parents and brother did not do: They explained why they were certain that it was Zimmerman’s voice they heard.  Frankly, listening to the audio, I did not hear what I would have guessed was Martin’s voice. And why should we discount Officer Smith’s testimony of what Zimmerman told him at the scene: That he repeatedly called for "help," but “No one would help me.” 

Renowned forensic pathologist Dr. Vincent Di Maio was direct and to the point (which CNN’s Headline News live bloggers completely passed over): The physical evidence backed Zimmerman’s claim that he was struck from someone on top of him, and that Martin was shot from a distance of only inches, from an angle that most likely occurred when both were horizontal on the ground. This was in direct opposition to medical examiner Shiping Bao’s tortured testimony last week, which probably explains his overly self-conscious behavior. 

Former Sanford police chief Bill Lee, who testified for the defense, told CNN that he was “pressured” by a city not interested in justice to arrest Zimmerman without a proper investigation. "It was (relayed) to me that they just wanted an arrest. They didn't care if it got dismissed later. You don't do that." Pressure also came from the “outside” to circumvent “normal investigative protocol”—remember it took four months before Arizona police arrested and charged Jude for the murder of Adkins, and that only after Jude was arrested on another gun-related charge. Lee also asserted that the facts of the case had nothing to do with Florida’s “stand your ground” law,” but of self-defense. 

Although it likely will not play a role in the jury’s decision, and maybe it is only me who finds such matters “telling,” it could very well be that Trayvon Martin’s “friend” Rachel Jeantel’s actions were ultimately the pivot upon which events turned to lead to the death of Martin. It was she who told him to “run” for no rational reason when he was passing by Zimmerman’s vehicle, thus precipitating Zimmerman’s own actions in “following” him. It was only natural—as the neighborhood watch captain—that Zimmerman would find this behavior “suspicious” and subject to his attention.  Otherwise, he would simply—from his perspective—not be doing his “job.” 

Despite the pro-prosecution nature of CNN’s—and the national media’s—coverage of the story, the latest Headline News poll shows that 71 percent of all respondents believe that the evidence shows the Zimmerman shot Martin in “self-defense.” This is a dramatic change since late March 2012, when a Pew Research poll showed that only 15 percent believed this. Things began to change as more information started to dribble out and a more nuanced view of Zimmerman and events that fatal night and before emerged, although this was largely ignored by the mainstream media. A Rasmussen poll taken the following May showed a shift to 40 percent, and the trial has only served to convince (mainly white) observers that a second-degree murder charge cannot be sustained by the evidence—and strengthens the belief that this trial was never really about the seeking of “justice”—but of vengeance and the refusal of a community to face its own culpability. Reports of a "twitter explosion" are already out, with promises to "kill" Zimmerman if he is acquitted--and maybe take some "white people" with him.

Update: Before closing arguments on Thursday, the blatant railroading of Zimmerman to find him guilty of something continued.  Nelson allowed the lesser charge of manslaughter to be considered, which under Florida can be punishable by a long prison sentence. Nelson also intended to grant the prosecution's wish to allow a third-degree murder charge to be considered, which is used in cases of child abuse when the minor dies. Martin was hardly a "child"--just a few months short of being an adult, and by evidence of his own words on his cellphone, he apparently was a "child" who liked to draw a lot of blood when he was beating someone. Attorney Don West vehemently opposed adding this charge, being highly unethical; Nelson withdrew her ruling for the time being for "consultation."