It is a sad state that so many people seem to be in favor of this so called "trial by press". Ever since O.J., we, as a society, have decided to crucify people that are involved in controversial events and seem to take pleasure when we destroy said people's reputations before they get their day in court. Sure, some (one could even say most) of these people end up being guilty, but for every O.J. Simpson there is a Kobe Bryant. For every Scott Peterson there are people like Reade Seligmann, Collin Finnerty, and David Evans (the defendants in the Duke lacrosse rape case from 2006). It is a crying shame that people care more about Nancy Grace's opinion (Grace can rip apart and label any potential suspect as guilty, but the fact is there is a murderer on the streets due to her actions as a prosecutor that resulted in a mistrial. A Georgia court called her actions a, "disregard of the notions of due process and fairness," before overturning a conviction of arson/murder and setting the defendant free) than they do about the rights to due process granted to every citizen by the United States Constitution. Yet, despite her using false testimony while acting as a prosecutor for the State of Georgia, many people hold her opinions on legal matters in high regard...or at least react as if they do when she, and others like her, get on their high horses and declare suspects guilty before they even get the chance to face a judge and/or a jury of their peers.
Now I'll get into the specific case that has led me to write this. At this point, what does ANYONE really know about this Trayvon Martin case? That the press is reporting that a white guy killed a black kid? That, if Martin's killing was in fact a murder, that it HAS to be a hate crime? George Zimmerman's family says he is Hispanic so it does not make sense to me why everyone is calling him white. Also, a former CNN anchor, Joe Oliver, (who just so happens to be black) said, "in this one spark incident, that [the portrayal of young, black men] wasn't the case. Race had nothing to do with it." In addition to being a CNN anchor, Oliver happened to know Zimmerman, personally, before this whole incident occurred. Although most major news sources have decided to just report on the protests by different groups who are angry at the handling of this situation, CNN did decide to report one fact that has been released; (albeit buried at the bottom of a long ass article) Zimmerman was, "bleeding, from the nose and back of his head." Those same news sources that are calling Zimmerman a white man have also have chosen to use a mugshot of him from an unrelated case in 2005 and put it next to a picture Martin from a few years ago where he looks like a little kid. Doing this is extremely prejudicial, and I believe that the media should feel obligated to report all news stories from a neutral point of view. That of course will never happen because being neutral does not bring in ratings a.k.a advertising revenue. All of that withstanding, I agree that it is POSSIBLE that race had something to do with the shooting, but it is far to early to jump to that conclusion. What if Martin attacked Zimmerman? What if that attack was because of a threat by Zimmerman towards the boy? Nobody knows yet because the police are doing their job and not leaking very much information to the press. A story was leaked yesterday that said there was evidence of Zimmerman being attacked, but who knows if that is even credible because IT IS TOO EARLY TO TELL! Potential self-defense shootings are not as simple as all of these protesters want them to be. They take time for the police to gather all of the evidence, interview witnesses and come to a conclusion. Another thing that the media is also, for the most part, choosing to ignore is that the facts of this case will be presented to a grand jury on April 10th. In Florida, prosecutors have two ways to charge a suspect: by information where the prosecutor acts within his own authority, or a before a grand jury. In a case such as this, with no eyeball witnesses, it seems that a grand jury hearing is the fair way to decide whether or not Zimmerman should be charged. With only circumstantial evidence, charging Zimmerman without a grand jury could be like, uh, I don't know, charging Casey Anthony with capital murder? It may please the media for a time, but in the end, it will backfire. While a grand jry is not the speediest way, I believe it is the fair way, even if it does mean the press will have two more weeks to continue to sully Zimmerman's name without really knowing what happened that night. Basically, I just believe people need to relax, be patient, and wait for ALL of the facts in the case to come out. I know this can be hard when a the death of young person is involved, but in the end it is what needs to be done. I also believe that the mainstream media (CNN, FoxNews, ESPN, MSNBC, etc.) contributes more to racial tensions in this country by bringing race into EVERY story that involves conflict between two people of different heritages. I know that they think they are helping, but they are not. They report something such as a black kid getting shot by a "white" guy (saying he is Hispanic does not sound nearly as controversial or as "juicy") and it snowballs out of control, when the fact of the matter is that no one knows a damn thing yet. Oh yeah, and regardless of whether the shooting was racially motivated, justified, or a straight up murder, there is absolutely no reason for the federal government to be involved in a local shooting. The local police need to man up, do their job at their own pace and not be influenced by pressure from outside sources. "Quick" justice is not the answer. As angry as people are now, it will only get worse if the police feel that outside pressure, move too quickly, screw something technical up in the process of finding out that it is, in fact, a murder and then George Zimmerman ends up going free anyways.
