The Occasional Observer

Breitbart did a fabulous job putting a timeline to the "reporting" done on the Zimmerman trial by the MSM.   Misinformation, hyperbole, and slander were present a plenty, with each new bit of race-baiting built on the foundation of yesterday's falsehood.   Please give the Breitbart story a read here.

In this case, it is the loss of Trayvon Martin's life that is most tragic.  Prayers and best wishes to his family, who undoubtedly feel like the scabs have been ripped off these deep and still healing wounds.

That said, the public disservice done by the media in creating a fire storm, one that did not fit the facts of the case, may be the most disturbing.  One might even call it a high-tech lynching, available via streaming video and RSS syndication.    It went low-tech when Al Sharpton (of Tawana Brawley fame) led demonstrations that managed to intimidate the State Attorney's office into bringing charges the police had determined were unwarranted.

The press built this narrative one step at a time.  Rather than admit that there was no evidence as to who began the physcial altercation, the press "profiled" Zimmerman as a racist.   When Zimmerman said "these guys always get away,"  the press told you "these guys" meant "black people," not "burglars."


Zimmerman followed Trayvon despite the fact that the 911 dispatcher told him "we don't need you to do that."  The press told you it was because he was spoiling for a fight, hoping to attack him.  Not that he was trying to keep him in sight to report his location back to police.   After all, he summoned police and knew they could be there at any minute, and had told the dispatcher to have them call on arrival, precisely so that he could give them Trayvon's location.

Someone was screaming "Help!" for 30 seconds or more, and the media told you it was Trayvon the child being pummeled by Zimmerman.   That the older man was assaulting the 17-year old in a crowded residential community, drawing the attention of dozens of people and numerous 911 calls and witnesses, before then deciding to take out his gun and kill him in cold blood.  This explanation seemed lacking to me.  If he was stalking this kid with, as the the prosecution maintained, "hate in his heart," wouldn't he have approached Trayvon gun out?   Told Martin not to move and wait for the cops?   Not allowed himself to sustain injuries to his face and the back of the head?  Wouldn't it have been easy?

There was much less media speculation that Trayvon had circled back or laid in wait, and gained the upper hand.  Of course, the trial revealed that the eye witness with the best vantage point, believed that Trayvon was on top of Zimmerman.   Trayvon told Rachel Jeantel he was being followed by a "creepy-ass cracker" (by the way, the only racial epithet that we know was uttered in this whole situation), and may have decided he was going to teach him a lesson.  Mark O'Mara's genius move in his closing argument was the 4 minutes of silence, indicating that the faster Trayvon seemed to have ample time to return home after Zimmerman hung up with dispatch.

Perhaps Martin was a bad kid.  But I doubt that.  More likely, he felt his dignity offended at being presumed a thief, and felt that he was being discriminated against for racial reasons as well.  Maybe he thought justice, or his self-respect, demanded he teach George Zimmerman a lesson.

It may be possible that Zimmerman caught up with the fleeter Martin, got the drop on him, assaulted him with his fists and then drew down and shot him.   But the state did not prove this beyond a reasonable doubt.  Not even close.   Their evidence and closing argument was built around making the case that Zimmerman was a liar, a racist, a violent wanna-be cop, and that you can "fill in the blanks" based on his state-of-mind.   Based on what you know of Zimmerman being a "profiler" and a hate-monger,  you can assume how the actual altercation would've gone down.   He would've gunned down a Trayvon Martin who was just trying to go home and avoid an altercation.

Unfortunately, we'll never know what happened in those 4 minutes after Zimmerman hangs up with the dispatcher, until the altercation began in earnest.  And therein lies the state's biggest problem.   For them to convict Zimmerman, even of manslaughter, they needed to prove Zimmerman did not feel he was at risk of grave bodily harm.   With someone desperately screaming "Help," it was pretty clear that either Zimmerman or Martin felt they were at grave risk.  The state did not have the witness or physical evidence to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that it was Martin.   The bulk of the evidence, from the wounds on Zimmerman's head to the eyewitness testimony, lent more credence to the idea it was Zimmerman calling for help.  Case closed.

The prosecution should have never brought this case to trial.  Without the media hawking a false racial narrative, it probably never would have been.  It was, as Don West said, "a disgrace."

His summation also hit the nail on the head: the jury prevented a tragedy from becoming a travesty.