In the end the Party would announce that two and two made five, and you would have to believe it. It was inevitable that they should make that claim sooner or later: the logic of their position demanded it. Not merely the validity of experience, but the very existence of external reality, was tacitly denied by their philosophy. The heresy of heresies was common sense. And what was terrifying was not that they would kill you for thinking otherwise, but that they might be right. For, after all, how do we know that two and two make four? Or that the force of gravity works? Or that the past is unchangeable? If both the past and the external world exist only in the mind, and if the mind itself is controllable—what then? George Orwell, 1984
I call it cruel, and maybe the root of all cruelty,
to know what occurs but not recognize the fact. "A Ritual to Read to Each Other", William Stafford
This entry is heavy on the quotes. I realize that, and I came quite close to clipping pretty well the Orwell quote, but I just felt like it was all so relevant, that it all had to stay.
And such it is. As you've probably guessed, this post is about the case of Trayvon Martin. I certainly realize that many people know a lot about this case and most have formed some sort of opinion about it. I also know that I probably won't be changing any minds. There are some other things I won't do, or at least I won't do to the point that one can discuss the case without doing so:
--I will not discuss gun control or "Stand Your Ground"
--I will not discuss race.
Now, it is impossible to really discuss this case without those two aspects, but I'm going to attempt to minimize them. For I am going to make the radical suggestion that even if everything George Zimmerman has said is the absolute truth, he should be in jail.
I think that this case has struck a chord with so many people for a number of reasons. Now, of course, the fact that Trayvon Martin was black and thus more likely to be deemed "suspicious" by Mr. Zimmerman is one of them. So is the fact that he had "no duty to retreat even if possible". People far more dedicated to these causes than me are rallying to them and I applaud them. But I see this case, and I suspect many others do as well, as a moral test for our society.
It is a simple moral test: Can we call a spade a spade? When something is wrong, can we say it's wrong? Or do we equivocate? Do we try to find a way to make 2 + 2 = 5? We haven't been doing so well in such situations during my adult life. When our country's leaders swore that Iraq had "Weapons of Mass Demonstration" I supported sending troops, my friends, to that country. We were clearly snowballed. George W. Bush joked at a fundraiser "Where were those darned WMD's again?" We failed to get angry.
There is clear economic evidence that while our country's economy is producing more than any other time during history. Yet the bottom 90% of the population has seen no real gain in economic power since the late 1970's. Quite literally, the rich are getting richer and everyone else has to swim harder against the current. Wall Street absolutely massacred the country in 2008, but somehow, no one did anything wrong. Yet families working two jobs are booted daily out of their houses, houses they were told were guaranteed investments, that were the key to their middle class status. We're not angry.
Maybe what needed, I thought with no pun intended, was a black and white case. Somewhere where the facts were so obvious and the case so down to Earth that no one could be swayed by propaganda. In February of 2012, a seventeen year old boy was walking home when a man ten years his senior began to follow him in his truck. The man was so suspicious of this young man that he got out of his truck to look for him. He had a gun. Would he had even had the courage to get out of his truck without a gun, seeing as the youth looked so "suspicious?"
What happened next only two people have ever known. One is George Zimmerman. He claims that the youth, Trayvon Martin, "jumped" him, was beating him, was pounding his head into the sidewalk, that he thought he was in "great bodily harm", and therefore had no choice but to shoot Mr. Martin. Mr. Martin died within a few seconds of being shot through the heart. Mr. Zimmerman went to the doctor the next day, not because he was so wounded, but because he wanted to get back to work!
The other person who knew what happened is Trayvon Martin. He has never told his story.
*****
Both Mr. Martin and Mr. Zimmerman became cause celebres for certain pockets of the population. So many people rallied for Mr. Martin that the State of Florida was forced to act. So many people rallied for Mr. Zimmerman (but not publically, for the most part), that he found himself able to hire the best defense attorney in the state and also pay a not insignificant bond. Without Mr. O'Mara, would Mr. Zimmerman have even had a chance? Hard to say. That bit about a "sidewalk becoming a deadly weapon" was a stroke of genius. I guess all of us are, and have been for quite some time, unknowingly in possession of a deadly weapon. Who knew?
*****
The state of Florida did not do a real good job with this case. Whether that was human error or just the facts at hand is debatable, but the prosecutors did get one good shot in there (I swear I am not trying to make puns). After Mr. O'Mara had cross-examined a physician to try to emphasize the severity of Mr. Zimmerman's wounds, the prosecutor asked on redirect "Would you describe Mr. Zimmerman's wounds as more or less severe than a bullet wound to the heart?"
Mr. O'Mara objected, successfully, but the point was made. For I believe all of us were, as Nate Silver might say it, losing the signal for the noise. For after all the courtroom legalese, the truth looms. The truth does not go away. The truth is this: An armed man thought a young boy looked suspicious. He followed him. They scuffled. Mr. Zimmerman killed Mr. Martin.
All of the rest should not matter. It is just noise. It might matter if, say, Mr. Zimmerman had been in his home and Mr. Martin had entered. It might have mattered if Mr. Zimmerman just been walking home, or if Mr. Zimmerman had been carjacked by Mr. Martin. But none of that is true. Mr. Zimmerman either provoked, or set the table for, a fight that night. (Incidentally, it is the height of irony that the defense wanted the jury to believe Mr. Zimmerman was defending himself, while completely ignoring the fact that, even if Mr. Martin started the fight as attested to by Mr. Zimmerman, doesn't he have the right to proactively defend himself against an armed, older man stalking him?). As he began to lose the fight, he shot Mr. Martin.
He killed him. The boy was walking home and he was killed. The boy was walking home and he was killed. The boy was walking home and he was killed....
*****
But Mr. Zimmerman is "not guilty". Apparently Mr. Martin deserved to die for having defended himself (and this is if you believe everything Mr. Zimmerman says). I have trouble accepting that. We are, as a society, failing to call a spade a spade yet again. A man provoked a fight with a teenager, shot him, and is somehow not guilty. I will admit, I've lost sleep over it. My son will someday be seventeen, and who knows who might think he'll look suspicious? Why do the Mr. Zimmermans out there get to decide, without punishment, who lives or dies? And most important, who decides who are the Mr. Zimmermans of the world, and who are the Trayvon Martins?
*****
Some folks have called this "a tragedy that should never have happened". Such platitudes are nice but ignore the fact that we know who MADE it happen and refuse to judge him. One website I saw went so far as to proclaim Mark O'Mara the "Atticus Finch of 2013". This person was not joking. I'm not sure if he was intentionally being ironic or just didn't get it.
Dr. King said that the arc of moral justice is long but bends toward justice. I believe he's right. I believe that in fifty years, we'll look back on this acquittal and say "What were we thinking?" If we're not thinking that in fifty years, I'll feel like this was all for nothing. I suppose it's human nature, to want Trayvon Martin's death to result in some sort of good.
Until then, be careful with all those concealed concrete carriers.
Peace, Mark