Zimmerman trial exposed racism

To the editor:

Pretend you are a law-abiding citizen, minding your own business, walking on private property, and a man with a gun accosts you. A fight ensues and you are killed, deprived of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness without due process. Your killer is found innocent.

Young black males have told me that they get suspicious, hostile, and fearful glances from many whites. Throughout most of American history, black males in the states of the old Confederacy would lower their heads, avoid eye contact, and speak softly when addressed by a white man. Should they resume that behavior?

The legal reality of the George Zimmerman trial is over. Even the astute editorial page writers of the Wall Street Journal stated that the there was no prosecution eyewitness to dispute Zimmerman’s self-defense claim. The fallacy of that is that in most killings there is no prosecution eyewitness. Convictions derive from relevant circumstantial evidence.

Historically, we will never know what was said between Trayvon Martin and Zimmerman. I suspect that Zimmerman said something disrespectful to Martin, triggering the fight. Martin noticed the gun and in self-defense used his fists. The principle, that if you are losing a fight you instigated, you have the right to kill your adversary is one that I can’t accept.

Prior to this verdict, I thought that America had made enormous progress in racial relations. My opinion has changed. Americans still have latent racism and sexism. The constant reference of the all-female jury and that five of them are mothers reflects stereotypes. Does being a mother means you are not susceptible to racism?

Should we free Khalid Sheikh Mohammed because no one actually saw him draw up plans for 9/11? Perhaps the real heroes of United Flight 93 were the four hijackers who acted in “self-defense” against a howling mob of passengers?

Rick Sirvint


Legacy Comments1

The problem with the aftermath of this case is that people, in this case Rick Sirvint, choose to offer their opinions with no basis in the facts of what happened. Note where he says "I suspect that..." Yes it is okay to have an opinion, but to offer such a statement with no basis in fact or without having been present when this attack occured does nothing more than fuel the racial divide. Zimmerman has been portrayed to be racist from the very beginning. NBC edited the 911 tape to fuel their talking points of him being racist. Through the course of FBI interviews, none of the 35 people who were interviewed because they knew of Zimmerman through acquaintance or work relationships gave any indication of him having racial bias. In fact, Zimmerman was known for working with and mentoring minority youth. Funny how the media skews facts and people latch on with their own opinions to expand the racial divide.

Post a Comment

You must be registered to comment on stories. Click here to register.