Print the Legend: Peter Schiff

Peter Schiff * GoldSeek.com

The Trayvon Martin/George Zimmerman tragedy has become one of those transcendent events that dominates the national discourse and throws light on dimly lit aspects of our society. Obviously, the case touches most closely on issues of race relations, media culture, and the politicization of the justice system. It also reveals how preconceived emotional commitments to a narrative can consistently trump demonstrable facts. These tendencies are also present in the polarized discussion about the persistent weakness of the U.S. economy. In both cases, the majority of observers have chosen to believe an emotionally comfortable narrative while ignoring a far more likely, ambiguous, and unsatisfying reality.

When the Trayvon Martin case first caught national attention, it confirmed the worst fears that many had about America. A sweet young African-American teenager (12 or 13 by the looks of the pictures we were presented) returning home from a convenience store with Skittles and ice tea is gunned down in cold blood by a racist white man who profiled him as a criminal simply because he was a black kid in a hooded sweatshirt. The fact that the killer had not been arrested by local authorities, simply reinforced the suspicions that the South (which apparently includes central Florida) remains locked in a Jim Crow era of institutionalized white supremacy. The gears of the media and the political establishment quickly fell in line to support this narrative. This resulted in the appointment of a special prosecutor and a murder trial for George Zimmerman.

But then demonstrable facts started coming in that clashed significantly with this narrative. But the unwanted information was thoroughly ignored. The media and the public had become so invested in the story that no contrary facts could be tolerated. Rather than reconsidering initial assumptions, everyone just dug in their heels and stood firm.

As it turns out Trayvon himself was not the little boy that the pictures suggested. The most recent images of him as a 17-year old revealed a much more mature, masculine, and imposing figure. His behavior at home and in school objectively suggests a youth veering towards violence. He had gotten into trouble for fighting, had been suspended from school three times, once after having been caught with drugs and women’s jewelry that may well have been stolen. His tweets and e-mails are replete with boasts of violence, drug use, and even suggestions of firearm procurement. In fact, the reason he was living in the housing community in which he was killed was that his mother sent him 200 miles north to live with his father after determining that she could no longer control her troubled son. (None of these facts were presented to the jury.)

For his part, George Zimmerman did not fit the mold that had been prepared for him either. First off, he wasn’t really white, but half Hispanic (English being his second language). And while he certainly had a few marital, personal and psychological skeletons in his closet, nothing in his background suggested that he had ever displayed racist tendencies towards blacks. In fact, he had many black friends, had once championed the cause of a black homeless person beaten by the son of a white policeman, mentored black children, and had even taken a black woman to his high school prom. In addition, he had no affiliation with any fringe groups with known racist tendencies. In fact he was a registered and politically active democrat — one of the “good guys” when it comes to racial equality and social justice.

The details of the encounter also failed to correspond to the narrative. The only thing that is known definitively is that Zimmerman referred to Martin as a “punk” expressed frustration that “they always get away” and that a 911 dispatcher suggested that he need not follow Martin. Despite these facts there is no solid evidence that Zimmerman actually sought a confrontation.

While some of Zimmerman’s actions may have shown poor judgment, such behavior is not criminal, or even actionable. The evidence that does exist, the broken nose and other injuries sustained by Zimmerman and the small abrasion on Martin’s hand, suggests that Martin was the aggressor in the physical encounter and that Zimmerman had cause to fear continued bodily harm when he decided to use deadly force. This physical evidence corresponds to the consistent story told by Zimmerman and is corroborated by the only other eyewitness testimony. Certainly this provides sufficient evidence to suggest that Zimmerman was acting in self- defense according to the legal definition of the term. One need have no sympathy for Zimmerman to conclude that the facts, as they exist, could not support a conviction on the charges he faced.

continue article at GoldSeek.com:

http://news.goldseek.com/EuroCapital/1374239220.php