Of Justice And Racial Partiality

Of Justice And Racial PartialityThe headlines have been abuzz with the controversy over George Zimmerman’s acquittal in the Trayvon Martin murder case. Streets have been flooded by people who protested this acquittal and racial discrimination has been the talk of town.

‘Fine line between’

Many people believe that Zimmerman should have been pronounced guilty. Many also believe that Martin was in the wrong. Between the shouts of protests and the silent resignation, what is your opinion about dispensing justice in the wake of a case tainted by racial issues?

Whenever there is a serious case between a white and a black person (or any non-white person, for that matter), the jury is torn between two underlying and mostly unspoken issues. First, there is the issue of discrimination. Second, the issue of right justice.

Under the issue of racial discrimination, the blacks (or non-whites) are usually the victims. For this reason, lawyers, prosecutors and the jurors are usually more careful when treating the blacks because every untoward statement can be seen as discrimination. Under the issue of right justice, there is the burden to prove the defendant’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt. And in a case as confusing as the Zimmerman-Martin case, it is easy to teeter on the fine line between dispensing justice rightfully and wrongfully identifying the true victim in the case.


‘Racially partial’

What if, in the search for true justice, the rights of the defendant are stepped upon just to avoid being called out for being racially partial? What if, the person that we thought was he victim was really the assailant? What if, even without the race factor, we still have the tendency to condemn the wrong person?

These are difficult questions that warrant careful thought and consideration. These situations can happen all the time, everywhere, to anyone. And we cannot do anything else except hope that the jurors come up with a verdict that is truly right and just.

What is your opinion regarding the Zimmerman-Martin case? Do you think the jury gave the right verdict?

Image: Bossip

Jury Finds George Zimmerman Not Guilty In Trayvon Martin’s Death

Jury Finds George Zimmerman Not Guilty In Trayvon Martin's DeathGeorge Zimmerman never denied shooting Trayvon Martin, but he said he did so in self defense. Late Saturday night, a Florida jury found him not guilty in the teenager’s death.

‘Intentionally committed’

The verdict caps a case that has inflamed passions for well over a year, much of it focused on race. The six jurors — all of them women — deliberated for 16½ hours. Five of the women are white; one is a minority.

To convict Zimmerman of manslaughter, the jurors would have had to believe he “intentionally committed an act or acts that caused the death of Trayvon Martin.” That charge could have carried a sentence of up to 30 years in prison, though the jury was not told of that possible sentence.


‘Deadly encounter’

Both sides of the case asked for peace after the verdict. In the immediate aftermath, they appeared to have gotten their wish — even though the Internet erupted with outrage. But now that Zimmerman is a free man, his defense and his brother fear for his safety.

The deadly encounter took place on February 26, 2012, as Martin walked back to his father’s fiancee’s house through the rain from a Sanford convenience store. The 17-year-old was carrying Skittles and a drink. Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch volunteer, spotted him and called police. Sometime after that, Zimmerman and Martin got into a physical altercation that ended in Martin’s death.

Are you satisfied with the jury’s verdict for George Zimmerman? Why or why not?

Source: Greg Botelho and Holly Yan | CNN

Image: NBC News