“We are all Trayvon Martin,” read signs displayed at protests. Let’s take some time, like the jury in the George Zimmerman case, and by a careful examination of the evidence, determine if we really want to be like Trayvon Martin, or more to the point, if we would truly like our children to follow his example.
We tend to enlarge people in death beyond their stature in life. Faults and foibles are, if not exactly forgotten, swept under the rug in favor of remembering and lauding the good in them. For the most part, this is a benign, harmless practice. As Thomas Jefferson said, it does not pick anyone’s pocket or break their leg.
Combine it with politics, and particularly racial politics, however, it surely does the former and is likely to do the latter.
The verdict in the George Zimmerman trial had scarcely stopped echoing in the courtroom when Scheme Team lawyer Benjamin Crump compared Trayvon Martin to civil rights icons Emmitt Till and Medgar Evers:
Trayvon Martin will forever remain in the annals of history, next to Medgar Evers and Emmett Till as symbols for the fight for equal justice for all.
Crump was not alone. Elijah Anderson at The Denver Post wrote:
Martin, 17, became symbols of the unique challenges that have faced young black men in America.
At the Huffington Post, Keith A. Beauchamp wrote:
57 years after the murder of Emmett Louis Till, who would have thought that we would find ourselves once again confronted with the never healing sore of Injustice?
Just like many, I found out about the Trayvon Martin tragedy online after a good friend sent me an email, expressing his disappointment about how the case was being handled. As I learned more, I found myself struggling trying to hold back the transgenerational pain that exists in the depths of my soul.
At the Chicago NBC affiliate, Ronald Harris carried the same torch:
Chicago’s Emmett Till and his horrific murder by white men in the south in 1955 galvanized our nation. Now some see the shooting death of a Florida teen by a neighborhood watchman another turning point in American history.
This could possibly become the torchlight of young people ramping it up a bit to engage in activism that can bring about change,” said Ronald Harris, who heads the African American Male Resource Center at Chicago State University.
These are far from the only examples of those determined to elevate Trayvon Martin to the status of a civil rights icon.
Who were Till and Evers? Fourteen year-old Till was killed on August, 28, 1955 in Money, Mississippi after speaking with a white cashier. Her husband and half-brother kidnapped and brutally murdered him and were acquitted at trial, though they later admitted to kidnapping and killing Till. His death was in part, motivation to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1957. The iconic 1987 documentary Eyes On The Prize, began with the story of Till.
US Army WWII veteran and NAACP field secretary Medgar Evers was killed on June 12, 1963 in Mound Bayou, Mississippi by Byron De La Beckwith. Evers was buried with honors at Arlington National Cemetary. De La Beckwith was prosecuted, but the all white jury deadlocked. Thirty years later, with new evidence, a jury convicted him and he died in prison in 2001 at the age of 80. Evers’ death inspired music, television programs and the 1996 movie Ghosts of Mississippi.
Till and Evers were legitimate, rather than manufactured, victims of racism. Till was truly in the wrong place at the wrong time. Evers died not only working for a living selling insurance, but working for the betterment of America. Till’s notoriety came as a result of his age, the particularly brutal manner of his murder, and the times. Evers served his nation honorably in war and in peace and died as a legitimate symbol of the equality he sought for all.
And then we have Trayvon Martin. Before I begin, let me remind all that race cards are not accepted at this Internet ATM. That Martin’s parents and friends wish to remember him for his good qualities is not only understandable and unremarkable, it should offend no one. That others should manipulate the memory of Martin to political, financial and racial ends is utterly wrong and reprehensible. Such manipulation soils and belittles the memory and legacy of Emmitt Till and Medgar Evers, and particularly Evers whose accomplishments as a man and American are unquestionable and worthy of praise and remembrance.
Let’s consider what the jury was never able to learn about Trayvon Martin, and what the media–with virtually no exceptions–refused to tell the American public. Teenagers are inexperienced and immature, impulsive and prone to act on their emotions rather than anticipating consequences. In these tendencies, Martin was much like all teenagers, but in many ways, he was very much unlike almost all teenagers.
Trayvon Martin did not live in a two-parent home. In fact, on the night he died, he was visiting not his father’s home, but his father who was living in the home of his current girlfriend. All available evidence suggests that Martin was often bounced between his father and mother and was sent to his father because his mother was having difficulty controlling him.
In fact, he was in Sanford due to a 10-day school suspension. While the defense was able to get his school records, they have not been generally released. However, we do know that this was not Martin’s first suspension from school. We also know that he had been caught vandalizing school property, and had been caught with a baggie containing marijuana residue. In addition, he was caught with jewelry taken in a burglary near his school, as well as a burglary tool. It does not take my more than three decades of police and education experience to surmise that Martin’s grades must have been poor indeed. Concerns other than academic achievement were his priority.
The Conservative Treehouse has done a great deal of the reporting that the media have studiously avoided. Through FOIA requests, they discovered that the chief of police of the Miami schools implemented a policy that “benefitted” Trayvon Martin, perhaps benefited him to death. Because black male students were committing so many crimes at school, the school district decided to change those statistics, not by doing anything to prevent or stop those crimes, but by reclassifying the crimes and not reporting them to police. In Martin’s case, possession of stolen property was magically transformed into “found property,” and the case was not referred to the police.
Relatively few students are ever suspended from school for any reason. Fewer still are suspended for 10 days. In virtually every school district, a ten-day suspension is the last step, the last disciplinary resort before full expulsion. In order to be suspended for ten days, multiple lesser disciplinary measures, including multiple shorter suspensions, are virtually always required. The only exceptions would be for offenses so serious that an immediate jump in the disciplinary ladder to a 10 day suspension is required.
There is substantial evidence of Martin’s drug use, much of it in his own words in his social media communications. Martin often wrote about his love of “blunts,” cheap cigars hollowed out and filled with marijuana. Photos of them even appeared in his communications. He often wrote about his appreciation for “Purple Lean” or “Drank,” a drug concoction made of sugary candy, a sweet drink, and Robitussin cough syrup. On the night he died, he had levels of THC—marijuana–in his blood sufficient to render him legally intoxicated in multiple states. Of course, any amount of marijuana in the blood was illegal in Florida.
There is also evidence that Martin tried to purchase blunts at the 7-11, and that he engaged three young men who happened to arrive at the store while he was there to buy some for him. Remember that it took Martin some 45 minutes to cover a distance he could have covered in a fraction of that time before being seen by Zimmerman. In addition, when he died, he was carrying two of the three ingredients of Purple Lean: Skittles and watermelon juice cocktail. This may have been a coincidence, but it’s a relevant coincidence.
Martin’s social media name–“Slimm@No Limit Nigga”–is also, taken with his on-line persona, suggestive of a young man trying to live the thug lifestyle with all of its negative and destructive connotations. Many of his communications were clearly disrespectful to women, photos displayed him wearing false gold teeth and displaying obscene gestures. There were photos of marijuana plants and probably the stolen jewelry he was caught with. There was even the photo of a hand holding a semiautomatic pistol. In fact, several of Martin’s communications revealed his attempts to obtain handguns–illegal for him due to his age–and even his father was apparently involved in that pursuit.
Martin also had an interest in fighting, which was clearly expressed in his communications. He wrote about engaging in a fight and learning the lessons he specifically applied in his attack on Zimmerman, and in another expressed his interest in punching people in the nose and making them bleed, which is precisely what he did to Zimmerman. Itonically, even his friends seemed to be trying to calm him down and call out his more outrageous comments and attitudes.
All of this provides, as prosecutor John Guy claimed of George Zimmerman, A window into the soul of Trayvon Martin. Considering only Martin’s multiple school suspensions, Martin was outside the mainstream of acceptable, legal behavior for teenagers. One might argue that at least some of the kids suspended from school are not necessarily criminals, and that their suspensions don’t necessarily reflect anti-social behavior elsewhere in their lives. Some might argue that bragging and foolish comments on social media aren’t unusual for teenage boys. To a limited extent they may be correct.
However, it has been my experience that by the time a teenager receives a 10 day suspension, drug use, crime and other problems are already deeply embedded in their character and behavior patterns and trouble at school are merely symptoms of a teenager on a steep downward path to jail or worse. This very much appears to have been the case with Trayvon Martin, who, in the year before his death, displayed all of these warning signs.
In many ways, Trayvon Martin was a tragedy looking for a place to happen. Many have claimed to have no idea why Martin attacked Zimmerman or why he didn’t simply go home in the ample time he had after losing Zimmerman in the rain and dark. There are a number of obvious possibilities suggested by Martin’s behavior and habits.
Those living the thug life style are characterized by taking immediate and raging offense at the most insignificant slight, real or imagined. Being observed by a “creepy-ass cracker” (please keep in mind that Rachel Jeantel’s credibility in making this assertion is shaky at best) would surely be more than sufficient provocation that would inevitably lead to violence, by a young man who had recently written about punching people in the nose and making them bleed.
Martin didn’t run from Zimmerman out of fear, but perhaps for a more obvious reason: he knew he had been smoking pot, and may have been carrying some. Seeing Zimmerman on the phone, he needed to get out of sight and throw away his stash. He kept his lighter, which was found in his clothing (he had no cigarettes).
In a recent interview, Jeantel claimed that Martin thought Zimmerman a police officer or security guard (interesting that she did not make this claim in court). If this is so, it makes his actions in laying in wait and attacking Zimmerman even more reckless and dangerous. Was he truly willing to ambush a police officer or security guard, or, discovering that Zimmerman wasn’t either of those things, did Martin see a green light for assault?
Granted, this is conjecture, but I’m not prosecuting Martin and have no need to prove anything beyond a reasonable doubt. Are these possibilities–there are surely more–truly improbable given the known facts?
Even putting aside the verdict, there can be no doubt that Trayvon Martin attacked Zimmerman. Stunning him and knocking him to the ground, he pressed the attack, ruthlessly beating him for 45 seconds. It was this that directly led to his death, a death the result of lawful self-defense.
Ah, but Zimmerman was a racist! Not according to the FBI, which conducted an exhaustive investigation into that aspect of his character, finding just the opposite.
I have no need or desire to soil the memory of Trayvon Martin, but when many seek to elevate him to civil rights sainthood, his qualifications for that exalted moral station are legitimately a matter of public interest. Clearly, this case does not qualify as an example of racial discrimination. Morally and legally, it was a case of lawful self-defense, proved by the fullest exertions of the criminal justice system. Clearly, Trayvon Martin does not qualify as an example of exemplary character, purity and innocence. He was a young man on a self-destructive, dangerous path, a path that harmed him and others, and ultimately led him to his death.
What parent would want their son to emulate Trayvon Martin’s example? President Obama proclaimed that if he had a son, he’d look like Martin. Would Mr. Obama care to claim Martin’s attitudes and behavior as well?
To see the contrast with what Trayvon Martin was, and what he–and any young man–might be, consider this report of a 15 year-old boy, who with a friend, took the law into his own hands and was responsible for freeing a five year-old kidnap victim. Like George Zimmerman, he knew the police were involved, but he observed and acted, and saved a life. That’s a young man worthy of the praise of the NAACP or any group.
Trying to elevate this case and this unfortunate and tragic young man to the level of those genuinely deserving of praise and cultural remembrance does no one honor and exposes the base political and financial motivations of those that seek to manipulate history.
Regardless of whatever good qualities he might have possessed, the story of Trayvon Martin is properly remembered as a cautionary tale, an example of how not to live and what teenagers should not do.
I agree with your opinion whole heartily. These leaders that profess to be “Reverends” are in fact doing more harm to their communities rather than helping them. By uplifting Trayvon to the realm of sainthood is condoning his lifestyle and the choices he made. What kind of message are these charlatans giving to the young?
The only thing that the Al Sharptons and Jesse Jacksons of the world are good for is name recognition and getting rich. The sad thing is all the ignorant people that allow themselves to be used. They are trying to remain relevant.
Rush Limbaugh this morning pointing out that Rachel openly admitted on Piers Morgan last night that Trayvon beat George Zimmerman because he thought George was gay.
And aptly pointing out, too, that this should have been headline news in the liberal media today… but it isn’t.
http://dailyrushbo.com/rush-trayvon-martin-was-a-gay-basher/
To put it in SAT form:
Trayvon Martin is to Medgar Evars as Tawanna Brawley is to Rosa Parks.
Nice!
Just when I think this case and incident couldn’t get more absurd, this comes out.
http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/07/law-schools-are-turning-out-too-many-social-engineers/
If you care to check it out, you will find that one of Crump’s associates believes she is a social engineer.
Is this a new job title?
Hi, My name is Lee Gal Analyst. I am your social engineer. I am here to help you understand where you have been made victim and where you have been made ruler. Also, I am here to make sure you that you only think a certain way. You are allowed questions. Those questions are at the end of the manual. Please read them at the earliest opportunity.
By the way, I am Social Engineer First Class, but I am a regular person, just like you.
Thank you Mike for all of your reporting on this case from way far back when. The MSM and all of the Martin families Scheme team jumped on this story, and to this day so many still live in the world of the “narrative.” If more people, who supposedly are on the right, would have come out swinging early and often, perhaps there could have been just a teensy bit of pushback? I truly believe that so many, including the conserbative talk radio hosts wouldn’t touch the story because even they believed that surely Corey had something really big on Zimmerman that would come out in the trial, and they would have egg on their faces. I even heard Hannity indicate, after much of the trial was underway, and was backing up GZ’s story, that he was still waiting for the state to present some really explosive evidence. If I am not mistaken, that happened even after the state rested.
This is the problem those on the right have. They will not, refuse to, and are die hard reluctant to ever put their fist up and fight what so many knew to be a public lynching so much earlier. The right sits back, awaiting what they likely know will never come, but hey, I can’t do anything to defend this guy, I can’t touch this racially explosive case, just in case the state just might have some kind of evidence against GZ.
GZ has been dissapointed that the media portrayed him as a vigilente, cop wannabe, evil dude, only out to kill young black males.
When the hell will those on the right start giving the benefit of the doubt to something as silly as “innocent until proven guilty” maybe. I see many on the right as actually being aiders and abettors of injustice, because God forbid they come out swinging for a person’s rights as an American citizen. When will those on the right with microphones start supporting the laws in this country, without being afrid that hey maybe we can have some kind of a voice here. Honestly, Levin and Rush had almost nothing to say about the Zimmerman lynching, and now after the verdict, they have plenty to say. How about what has happened for the last 16 months to Zimmerman and his family. Shouldn’t they have at least talked about the Black Panther poster, or something?
Dear minpin06:
Thanks for your fine comments. I must, however, correct you on one matter: I can’t speak to Rush Limbaugh because his program is on while I’m working, but I’ve had occasion to hear Mark Levin’s program over the last year and he has been uniformly excellent on calling out Angela Corey and exposing the lunacy of the entire prosecution.
Thanks again!
Thank you Mike for your yeoman service covering this case.
In my own experience in overhearing conversations between members of a certain ethnic group, I am, perhaps unfortunately, leaning toward the conviction that in their minds, Trayvon was a civil rights victim and someone that they will immortalize alongside Rosa Parks, MLK and others.
The saddest thing is that these people are members of the upper 10% income bracket or higher. They’ve never spent a day ‘in the hood’ and I personally know that two of them have punished their children for ‘bringing that gangsta crap into my house’
I fear for my country
all of the sordid details of trayvon martin’s past will come out, thanks to the whistleblower lawsuit against corey and the sanctions motion against the prosecutors.
btw, if nelson doesn’t allow sanctions, is that within her discretion or can that be appealed?
RJ’s constantly evolving story…in da beginnin’…on cupcake’s couch, Trayvon was a ‘Mama’s boy’ who would never fight.
Contrast that with her pierced morgan interview and how folks in that neighborhood were all well versed in the art of ‘whoop – a**’?
.
I told my Asian wife last night that any credibility JR might have had on the witnes stand just vanished last night on tv.
.
I pray for her future. The entitlement attitude & the unbridled racism are not good signs.
.
Note: liberal hypocrisy alert. Its not ok to suggest that tm started it. Why would he do that? You arent allowed to classify black people as angry, but you’re expected to understand why they could be angry?
This all has gone beyond any remorse for individual loss or undeserved punishment.
For Holder, and those he works with, Trayvon is a nothing, something they would never let their children be around. They are too smart to not know this. Holder has all the means he needs to know exactly what kind of person Martin was. Martin is their (dead) fool. He is trash, but useful trash.
This is a practice run, it is beginning to appear, for large scale social disruption. This is an engineered social crisis, and Holder’s word’s and DOJ actions strongly suggest that they are pressing as many buttons as they can through their proxy groups (such as “Dream Defenders”) in an attempt to confound elected government and the judicial system.
Why else would a government seek to inflame racial hatred and conflict within its own nation? What do they hope to gain at this point, unless they have more “fundamental changes” in store before this administration is forced, by the Constitution, to leave office.
Your words scare me, for I fear they are true.
Reblogged this on A world at war.
New York Daily Post list apparently has a cover with Trayvon listed with Emmett Till and other victims of racial violence.
This is starting to get under my skin. TM was not an innocent nice kid, we all know that. But the media insist that is what we all must accept, that and the lie that only black teens experience threat or violence because of racism. The crime stats tell the opposite story.
Seems that Holder, and all those silly infotainment media pundits think ordinary folks are far more dangerous than wannabe gangsters and do not deserve to be armed or have the right to self defense.
It’s not appropriate to align Trayvon with Emmett Till or Medgar Evers. At the same time, the opposing views around Trayvon’s innocence are arguing separate conditions: (1) Trayvon’s innocence in life (2) Trayvon’s innocence in the minutes leading up to the altercation; and perhaps (3) Trayvon’s innocence during from the start of the altercation itself. Point 1 is irrelevant to the case and is not under litigation (except perhaps in the blogosphere), but seems to be the main viewpoint of those insisting Trayvon is ‘not innocent’. Point 2 is relevant, and seems to be the main viewpoint of those insisting on Trayvon’s innocence – – but this only has murky evidence, at best, and is therefore able to be debated – – but is also ultimately unknowable. Point 3 is relevant as well, but also has no firm evidence one way or the other and is also unknowable.
Jeantel will continue to reveal details because I believeTM told her he was gonna jump that cracka. Today she told HP Hill that TM threw the first punch, and it was just a typical ghetto style whoop azz, no problem with that GZ was just supposed to take it according to her.
Look, I live in a hood, and know exactly how typical each action TM engaged in that night.
Some of the evidence is still not public such as the ping logs from the phones, which will prove the only person stalking was TM for the 4 minutes after he checked out GZ until he punched him the face. TM was also the only racist, calling GZ a cracka.
If you have not read TM own words about recent fights and his outlook you should, the texts are in the discovery docs.
One major correction with this incident it was never a fight, it was a one sided attack, a felony aggravated battery. TM chose to attack GZ because he snitched to the cops, TM doubled back ,lay in wait for GZ to hang up and then the typical ghetto talk, you got a problem? now you do, punch to the face. Mount ground and pound with such brutality and force. He does not stop even when told to by John. TM is out of control teen.
As if this scenario is not typical. Of course it is. Happened to me.
Cassandra – my condolences for your own experience – I am sorry you were in that situation. I have also had my head beaten, and I can tell you that it doesn’t just happen in the ‘hood by black people. I am on the record multiple times for saying I don’t believe there was any racial component to the instigation, however and if in fact there was, it didn’t matter for George since he is Not Guilty by Reasonable Doubt, and it didn’t matter for Trayvon since he was not on trial.
I just happened to review the Huffington Post video that you are referring to (oddly, a leftist media source) before I read your post. Rachel does say that ‘she believes’ Trayvon landed the first hit. (actually, I don’t think anyone thinks George landed any hits). She goes on to say immediately that she also believes that Trayvon wouldn’t have started it because he wouldn’t have kept her on the phone if he wanted to start something. (“it’s a black, … not a black situation … any teen situation”)
This is still murky, especially since the witness doesn’t say why she believes that Trayvon landed the first hit (however she rambles separately about Travon’s self-defense), as well she makes sure to indicate that she also believes Trayvon didn’t start the scuffle (she indicates elsewhere that George may have pushed or grabbed at Trayvon first – see some of the Piers Morgan clips) All of these statements are her ‘beliefs’, without any backup. To evaluate the validity of Rachel’s words, all her beliefs must be considered, not just the ones that are convenient. They all have equal weight.
I will agree that we don’t know, and it could have happened similarly to the way you suggest in your scenario (although, since George did not need medical attention, I would still take issue with the ‘pound with brutality and force’ assertion). It could have happened just as easily quite differently. It has to be agreed by anyone that focusing on selected phrases from Rachel Jeantel’s testimony, statements, and subsequent interviews, without looking at her whole narrative together is insubstantial, at best.
Separate item: please tell me more about the ping logs.
Mike, I think you are reading far to much into a simple sign. I can see no content or reason to believe that the phrase, “We are all Trayvon Martin” means we should all emulate Trayvon Martin, or that we should all want to be like him. Instead, it seems to be a current-sense metaphor. I can’t interpret it any deeper than to believe it suggests we are all subject to being in the right place at the wrong time, and could be a victim of another’s experience-based assumptions and interpretations.
I have also not run across others asserting that Trayvon is worthy of emulation – perhaps a cautionary tale – but not a person to be looked up to. Can you point me to anything like that? Like you, my initial position is that that would be a misguided position, but I would like to read about them.
Also – are you aware that much of the social media content (including menacing photos) attributed to Trayvon Martin are actually from another Trayvon Martin who also happens to live in Florida? Have you verified that your examples are attributable to the right Trayvon Martin?
“are you aware that much of the social media content (including menacing photos) attributed to Trayvon Martin are actually from another Trayvon Martin who also happens to live in Florida”
Cite please.
http://www.snopes.com/photos/politics/martin.asp – – this particular reference was originated about false photos coming from the wrong facebook site.
Jspurr01, Snopes is not a legitimate site, nor are Crumps refutations reliable given that many of these photos were released in the Defense’s Discovery filings. There may have been a few illegitimate pictures circulating, but the Gold Grill, the cash, the pot plants, the guns, the codeine, the self protraits were all indeed Trayvon. How do we know this? Because the defense subpoenaed the accounts.
You are right, Snopes content has not been entered into evidence, however it casts doubt upon assertions about what content in the blogosphere is attributed to the real Trayvon Martin, so, I would respectfully turn the tables and ask for citations to prove where the referenced negative social media content came from.
The Snopes reference by its existence illustrates that there is faulty information on the web, even if it is their own. I have seen many posters reference the image that Snopes supposedly debunks. Where is the evidence / citation that ties it to the Trayvon Martin from the Zimmerman trial?
Which social media references in the blogosphere are actually legitimate discoveries of the defense, and which are replications from erroneous origins?
Dear wrongonred:
Welcome to SMM and thanks for your comment. You’re quite correct, Snopes is as often wrong as they are right. In fact, I’ve yet to find a single “fact check” site that has an accuracy record substantially greater than random chance. As always, the only way to be really informed is to find trustworthy sources, and always, do your own research.
not true. only one, rarely published photo was not of trayvon martin. the widely published photos of him with gold teeth, him blowing smoke and him close-up to the camera, flipping a double bird, are genuine.
only the one faraway shot of a person flipping a double bird is another person.
citations please?
the trayvon martin photos I am talking about were introduced as evidence during the trial.
OK – you have personally seen and examined them and the supporting evidentiary documentation? (at least online) Please point me where – I would like to see them too.
i’m not your personal assistant. google them, go to trial websites, ask experts like mike or Andrew. they were broadcast on television when the trial was televised. mark O’Mara used one of them in his closing argument.
True, you are not my personal assistant, but in the name of personal responsibility, I would suggest we are each responsible to source the ‘facts’ we use to debate with. I provided my source when asked. Not everyone likes it, but no one has countered with any evidence or sources that supports otherwise. Mike is here – if he wishes to chime-in, I am sure he will.
If I happen across additional information in your favor or mine, I will be sure to post it here, but just like you are not my personal assistant, I am not going to research your statements for you either.
Dear jspurr01:
Hi there. Interestingly, this is the first time I’ve heard of another Trayvon Martin who happens to live in Florida and who happens to post essentially the same kinds of things on social media as the Trayvon Martin that is the subject of this conversation. The general rule is that it is the absolute burden of anyone making claims that upset what is known and generally understood to be true to conclusively prove those claims.
Those who note that many of the social media posts and photos were in discovery and were clear produced and/or owned by Trayvon Martin (the one we know, not the one that may or may not exist) are correct. And while the alternative is possible, as I noted, I’ve yet to see any actual evidence of that.
I do wonder about one thing however, and I don’t specifically address this to you jspurr01, which is: the trial is over. Why is anyone still trying it? There are more than sufficient related issues to deal with, are there not?
Dear Mike – – thanks for your response. I still hold to the opinion that those who make statements in a debate need to be responsible for citing and supporting those statements. I am not sure how to quantify or measure “known and generally understood to be true”.
In answer to your question about “why is anyone still trying [the case],” that is my point exactly, and where I started. (I will admit to drifting a bit in response to other discussion side topics that have occurred along the way) I was looking forward to a cool-down after the verdict, however, it seems that there has been a significant up-tick in those switching to Trying Trayvon’s background – which is unfortunate. I felt compelled to provide a reasoned counterpoint as best I could.
I am in 100% agreement with you. Let’s put the case(s) to bed (both the official Zimmerman Trial and the unofficial Martin Trial), and allow other issues the attention they deserve.
Thanks Mike.
Note: recognizing we have differing opinions and positions on some topics, I am impressed with the effort and quality you put into your blog. I can’t imagine how you have the ability to expend the effort required to do what you do. Your standards should be a benchmark for all other blog sites and commentators to aspire.
Dear jspurr01:
Thanks for your kind comments. I work hard to set the tone here and readers are kind enough to uphold it.
Perhaps the best example of what I am getting at is Judge Nelson’s ruling on the contents of Martin’s cell phone. She would not allow them because of the mere possibility that someone could have somehow obtained his passwords, despite his efforts at double encryption. In this, not only was she behaving irrationally, the law is dead set against her. The law recognizes that when we have hundreds, even thousands of messages and photos on anyone’s phone, it’s entirely reasonable to believe those things belong to that person. The law doesn’t require us to exhaustively research each and every item to conclusively prove that no one else could have possibly had a hand in producing it. The burden is on those who seek to deny the authenticity of a given item to prove it is inauthentic. This is as it should be.
Thus, the items on my cell phone can reasonably be believed to be mine and produced and retained by me, while the same is true of the contents of anyone’s cell phone.
Dear jspurrr01:
I agree that one, perhaps the primary, intention of the “we are all Trayvon Martin” slogan is the suggestion that we all share something in common. However, beyond that, it’s open to multiple interpretations. For example, what are we to understand when members of Congress wear hoodies on the floor of the Congress? When a hoodie becomes a symbol of–something or other–are those adopting it not emulating Martin?
And when people seek to elevate Martin to the level of legitimate role models, people who died in a worthy and noble struggle for the aspirations of all Americans, should we not inquire if they are worthy of the exalted state?
I understand your points, but I’d like to read anyone–outside of a few conservative sites, suggesting that Martin is not worthy of emulation. I certainly don’t see anything like that from the left of center.
Good article, Mike.
This story makes my heart ache. I am saddened by the death of a young man, and saddened by what I consider governmental persecution of another young man who felt he had no other option than to take the life of someone else.
But I am also angry that there are those who are now using this case to claim that our nation is nothing more than the same old Jim Crow nation of days long past. I am also reminded of the words of Booker T. Washington who pointed out that there are those who will use the problems of black people to create for themselves a job, allowing them to enrich themselves on the problems of black people.
Unfortunately, there will be more Trayvon Martins, and the chances are they will be murdered by someone who has the same skin tone. But the poverty pimps, working so hard to foment violence as they claim they are against violence, will never address the real problems with young adults like Trayvon. They will not address the black on black crime that has taken the lives of so many young black men in Chicago and Detroit; they will not talk about the apathy of black parents toward their children’s education, or how those black parents do nothing to provide their children with roll models. Nothing will be said how many black men have become nothing more than sperm donors, willfully avoiding their responsibilities as a father.
Trayvon Martin was a human soccer ball, kicked from home to home after his father dumped Wife #2 to move on to another bed, and then to another. He took Trayvon from the only stable home the kid had ever known, with Wife #2, and sent him to the mother that, up until then, had little to do with the boy. She then moved the kid to an uncle’s home, back to her house, and then to another town with a dad who had been clearly no longer involved in the kid’s life. The two things that help a kid avoid the pitfalls of going down the wrong road, stability and parental involvement, was missing. Trayvon had become a statistic that is all too common.
But the race card must be played. The hustlers must continue the meme that all the problems blacks encounter are the fault of “whitey” and things like white “privilege” and white “supremacy” as was said on the evil The Nation website. Never mind that a majority of black children are born in homes with an absentee father. Or that the mother pays little attention to their children’s education, having adopted the view that it is the responsibility of others to raise their children and be held accountable for them.
The place to deal with family problems is not in the government, making excuses for those who fail the personal responsibility test, it is in the home. The place to cure the ills of blacks is also not in the halls of government, but in the black community itself.
I am reminded of a story about a housing project in St. Louis, that when built, was supposed to be a model community for low income families. Within just a few years, it was run down, rife with crime, and a total eye sore with residents complaining how drug dealers and hookers used the complex as an office. The hall ways smelled of urine and residents complained that when they left their apartments, they would come home to missing appliances including bath room fixtures.
A brave black woman had had enough. She organized the residents who quickly booted out the drug dealers and hookers. A “community” watch program that worked with local law enforcement was created and residents painted the hallways which were covered in graffiti, moped hall way floors, took care of the outside grounds and made sure that no trash was laying around. Residents who did not take care of their apartments, or who violated the rules created by the residents themselves, were booted to the curb. The Crochran Gardens became a model for other low income housing projects all across the nation. The problem was in that community, and the community, not the St. Louis government, solved the problems.
So while Eric Holder declares that we must have a “conversation” about the problems with the black community, that conversation must start among blacks themselves. Whitey is not responsible for the high rate of black unwed mothers, or the number of black teens using/dealing drugs or the high rate of block absentee fathers. And whitey can not do anything to cure those ills.
That’s an excellent summary, Retire2005 – lot’s of great thinking. The exception I will take is that we can’t expect every community to have their own charismatic brave black woman to take charge. She, in effect, created a very local ad-hoc government. A person like that can’t be expected to magically appear and succeed everywhere. (what happens when she moves or dies? did she set up a structure that can be self sustaining? – if so, she could be a candidate for a Nobel Prize to have pulled that off on her own) Even the Cochran Gardens example had a dependency on Formal Government for its very existence as well as the local law enforcement support.
Obviously Big Government made mistakes, maybe did too much, and/or did not have the whole solution for a Cochran Gardens success, but at the same time, formal government is not for whites only (just like I suspect there were also non-black residents at Cochran Gardens), or business only, or law enforcement only, or whatever only. We have government to support the big collective challenges (of the people, by the people, for the people) that are too big for the root community to completely solve on their own – because most of these issues affect us all in some way. The solution is not to ignore it and say, “let them work it out”. It is also not to say, “it didn’t work, so give up.” It is also not to come in and take over. The solution, like everything else in civilization is to analyze, fix, and try again. Business folks will recognize “Plan, Do, Study, Act” which came out of Deming Quality theories back into the 80’s.
The notion that Government should run like a business can’t just focus on controlling expenditures. Quality Management and ROI analyses need to be employed as well. It’s OK to fail in business, pick up the pieces, correct, and try again. Donald Trump declared bankruptcy at least 4 times. It is also OK to fail in Government, but lessons need to be learned and fixes applied. Unfortunately, we citizens seem to gravitate to bad news and yawn at good news stories, so failing government may be a self-fulfilling prophecy due to failures and doomsayers getting all the attention, and causing congress to go into gridlock – which can only drive more failure.
OK, I have deviated significantly from the main point, here. In your example, the brave black woman, in effect, created her own local government. They even paid taxes to this ad-hoc government (at least in the form of time and labor – – but someone must have bought the paint) Would extending the principle of finding the cure “in the black community itself” require an ‘informal’ black government on a national basis? If so, how would that work? Who would be the leader(s) and how would they be chosen? If not, what would the alternative look like? How would it be organized?
You asked:
” Would extending the principle of finding the cure “in the black community itself” require an ‘informal’ black government on a national basis? ”
No, no national basis required. A number of black neighborhoods have been cleaned up because the residents were tired of the crime. They watched when drug dealers gathered on the street corners, and simply called the police saying “Come and get them.” They worked to keep the trash picked up, took an interest in their local school and the local school children. They did what the left never advocates; they took personal responsibility for their own actions and the actions of those in their neighborhoods.
The Cochran Gardens eventually was a failure. The reason was not because the residents did not do a good job, it was because [black] city council members thought they could do a better job, accused the residents of stealing public funds (never proven) and took over the management of the complex. It was not long after that Cochran Gardens was in the same pathetic shape it had been in. Another clear case that if you want failure, get the government involved.
Why can’t we expect every neighborhood to have responsible people? Why is it OK to accept the status quo that government cannot cure? Have we become so apathetic to the concept of personal responsibility that we now give people a pass when they have none? Case in point: you have the right to have as many children as you want. You don’t have the right to dump the cost, and the responsibility, for those children on others.
Too bad about Cochran Gardens. Based on what you described, there was certainly a government intervention problem. Unless there is another solution, it seems that figuring out how to make government work is the only choice.
You can “expect” all you want, but sad as it may seem, remarkable people with the capability to have a vision and the capacity to lead to success is a rare thing. Nothing happens without some degree of structure and organization and energy. I live on a private gravel road, and getting someone to step up to organize getting it graded is near impossible. (I did the last one, and there is never full participation, yet the road can’t just be graded in front of the houses of those who pay) It requires the right personality, the right motivation, and the right situation. We have to pay elected officials to run government for us. Structure and organization is at the very heart of the reason for government. It can be ad-hoc (although, as you pointed out, the ad-hoc Cochran Gardens government, with no teeth, eventually was crushed or failed), local, state, federal – but otherwise, it’s anarchy. Even businesses institute their own internal governments. “Governance” is all the rage within the most forward thinking businesses these days. For the people, government exists to establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.
I know that I don’t accept the status quo, but if no one does anything about it, the status quo is all that will happen (actually, the laws around entropy applied to society loosely say if you don’t do anything, it can only get worse)
How do you ‘expect’ a solution to happen without some kind of structure and energy behind it? Other than ‘expecting’ – is there some other part of the solution?
Dear retire2005:
Hi there. Great comment! What irks me in this situation is that the civil rights movement won. In every meaningful way, it achieved its goals. Actual racists are few and far between and are rightfully social pariahs, yet some need to invent racism for their own ends.
I have no doubt that most Americans are concerned with making a living and raising their families. They could care less about the race of a coworker, but care greatly if they are a reliable and capable person. They see no need to have a “conversation” about a supposed character fault they simply don’t have, particularly when the substance of that conversation would consist of people harrying them by telling them the fact that they aren’t racist is denial of their racism. Why converse with anyone that begins with the premise you are inherently flawed and evil and more so because you won’t admit it?
Thanks!
Actual racists are few and far between and are rightfully social pariahs, true enough, in the white mainstream world that also includes many non whites, but in the black community I would posit that what we are really seeing is the unrestrained angry racism and hate directed at any handy non black. four years of barry has made beating and attacking whites in mobs a summertime sport and one in which repeatedly the police refuse to recognize that these are hate crimes. hundreds have been brutally hurt and it has been hushed up by the media. I would go further, IF THIS WERE GOING ON IN THESE SAME EPIDEMIC NUMBERS BY WHITE “MOBS” HURTING THIS MANY BLACK PEOPLE WE WOULD BE UNDER MARTIAL LAW RIGHT NOW.
Mike, the problem is singular; the Al Sharptons and Jesse Jacksons of the nation see their influence slipping through their fingers. Blacks represent just 12% of our nation, but Hispanics are already at 14%. Hispanics do not give a whit what the race baiting poverty pimps have to say and their influence is growing while Sharpton/Jackson’s is waning.
So the poverty pimps will try to whip up the crowd in order to increase their bank account balances. But at some point, when more than just two Hispanics have been beaten down by young thug blacks all in the name of “Justice for Trayvon” we are going to see real problems. And eventually, even white Democrats are going to tire of being labeled “racists” for no other reason than their skin tone.
I think Sharpton, who is organizing protests in 100 cities, has the ability to really hurt the DNC along with Hillary who seems to be taking “racial” sides. If the DoJ, which has now confiscated the evidence from the Zimmerman trial, does continue to go down this road, how long before Hispanics start asking “Why is the DoJ persecuting a Hispanic that has been found not guilty?”
Hello rumcrook – I tend to agree with you on the lowering numbers of actual racists these days. I am wondering about your ‘summertime sport’ comment, though. The FBI data on violent crime shows a reduction of 14% from 2008-2011 (3 years of Barry … 2012 data is still pending publication). Go here: http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/violent-crime/violent-crime.
Dear jspurr01:
Actually, violent crime in the nation has been declining for long before Mr. Obama took office. He has certainly done nothing whatever to reduce it, while laboring mightily to disarm the law abiding.
Thanks Mike – the longer term trend you mention is very true – I was simply sampling the time period represented by rumcrook in his assertion. If you go to the link I posted, you can find earlier history as well.
the trend may be lower, that does not exclude or refute the hundreds of stories ive read of racially motivated mobs of black youth beating people in cities across the US. many of these instances are either not written up by the police and disappear down the official statistics memory hole or they are written up in very obtuse downplayed language by the police.
the main component of my argument is that one misrepresented case the zimm/martin case has swamped the nation, the other side of the coin black on white racist attacks have happened a hundred fold more than that but they are hidden behind ambiguous language.
if the racially motivated attacks were reversed white on black in any real numbers approaching the number of racially motivated attacks by blacks we would be under martial law.
Alan Dershowitz appeared on Huckabee and explained why there’s not going to be any fed charges.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-e0jCN4Ylo
And Angela Corey-Nifong is going down. Circumstances for her are quite grave.
Sidenote: This case is so bizarre, isn’t it. Everyone is scrambling on to TV and testifying in the court f public opinion. It is as if this is he next phase of the litigation.
I did not catch it, but did Corey and crew appear on one of the cable news channels and the host played one-word with them, this time “one word to describe Zimmerman.” When it was Corey’s or Bernie’s turn they said “murderer.” I am not sure, but I don’t think the prosecutor gets to say that. It is badmouthing the justice system and the jury.
Great article, Mike. I have watched this case since it began, including gavel to gavel coverage of the trial itself, and I just about choked on my adult beverage when I heard Crump compare Martin to Evers and Till.
However, I completely agree with this comment you made above:
“I do wonder about one thing however, and I don’t specifically address this to you jspurr01, which is: the trial is over. Why is anyone still trying it? There are more than sufficient related issues to deal with, are there not?”
I’m tired of talking about this case, or at least the part of it concerning GZ’s guilt or innocent. It’s done. He’s acquitted. There are much more important things to be concerned with now, from the prosecutorial misconduct to whatever the government is trying to do. I’m done arguing over GZ’s individual case, but I’ve just gotten started on the threats to our freedom and way of life coming out of Washington, D.C.
Matt… my impression is that city, county, state, and Washington govts. are simply letting the “angry black community” blow off steam. From the looks of things this appears a good strategy.
For example, there were only hundreds attending protests in the big cities. Here in San Francisco there were very few who marched and yelled.
Across the Bay in Oakland there were a few who broke store windows, etc., the first few nights, but those people are hooligans who use any excuse to march and destroy.
Heck, here in San Francisco we saw more violence when the Giants won the World Series (out-of-towners burned a MUNI bus).
My impression is that everyone is moving on. Even in the media last night Zimmerman was item four. By the weekend he won’t be in the news.
Even in Oakland the violent have moved on to new matters. E.g. last night there was a shooting in the “bad part of that town.” End result, one 8-year-old killed, two other girls in the family shot and wounded, grandmother shot and wounded. That event pushed Zimmerman coverage to the bottom of the fold.
abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/local/east_bay&id=9176998
Then Rolling Stone captured headlines for putting the Boston Marathon Bomber on the cover.
Pingback: The Trayvon Martin Case, Update 49: Come Fly With Me? | Stately McDaniel Manor
Pingback: The Trayvon Martin Case, Update 53: All White People Are Racist! | Stately McDaniel Manor
Pingback: The Trayvon Martin Case, Update 54: All White People Are Racist! | Stately McDaniel Manor