HOW TO HANDLE A TRAYVON-ZIMMERMAN MOMENT
BY WILLIAM DWIGHT MCKISSIC, SR.
No one disputes that George Zimmerman initiated the communication with Trayvon Martin. No one disputes that Neighborhood Watch Volunteers are trained not to carry a weapon. No one disputes that Neighborhood Watch Volunteers are trained not to personally intervene if they observe a suspicious person or activity, but rather notify law enforcement. No one disputes that the 911 dispatcher counseled Zimmerman not to pursue Trayvon. No one disputes that Trayvon had just as much right to be on those premises in Samford, Florida, as Zimmerman. Yet, Trayvon was the one viewed with suspicion and being pursued by Zimmerman. No one disputes that Zimmerman was the aggressor in the encounter.
The truth of the matter is young people, and not so young people, will inevitably face a Trayvon-Zimmerman-like encounter. A sudden, unanticipated, confrontational situation—with the potential to escalate to a violent encounter—could happen to any one of us—even in close proximity to our homes.
Someone can deem you as suspicious. Someone can approach you without identifying themselves and ask you questions that you deem are inappropriate. Someone can engage you with the wrong attitude. Someone can encroach upon your personal space and cross your comfort zone. Someone can form wrong and premature conclusions about you. Someone can report you to authority figures based on their false assumptions. Someone can approach and address you with a superior, judgmental, authoritarian and condescending attitude and disposition. This is what Trayvon Martin encountered at the hands of George Zimmerman on that dreadful evening in Samford, Florida.
Without the benefit of any prior knowledge, Zimmerman concluded that Trayvon Martin was an “a …hole, suspicious, and a f…ing punk.” He also categorized him as belonging to a group called “they” who always get away. Either Zimmerman had a mysterious, inexplicable discernment regarding Trayvon, or he profiled him. Those are serious and sordid assessments to make upon sight regarding a total stranger.
How do you reach such strong conclusions about a person that you’ve never met? It is impossible to harbor those kinds of feelings toward a person and it not be reflected in your actions, attitude, body language and speech when you approach and address that person.
People sense when these are your feelings toward them. Trayvon sensed Zimmerman’s unjustifiable disposition and attitude toward him. Zimmerman’s profile of Trayvon was based solely on externals and perception. Trayvon’s externals were: race, clothes, age, gender, skittles, tea, and a cell phone. Armed with only that knowledge, Zimmerman concluded that Trayvon is again, an a…hole, f…ing punk, suspicious and a member of a group called “they.”
It is my belief that we all engage in selective racial profiling at times. I certainly am no exception and neither was Zimmerman. To that extent I can identify with Zimmerman. The problem, however, is when we act on our “suspicions” or profiling. That is totally unacceptable and can easily ignite a dispute, fight and racial unrest—that can escalate to a national crisis—as we now all see.
Let me be clear. Had I been on the Zimmerman jury, I would have found him, guilty. If Zimmerman had been a 34-year old Black Man behaving in this manner toward a 17-year old White, Asian, or Hispanic child, I would also have voted—guilty.
President Obama is correct in stating the outcome would have been different if Trayvon had been the one left standing. We all know that if Trayvon would have been the one remaining alive that night, he would have been immediately arrested, tried, convicted and sentenced to life in prison. And that is why the vast majority of Black America are enraged by the verdict. Not having an African American on the jury exacerbates the outrage. The racial composition of the jury and the verdict reminded African Americans of an era that we’d hoped was past and gone.
As painful, disappointing and unjust as the Zimmerman verdict was, I found a sense of hope and healing from a surprising source—the President of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the SBC—Dr. Russell Moore. Reading what Dr. Moore said on this matter in the Washington Post produced a therapeutic and euphoric moment for me. Moore’s words represent the fact that the SBC may truly be on the verge of systemic and substantive change with regard to race. The fact that Moore is Anglo makes his words in this instance more impactful and helpful toward healing the wounds Blacks have felt over Trayvon’s tragic death. In our mid-week service last Wednesday, we put Moore’s quote on the stage screen and read his quote verbatim. These words were like apples of gold on plates of silver:
“Regardless of what Trayvon Martin was doing or not doing that night, you have someone who was taking upon himself some sort of vigilante justice, even by getting out of the car. Regardless of what the legal verdict was, this was wrong,” said Russell Moore…”
“And when you add this to the larger context of racial profiling and a legal system that does seem to have systemic injustices as it relates to African-Americans with arrests and sentencing, I think that makes for a huge crisis.”
“Most white evangelicals, white Americans, are seeing [the Martin case] microscopically, in terms of this verdict, and most African-Americans are seeing it macroscopically. It’s Trayvon Martin, it’s Emmitt Till, it’s Medger Evers, it’s my son, my neighbor’s son, my situation that I had,” Moore said. “Most white Americans say we don’t know what happened that night and they are missing the point.”
For a White Southern Baptists to truly understand the depth of our pain and to be willing to articulate and identify with our perspective without needlessly trampling on Trayvon’s grave is truly extraordinary.
When faced with a Trayvon-Zimmerman moment, there are only three possible responses one can make. Jesus in Scripture was also profiled based on His background. Therefore, He could identify with Trayvon. Jesus faced unwarranted and unanticipated opposition, as did Trayvon on the night of the Zimmerman encounter. By example and teaching, Jesus shows believers how to handle a Trayvon-Zimmerman encounter.
All believers of all colors will inevitably face an adversarial person that could be any race or color. Before we encounter that person(s) we need to make sure that we are armed and equipped with the mind of Christ (Philippians 2:5). Lessons from Jesus and Trayvon’s legacy can guide believers through an unanticipated moment of potential conflict.
The three options available when faced with a Trayvon-Zimmerman moment are to (1) fight; (2) finesse; or (3) flee. Jesus addressed all three.
1. The option to fight should only be employed when there is absolutely no other possible way to remedy the situation. And even then one can take the option of not fighting back and hoping that the aggressor will relent. Jesus taught that you should turn the other cheek. I know that sounds archaic and unrealistic in today’s culture; but this was the method employed by Jesus and Martin Luther King, Jr.
As a matter of fact, Jesus told Peter to put up his sword, because he who lives by the sword will die by the sword (Matthew 26:52). Jesus taught that responding to aggression with aggression is not wise. Trayvon responded to aggression with aggression, and that proved to be fatal and tragic for him. We all need to learn a lesson from that. The option to fight, according to Jesus, is not the best option to take.
2. The option to finesse when faced with a Trayvon Martin situation is also available. By finesse I mean to respond with conciliatory, constructive, non-threating dialogue. Jesus said in Matthew 5:25:
“Agree with your adversary quickly, while you are on the way with him, lest your adversary deliver you to the judge, the judge hand you over to the officer, and you be thrown into prison.”
To finesse when faced with a Trayvon-Zimmerman encounter, simply means to seek common ground in the dialogue—not battle ground. Jesus makes it clear that the consequences are weighty if the two parties don’t find—common ground. Jesus also makes it clear that the right kind of dialogue can lead to a peaceful resolution.
3. The third option available when faced with a Trayvon-Zimmerman encounter is to flee. This is probably the best option. Especially in the kind of situation Trayvon faced on that dreadful night.
Jesus said if peace don‘t abide, flee (Matthew 10:14). Jesus fled when he faced an aggressive group that was prejudiced against Him for false reasons. If Jesus fled in this situation, you and I can flee (John 10:39).
My mother warned her children that we would face a Zimmerman encounter in life. And again, we all have. Her advice was “It is better to be a live coward, than a dead hero.” And I believe mother was right and so was Jesus.
There comes a time, when you don’t allow someone else to take your life. By fleeing and finessing, you freely lay your life down.
You are to fight only if this is the only option that you believe is available to you.
Zimmerman was wrong. But to respond to the jury verdict with violence would be equally wrong. Two wrongs will never make a right. Innocent Hispanics and Whites who have been verbally and violently assaulted in the aftermath of the Zimmerman verdict—have been racially profiled, and we need to cry out against that kind of senseless violence as well. The media should publicize the names of the victims and perpetrators in these instances as they have done Trayvon and Zimmerman.
Ironically, the SBC may be the only ecclesiastical body that can bring our nation together for prayer and dialogue surrounding this issue across racial lines. The SBC sanctioned the segregation of American society from her inception through the first century of her existence. Perhaps, now the SBC can lead the way to the healing of racism and racial distrust in American society in the 21st Century. Zimmerman may have gotten by, but he is not going to get away. Remember O.J.? Maybe out of Trayvon’s death will evolve a resurrection of constructive racial dialogue and healing that could lead to the prevention of unnecessary racially motivated deaths in the future.
I would love to see the SBC lead the way on this very important issue.
It is time for action.
Tom,
You & I both. Let’s pray for Dr. Moore & the ERLC. He has all the essential qualities to take the lead on this issue and do well. He is probably receiving a lot of negative feedback as well. We are going to have a special time of prayer for him in our service tonight.
Dwight: I agree with the great majority of your piece. The only thing that troubles me is your assertion that you would have found Zimmerman guilty. This sounds premature considering that you do not have all the facts before you, as the jury did. It seems to imply that the jurors reached their unanimous verdict for some other reason other than the facts, such as race. We all have judged the case in a sense. From what I know, I don’t think the prosecution proved their case beyond reasonable doubt, which is the standard for guilt or acquittal. But I… Read more »
I do not believe that the jurors were racists, nor persons who agree with them. Technically, the jurors may have followed a microscopic view of the law and the facts presented in court, and based on the reasonable doubt clause–the decision that they came to is plausible. Again, as I interpret the facts and the law, I would have come to a different decision. But I believe the jury’s decision must be accepted even if one is disappointed and disagrees with their decision. Just as in the OJ case, the jurors and their decision needed to be respected, so it… Read more »
This sounds premature considering that you do not have all the facts before you, as the jury did.
“Facts? We don’t need no stinkin’ facts.”
-Monty Python, as adapted by D. Joseph Blackmon, II
Joe, Joe, Joe. ~shakes head~ Since when did Monty Python write “The Treasure of the Sierra Madre”?
Haa, sorry. Next time I’ll look it up. 🙂
Sorry, Dwight, but assertions are not facts. Asserting that “We all know…” while I suspect are emotiionally satifying for you, don’t change the fact that we most certainly do NOT all know. In fact, a great point made by Dave in his post over the jury verdict is just that–we do not know. Also, it is quite laughable that you besmirch the integrity of the jury simply because you don’t like the color of their skin but then assert, bascially, that a black person would have been able to see the truth. Thank you, I needed a good laugh this… Read more »
Dwight, I agree with most of what you say in this article. You are aware of the fact that the FBI has reported that not only is it abundantly clear that Zimmerman is not a racist, his life PROVES that he is NOT a racist. His actions prior to this tragic event point everywhere BUT to that conclusion. You said if you were on that jury you would have found Zimmerman guilty. I find that rather disturbing since you did not hear the testimony. Add to that the fact that the Sheriff’s department did not arrest Zimmerman because of the… Read more »
Bob, I don’t know what Zimmerman’s history is on the issue of race. What I do know is this: On the rainy night in Samford, Fl., when Zimmerman saw a young Black male walking along, minding his own business–for him to draw the conclusions that he drew, without one iota of evidence to support his conclusion, he racially profiled that young man, and acted on his conclusions. Because most, if not all the other commentators on this thread has never experienced that, it is impossible for them to comprehend or relate to that. I accept that. Thank God that we… Read more »
Bob, I just read the 911 transcript that Jason K. supplied a link to on this thread. Early on he was asked about Trayvon’s race and Zimmerman responded that I think he is Black. Later Zimmerman volunteers the statement “he is walking with his hands in his pocket and he is Black.” Why reference his race on this time and what is wrong with walking with your hands in your pocket? Is there something inherently wrong with a Black kid walking with his hands in his pocket. Commentators on this thread who said that Trayvon was walking looking through windows… Read more »
For the record, I did not make any such remarks about Trayvon peering in any windows. I do not owe you or anyone else an apology for the comments I made earlier. It is interesting that you continue to speak of unwarranted aggression of a grown man. Perhaps that is true and perhaps it is not. Neither of us has any idea how true that statement is nor to what extent it is true. I noticed you made no comment as to the events surrounding Trayvon’s life had any bearing on his reaction to whatever may or may not have… Read more »
What is missing in the above comments however is the fact that Zimmerman did not identify himself as a concerned citizen or a neighborhood watch patrol. He went against the advice of the police and the 911 dispatcher by getting out of his vehicle and following Trayvon.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/05/us/trayvon-martin-shooting-fast-facts
We all know that if Trayvon would have been the one remaining alive that night, he would have been immediately arrested, tried, convicted and sentenced to life in prison. Yes, because that’s what happened in the case of Roderick Scott, a black man who shot a white teen in self defense. Oh wait, no it isn’t. Not guilty: The verdict in the manslaughter trial of Roderick Scott. After more than 19 hours of deliberations over two days, a jury acquitted the Greece man in the shooting death of Christopher Cervini, 17, last April. Now, I know you won’t respond to… Read more »
Dwight, No caveat’s here. Solid piece. Your article concludes with the options we all face were we Martin not Zimmerman. A fact that may be missed as you lay out your initial convictions about what you do know. What I have observed from your piece is that we all face the situation Trayvon Martin faced. We have options. It also seems apparent that what is being criticized is your assessment of what happened in the fateful moment that took both Martin and Zimmerman’s life. Surely no one thinks Zimmerman will ever have a semblance of the life he once had.… Read more »
Todd,
Dr. Land was correct about one issue. He said that the majority of the SBC agreed with his remarks before the trial regarding this incident. Most of the comments on this thread are proving him right. Perhaps this also explains why your motion/resolution was rejected in NOLA.
Thanks for being a voice of reason and moderation here. Had you lived 200 years ago in the USA, I believe that you would have been a abolitionist. I have a heartfelt identification with you. Thanks.
Todd, Question. Since the majority of the SBC agrees with the Zimnerman verdict & obviously agreed with Dr. Lands initial remarks concerning this matter; why then did he apologize? All of those who support the verdict & Lands initial assessment of the TM/GZ matter see no reason to be apologetic; therefore, it leaved somewhat baffled: why did Labd apologize & why did the ERLC board back away from their initial 100% support of Land and his remarks? They later acknowledged that Land’s remarks were “racially inflammatory” or something to that effect. But it’s clear to me reading this thread that… Read more »
Apologies for the typo.
” . . . self-defense is now off the table.”
Has Dr. Luter addressed the issue of race since becoming President of the SBC and if not why not?
Tom, Russell Moore is doing a fabulous job addressing this subject. The comments on this thread has me absolutely convinced that President Luter would probably best serve the convention & himself by not addressing this issue. I am convinced if he spoke, his message would be similar to President Obama on this issue. He did speak on this matter when it first became a public issue in sympathy of Trayvon, and a few SBC personalities were critical of him then. Mark Lamprecht being one of them, if memory serve me correctly. When the negative responses to President Luter’s race message… Read more »
Dwight:
I greatly respect you for your willingness to address this issue in the graceful way you have been doing!
Pastor McKissic: “I am convinced after reading this thread, Blacks will fair far better under a judicial system governed by Democrats than Republicans. At last, I now better understand why 90% of African Anericans vote Democrat. It boils down to race & social justice. The Democrats simply are more fair minded & do a better job on these issues. … I am so buoyed by President Obama’s healing, helpful, wholesome , and timely word on this matter, ’til I would be incline to vote for him if he were eligible for reelection.” [One eyebrow highly raised. Slowly scans room. Not… Read more »
Truth Unites & Divides, Your moniker is so true. I am as serious as I can be. Reactions to this verdict have been an eye-opener for me. Listening to the pundits on TV who are Republuican & listening to the denials on this thread regarding the seriousness of Zimmerman’s false, prejudice, and baseless allegations against Trayvon-really alarm me. The people who responded to the Washington Poll indicated that Democrats tend to interpret the issue as I do. Republicans don’t. If I were going before a judge or jury, I think that I would fair better under people who view this… Read more »
Dwight, Just because White people see things in a more microscopic view, does not mean that it’s wrong. It’s just the way we see things. You act like the way that White people see issues is somehow negative and narrow. Brother, racial harmony will not be achieved that way. Dr. Moore was just simply pointing out that the different way Black people and White people see issues could be a contributing factor to why we’re seeing this issue so differently. I dont think he meant that White people are negative or narrow, just because we look at it that way.… Read more »
Volfan,
One thing is for certain; people from different backgrounds tend to interpret and process the same set of facts and circumstances differently. It does not make either side good or bad-just different. My issue is there was no one on that jury that understood and could articulate what the President said about this issue. No one on that jury had felt the sting of being pre-judged as Trayvon was based on external factors. There was not one Black person on that jury. That is hugely problematic for me.
Dwight,
Then, your beef may be with the Prosecution….they most certainly had a say in who was on the jury, and who wasn’t…. don’t they? Why would they agree to such a jury? Why would they agree to just having 6 people on the jury, when they could’ve had more? Correct? Or, am I wrong?
David
Dwight, A few thoughts. Black folks often say we need to have a dialogue on race. Too often this means a one sided dialogue and if white folks say the wrong things, they are labeled racist. We should not be so sensitive and should be more open about hearing both sides. This is not in reference to you, just a general observation. I believe a good, godly Christian can be on either side of this issue. I notice you do not mention the racist comment Trayvon said in reference to Zimmerman, a Hispanic. And Zimmerman is as Hispanic as President… Read more »
David B, Points well made and received. The point that I agree with you most is that good and godly people can be on both sides of this issue. Volfan and I have been able to discuss this issue at Voices without resorting to name calling, or threatening our mutual respect and friendship. Even if one agrees with the legal verdict, it would be helpful to know that all believers view Zimmerman guilty of bad judgement in getting out of the car, and is guilty of an unncessary immoral killing of Trayvon,even if somehow he is technically not guilty of… Read more »
it would be helpful to know that all believers view Zimmerman …guilty of an unncessary immoral killing of Trayvon
So, if someone believes that Zimmerman was justified for shooting someone who was bashing his head into the concrete they’re not a Christian? Wow. Just…..wow.
Let’s appreciate the stark clarity that Pastor McKissic is arguing for.
I too am appalled at your blanket statement “Had I been on the Zimmerman jury, I would have found him, guilty.”
PLEASE TELL US BASED UPON WHAT EVIDENCE OR TESTIMONY YOU WOULD HAVE REACHED THIS VERDICT.
Greg,
Based on the testimony that Zimmerman was counseled not to pursue Trayvon & despite the denials on this thread–Neighborhood Watch Groups are trained not to carry weapons. Furthermore, Zimmerman’s attitude toward Trayvom solely based on externals give me a window into his mind and his decision making process. Therefore, based on these three facts, I would have voted guilty.
Wm. Dwight McKissic, Sr., I like your second point where you say, “By finesse I mean to respond with conciliatory, constructive, non-threatening dialogue.” This would have been the proper attitude for both Trayvon and George to have. I have been approached kindly by police officers who were suspicious of me and I responded conciliatory back, and it worked. Sometimes we do not disciple our people on this principle. The demonstrations on this issue are not productive and never have been. If we side with those who want to demonstrate against the justice system every time Sharpton and Jackson want to… Read more »
Bruce H.,
We have made huge progress on the racial front. But this was a huge setback. Thus the protest in the streets and the unrest in the community. The church needs to get out front on this issue.
Dwight, It is my thinking that if we make huge progress in love, the setback would be minimal. We are talking on the Christian viewpoint and the World’s viewpoint here when it comes to progress. The world will not have progress, just laws to force men to get along and programs to put everyone together. The Christian is the only one that can change and setbacks have little effect because a growing Christian lives for setbacks. Grace motivates us through our setbacks, but not the world. The church that is out front on this issue right now is being led… Read more »
Bruce H., “The demonstration on this issue are not helpful and never have been.” These demonstrations have given an opportunity for people to vent their anger, frustration, disappointment & fears in a largely peaceful, constructive & goal oriented manner. For those reasons, the demonstrations have been very helpful to the people participating. The goal if the demonstrations are two fold; (1) To demonstrate to the Federal Government that there is a large demand for Federal Charges to be brought against Zimmerman. (2) to ask that the stand your ground laws be repealed. To the persons that are marching, these are… Read more »
Dwight, If a demonstration allows people (especially Christians) to vent anger, frustration, disappointment and fears in any form it goes against God’s principle of trusting Him and His sovereign plan. None of those emotions are of the Spirit. His plan is for individuals and people groups to suffer through what we cannot see from His standpoint and wait on Him. We must trust Him after the verdict, whether guilty or not guilty. If the verdict was not guilty and white Christians demonstrated, would that help anything? No. Agreeing with the demonstration contaminates the cause because Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson… Read more »
BTW, as a side note, Zimmerman getting out of the car did not make him the agressor and most certainly did not take the option of self defense “off the table” when he was getting the snot beat out of him and his head was being bashed into concrete. Just throwing that out there.
Joe: Yes it did. It made him the aggressor by ignoring the police and the 911 dispatcher. None of the above would have happened and he wouldn’t have shot Trayvon had he followed expert advice.
I promised Dave I would not engage you or respond to your comments.
If someone breaks into your home, and you call the police, the standard line that the dispatcher is going to give you is to run and hide. Even if you tell them you are armed and can defend yourself, they will tell you to go and hide in a closet and wait for the police to arrive. So if in your home, you call the police, they tell you to hide, but your child is between you and the criminal. Do you run and hide? Or do you do every thing to protect your child, including but not limited to… Read more »
Not following their words ARE NOT THE SAME as ignoring an order from a law enforcement officer on the scene.
x2
Joe, I understand your point. What I am attempting to describe is that had Zimmerman not gotten out of his truck to pursue Martin surely we could all agree, even with our past disagreements well noted, his nose would be straight and no wounds on his head. Let me reiterate what I read of a pastor’s comment in Sanford, “We all lost.” And, I am avoiding the insertion of race into that comment. Had the situation been between two white males, I would believe the same. No one wins when we have the outcomes we have. That is really what… Read more »
“He went against the advice of the police and the 911 dispatcher by getting out of his vehicle and following Trayvon.” Actually, he was already out of the car (apparently because the dispatcher asked where person he was reporting was) by the time the dispatcher made the suggestion, and apparently at that point stopped and went back to the car. One of the things this situation has convinced me to do, oddly enough, is go back and finish reading Daniel Kahneman’s “Thinking, Fast and Slow”. You can see a number of the biases he notes (“What You See Is All… Read more »
Bro. Dwight said: Someone can approach and address you with a superior, judgmental, authoritarian and condescending attitude and disposition. This is what Trayvon Martin encountered at the hands of George Zimmerman…. Sorry Bro. How do you know this? You said a LOT of good things in this article. And Moore is right when he says its not all about the verdict. I get that this brings up mental images of all kinds of injustices perpetrated because of racism. I do! I get that. But when it comes down to the verdict, a group of people who I can in NO… Read more »
Clark, If Zimmerman said the things that I quoted in my post concerning Trayvon, as recorded in the 911 call he made to the Sanford Police–then why would you think he approached Trayvon with any other attitude than “superior, judgemental, authoritarian, and condescending”? On what basis did Zimmerman draw the conclusions that Trayvon was all of those unflattering adjectives that he ascribed tom him? As far as I am concerned, once the police dispatcher told Zimmerman not to pursue Trayvon, Zimmerman was responsible for everything from that point forward. My guess is that in a civil suit he will be… Read more »
As far as I am concerned, once the police dispatcher told Zimmerman not to pursue Trayvon, Zimmerman was responsible for everything from that point forward
As far as the jury is concerned, he wasn’t. And thankfully, in our system of justice, juries decide cases based on evidence and testimony, not racial angst.
Clark, A key instruction to the jury in this case, given by the judge was: “use your common sense”. Based on that instruction, my common sense tell me that a grown man had no business pursing a child with candy in his hands. The child was not engaged in any criminal activity. The child was headed toward the home where he lived. The man was told by authorities not to pursue the child. The man had externally falsely negatively profiled the child and interacted with him accordingly. Later this man proved to be strong enough to rescue two people from… Read more »
The child was headed toward the home where he lived. Incorrect. The man was told by authorities not to pursue the child. Incorrect. Later this man proved to be strong enough to rescue two people from a car. But his lawyers argued at the trial that shooting & killing a innocent child was the only way that he could protect himself. Common sense says that since the car accident happened after the trial it would have no bearing on the decision. Common sense also says to read all of Juror B29’s comment because she also said race was not an… Read more »
Mark,
Are you denying that TM & his dad lived in that neighborhood? Are you suggesting that TM was in an inappropriate place? Are you suggesting that the 911 dispatch operator did not counsel GZ to not follow GZ?
I read that he was headed to the apartment where his dad’s girlfriend lived. Not sure that makes a lot of difference.
Yes, I am denying that TM and his father lived in that neighborhood. His father did not know the address when he called to report TM as missing. It was the father’s girlfriend’s home. I don’t know what you mean by “inappropriate place” but, according to the internal affairs police statements, TM was sent to Sanford because his mother kicked him out to spend time with his father during his school suspension. Even though TM was on his third suspension of the school year, his father left him alone in a foreign neighborhood with his girlfriend’s 13 yr. old son.… Read more »
Mark, You acknowledge that TM had a right to be there. Then if that’s the case on what basis did GZ find him suspicious & all of the other ugly stuff he said about a person that was a stranger to him? Was it the age, youth, clothes, color, or what was it that GZ found so disgusting & detestable that he followed him, and called 911 on TM? What crime was T M committing? And since you honestly are good with details & documentation, would you tell the readers of this blog that there is no record of TM… Read more »
(Oh and Joe, the quote I think you were adapting was “Badges, we don’t need no stinking badges.” Not Monty but from the movie Treasure of the Sierra Madre.)
Well, to be *really* persnickety about it, “Badges, we don’t need no stinking badges” is a misquote of the line “Badges? We ain’t got no badges. We don’t need no badges! I don’t have to show you any stinkin’ badges!” from the movie. The popular misquote “Badges, we don’t need no stinking badges” apparently shows up first in, of all places, a Monkees episode in 1967, and then in Blazing Saddles in 1974.
Bill O’Reilly offers some additional things to do. He is not off either.
http://video.foxnews.com/v/2560422134001/president-obama-and-the-race-problem-/
Yet, we know the real answer; Jesus.
Bruce H.,
Bill O’ Reilly was spot on here. I agree with everything he said. He could have been a little less strident in his tone. But his content was spot on. I am grateful for what he said.
Bruce H.,
Bill O’Reilly was spot on here. I agree with every thing he said. I am grateful that he was willing to say it.
Hey Bro. Dwight,
I’m looking forward to getting to meet you in August.
John,
E. Stanley Jones wrote a book on “The Unshakeable Kingdom”. It is with keen excitement and anticipation that I look forward to meeting you as well and dialoguing with you concerning The Kingdom of God. The very issue under discussion should be viewed through the lenses of the Kingdom of God. If I did so, and all of us did so, we could come closer to reaching unity surrounding this and all issues.
I hate to see Emmit Till and TM put in the same sentence. Both were young. Both were black. Both are dead. That’s about all the similarities there are between them.
I share many of Dwight’s thoughts on this.
One other thing I got out of this is that the media is even more incompetent than I had previously thought. That is, when they’re not deliberately twisting things, as NBC was caught doing. I hope Zimmerman dings them but good in his lawsuit against them.
Brother McKissic, As a former Neighborhood Watch Commander for several years, retired US Army combat veteran as well as a pastor I have several problems with your lead paragraph. You state: “No one disputes that George Zimmerman initiated the communication with Trayvon Martin. No one disputes that Neighborhood Watch Volunteers are trained not to carry a weapon. No one disputes that Neighborhood Watch Volunteers are trained not to personally intervene if they observe a suspicious person or activity, but rather notify law enforcement. No one disputes that the 911 dispatcher counseled Zimmerman not to pursue Trayvon. No one disputes that… Read more »
Richard,
THE BEST Comment of the day.
David
Indeed. Erudite and clear. Thank you, Richard.
Richard, I listened to a presentation on TV regarding the the origin, concept, and initial training of Neighborhood Watch Persons, and clearly it was communicated that they are instructed to not carry weapons. Carrying a weapons while on duty makes them law enforcement officers, and can lead to the very thing that happened–a totally uncalled for an unncessary murder. Trayvon did live in that community with his father who also lived there. He had every right to be on the grounds where his father was renting a place. Please don’t spread falsehoods on a dead child. Richard, if Zimmerman’s assessement… Read more »
My brother, Nothing I’ve seen or heard from the record indicated a black person. Nothing in the record indicates Zimmerman is a racist,however, if I identify a suspicious person and describe him as black – that doesn’t mean I’m a racist. Instead it indicates I’ve given an important item of identification. TV coverage,especially on this subject have been full of errors. I just checked with our NW. Officer and there is no mention about carrying as weapon. It is my understanding that this17 year old young man’s father lived outside the gated community and that Trayvon had just recently been… Read more »
Richard,
On what basis did Zimmerman conclude that Trayvon was a “a…hole” ….” a f…ing punk” and a member of a group called “they” who always get away? What information did Zimmerman use to draw these conclusions? Please answer this specific question?
Dwight,
Was this stated by George after he was beaten by Martin or before? Opinions of others are heightened (if we are worldly) when we have more convincing information about that person. Unfortunately, Zimmerman was not humbled by getting a beating from a 17 year old, however, he was still fighting for his alibi of self defense.
My brother,
I do not support the use of such language, however, as both you and I know such verbage has become common usage. I find it being used by an exasperated individual – exasperated by the slow response of local police.
The old adage that “Sticks and stones may break your bones but words will never hurt you.” definitely isn’t true. Words do hurt but Zimmerman never addressed Trayvon with these words, he sounded off to a 911 operator musch the same as I did when I told one they were crazy.
The “they” Zimmerman is referring to is not a racial “they”, I would wager. It is a “they” as in “gangbanger” “thug” etc “they”. I would further wager if Martin had been native american, martian or purple with pink polkadots he would have been referred to in the same terminology. And further, I take exception to you calling him a child in previous posts. Martin was not a child, his height, weight, arm length, age and other bodily proportions preclude him from the child category.
Richard,
This article (link below) makes it crystal clear that Neighborhood Watch Volunteers are trained NOT to carry weapons. I agree with the title of the article: “Trayvon Martin would be alive if Neighborhood Watch rules followed.”
(http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-03-14/news/os-trayvon-martin-beth-kassab-031512-20120314_1_orlando-police-block-captains-zimmerman)
Richard Tribble’s testimony makes it quite clear that training for Neighborhood Watch groups vary. They do not all train in exactly the same way. The article makes it crystal clear that *some* Neighborhood Watch groups train to not carry weapons. Richard’s testimony makes it crystal clear that some do not. The real question is, what was the training for the particular group that Zimmerman was involved in? Until you have an answer to that question (not the answer to what other groups train), you really don’t know.
“Brother McKissic,
As a former Neighborhood Watch Commander for several years, retired US Army combat veteran as well as a pastor I have several problems with your lead paragraph.”
Your tone as well as the rebuttal argument you have offered to Pastor McKissic are both wonderful.
Thank you Pastor Tribble.
I, like Captain Kirk and First Officer Spock, have no trouble with tribbles. 😉
Oh those lovable tribbles!
🙂
“What we do know is that Trayvon did not live in this gated community.”
One quibble: Trayvon, though normally living with his mother, was staying with his father (who lives in the gated community), apparently due to a 10-day suspension from school. I think, though I’m not sure, that this was the first day of that suspension, so it would not be surprising that Zimmerman did not recognize him as living in the community.
Bruce H., Zimmerman made these comments on the 911 call prior to having an altercation with him. Here is where the prosecutors I believe could have done a better job. Just as no one here will date answer this question–not even Joe Blackmon–who has volunteered answers in defense of all things Zimmerman–this is the question America does not want to tackle. Why not? Because the answer to the question completely destroys the argument that Zimmerman was not bias against Trayvon. And it begs the question, what was the biased based on? And until someone provides me with a more satisfactory… Read more »
Dwight,
I agree that George went into the situation with a strong point of view of the person that was dressed like Trayvon in his neighborhood. I do not know about a group called “they” unless there was one in the area and George was profiling Trayvon as one of them. That may have removed George’s comment from the situation here. I don’t know. The 3 points in your post make more sense for us to consider.
Bruce, Thanks. If Zimmerman’s assessment of Trayvon was based on “dress”….how sad. This young man lost his life because of Zimmerman’s dislike of his dress. And yet he’s found–not guilty? Again, I must accept the verdict. But I am having a very difficult time understanding why others cannot see that to be armed with a pistol & to pregude a person based on “dress” is a serious matter & merits some level of punishment when you based on your prejudices confront & ultimately pull the trigger. Because Zimnernan’s felt this way about Trayvon, that means that he is apt to… Read more »
No, actually, Trayvon was killed because he decided to attack Geroge Zimmerman. If he had not made that decision, Zimmerman would not have shot him.
Joe- The only person who says Trayvon struck the first blow is George Zimmerman. He’s the only voice we get to hear because he is the only one still alive. Given Zimmerman’s past record of assaulting a police officer and having a restraining order filed on him by an ex-fiancee pardon me if I have trouble believing his story, since the person who could have given another version is dead. Most likely scenario is that Zimmerman, a hothead by all definitions, confronted Trayvon with similar language that he used to describe him on the phone (which by the way is… Read more »
And given Trayvon’s past history of drugs and fighting, please forgive me if I don’t think he’d be a credible witness.
As far as your “most likely scenario”….you can prove that, right? Because in a court of law, jurors that heard testimony and evidence came to a markedly different conclusion. 🙂
And Joe that is my point.
You are willing to dismiss ANY mention of Zimmermans past while continually using Trayvons past as an excuse to say he instigated the altercation. I’m not sure how those two very divergent ways of arriving at truth square in your mind but I’m sure the mental gymnastics you use to get there are fun for you.
I also dispute much of what you say no one disputes. But rather than get into a retort of your points let me ask one question. From your understanding of the “facts”, if roles were reversed and Zimmerman was the one being followed and Trevon took the actions as you see them. Would you conclude that Trevon was guilty? Lets look at it another way. What race did God create? Is mans definition of race Biblical? Here is my answer to the question about race presented five years ago at a Together for the Gospel Conference by Thabiti Anyabwile. Thabiti… Read more »
John K., The race of either party is somewhat inconsequential. If Zimmerman was the 17 year old kid, being pursued by a 34 year old Black Trayvon, who had been told by the dispatcher to not follow the “suspicious” person, then I would maintain that the 34 year old Black Trayvon was wrong, and should be found guilty of murder. The reality is if that scenario had played out that way–we would not be having this discussion. Because the 34 year old Black Trayvon would have been found guilty of having illegally killed Zimmerman. And that is the very reason… Read more »
Yes, Dwight, because that’s what happened when this black man killed a white teen.
http://rochester.ynn.com/content/top_stories/490926/jury-finds-roderick-scott-not-guilty/#sthash.1iQ1V6my.dpuf
Oh, wait, no it didn’t. He was found not guilty. Huh? Imagine that.
Black America may be outraged, but Black America has no right to be outraged.
Dwight,
Sorry that at one point you say “The race of either party is somewhat inconsequential.” Then go on to say “Because the 34 year old Black Trayvon would have been found guilty of having illegally killed Zimmerman.”
I know you as a great man in Christ, I hope you have a chance to listen to Thabiti also a great man in Christ. It may be hard to listen to, although God never promised us life and his word would be easy.
John K., Do you disagree with my statement, which is also the opinion of the POTUS and a constitutional lawyer, that a 34 year old Black Trayvon would have been found guilty if he had acted exactly like the 34 year old real-life George Zimmerman? I would also like to know from you, on what set of facts or perceptions did Zimmerman conclude that Trayvon was suspicious, and a “a…hole”…”a f….ing punk”….and a member of a group, called “they” which always get away? No one in this comment thread has up to this point answered this question. Why not? This… Read more »
We are all supposed to view this case in the wider context of racial history. I’ve read that a million times. Your question no one will answer is important. And one answer is context. At trial there was evidence about Zimmerman’s perspective that night: – History of burglaries in the neighborhood – History of burglary suspects – Behavior: slow pace in the rain near windows and buildings – no familiarity with Martin – history of good racial relations More context on Martin’s view of Zimmerman: – being followed – creepy a** cracker – Rachel J’s speculation that Zimmerman might be… Read more »
Dwight, Yes I disagree with POTUS and you on your conclusions that the Jury was racists in their conclusion of the evidence. I believe the Jury would have came to the same conclusions given the same facts in the same manner no matter what tribe of God the defendant came from or what tribe the assailant came from. This was a all female jury, were they sexist? NO. This was a all female jury, were they racist? NO. The prosecutor presented the best case the evidence allowed. The prosecutor picked the jury as did the defense. When we become a… Read more »
I had a thought yesterday. The Martin/Zimmerman case is kind of like a political/racial/sociological Rorschach test. We each look at the events and we see a truth. But what we see tends to reveal what we are, who we are, where we are. It reveals more about our own convictions and beliefs than it does about the case itself. I am amazed at the reaction in the Baptist blogosphere to this case. There is a passion and a force of opinion here that I’ve not seen on many topics. And people on all sides are absolutely convinced they are right.… Read more »
And, while I may not agree with everything Dwight said, as always, I appreciate his tone, his grace, and his godly spirit, even as he argues his points forcefully.
I am always honored, Dwight, when you send me a post!
But what we see tends to reveal what we are, who we are, where we are. I disagree. The two sides i see to this situation are the right side and the side that wants to make this about race. “If Trayvon had been alive…..if there had been a black juror….if Zimmerman hadn’t been white….” There is a segment of the population, like Dwight, who have what they believe is a righteous anger that a white man (who was Hispanic, but, he let’s not let facts get in the way) got away with murdering a black child and if the… Read more »
Joe, I think the force and emotion of your views on this says something about you as much as it does about the facts of the case.
The same is true for all of us.
And what exactly does it say about me? Oh, that’s right, I’m a white man so I don’t understand “the struggle”. By the way, my passion is due to the fact that someone posts an article here basically calling the jury’s integrity into question and suggesting that a black man on trial would have gotten a different outcome, which I’ve proven via news links is not the case. Further, my passion is due to someone saying they don’t view this racially when in fact their entire article and their comments are dripping with race. The only people who have any… Read more »
Yes, you are a white man, and NO, you do not understand what it is like to be a black man in America. Neither do I.
But your bluster and absolute certainty that you know everything about this case says more about YOU than it does about the case.
And, my point is true on all sides here. Each of us puts on the glasses of our own experiences, convictions and judgments and views this situation through that lens. We are colored by our own views and are subjective. Here you have godly men discussing an issue and disagreeing vociferously. Why would that be? Because in our imperfection, we each see this situation NOT just from biblical and godly viewpoints, but through the lens of our own experience. You would do well to accept that and be a little less sarcastic to your brothers in Christ as we discuss… Read more »
You would do well to accept that and be a little less sarcastic to your brothers in Christ as we discuss this.
Tell you what–I’ll do that when you give a similar repremand to Dwight for his assertion that the jury reached the verdict they did due to the racial make up of the jury. Fair enough?
It is not a matter of having opinions or advocating them strongly. It is sarcastic disregard for brothers that bothers me. Dwight has every right to advocate his position here. He has done so forcefully. I don’t agree with him in all his views (in particular, I think not-guilty was a reasonable verdict based on what I know). But he articulates his positions with grace. In fact, I feel ashamed when I see how he treats people who disagree with him. I wish I had his grace, calm, integrity and character. You have every right to disagree and to advocate… Read more »
“not subjective” I think you means “not objective”. “You would do well to accept that” I know you’re addressing this to Joe, but for this really to be effective, each of us has to take this and make it “I would do well to accept that”. It’s easy to see how others’ convictions are colored. It’s much harder to accept that mine are as well. And the trick is to do it without descending into post-modernism (though there I think the difference is that post-modernism says that the problem is that nature of the world – that you can’t know… Read more »
You are right, Ben. I made an edit in my previous comment (moderator’s privilege).
But your bluster and absolute certainty….
Ah, yes, but Dwight’s “We know it would have been different if he was black….” “We know Zimmerman started the confrontation….” and statements that litter this comment thread of the like are not blustery or expressing absolute certainty?
Sounds legit.
“And people on all sides are absolutely convinced they are right.” And on this I come back to “If anyone supposes that he knows anything, he has not yet known as he ought to know”. If we don’t see ourselves as capable of being being convinced of things that aren’t so, if we fail to see ourselves as fitting into exactly the scenario Dave talks about – seeing things filtered through our own experience and coloring the facts while thinking we’re looking objectively at the facts – then we’re operating without some very basic knowledge, knowledge that we *ought* to… Read more »
“As far as I am concerned, once the police dispatcher told Zimmerman not to pursue”
As I understand it from those who dug into the trial testimony and the dispatcher tapes, Zimmerman was out of the car *before* the dispatcher told him “You don’t have to do that”. And that he at that point stopped the pursuit and returned to the car.
What is funny here is that the subject is about “how to handle the moment”, not the facts, opinions and assumptions. Three points were given and I don’t know if anyone has tried to give support or provide additional answers on how we deal with the moment. One thing for sure, George and Trayvon never showed an ounce of Christian character. I doubt any of the worldly elements out there can produce the character of Christ without Him living in them.
BH,
Great Observation. I actually initially penned these thoughts to address the young people at the church where I pastor regarding “How To Handle A Trayvon-Zimmerman Moment.” That is the salient point or big idea here. I wish there were more commentary on the big idea here, without denying needed and healthy discussion regarding…the rest of the story.
The desire to address a similar situation is lost in the mis-statements and apparent racial biasis. It’s hard to begin discussing how one should handle such a situation when people’s vision is distorted by the weeds in front.
We need to spend more time in our pulpits focusing on dealing respectfully with people and standing against the wrong and violence of our society. When pastors put forth wrong statements as facts and flame racial tensions loose any integrity in trying to change the conversation.
sorry it has come to this.
Richard,
Where is the “misstatement” and where is the proof of the “racial bias”?These are cruel things to say without any supporting evidence. I am beginning to feel like Trayvon. He felt the sting of false accusations that night. Please provide evidence for your accusations.
Brother, The racial bias I see in the article is summed up in your statement: “It is my belief that we all engage in selective racial profiling at times. I certainly am no exception….” and my percieved treatment of the subject. Add to this the fact that the only racial statement made in the course of this incident was made by Trayvon and inflamed by those who have turned this tragic event into justificationb for more race bating. The Martin-Zimmerman event was not about race and should not be about race today. Black Americans who have attempted to point this… Read more »
Richard, Reading your remarks have helped me to better understand why the majority of Blacks vote Democrat and voted for President Obama. If we expect to get a fair, objective hearing and a “macroscopic” view of issues as the one under discussion–it appears that the majority of persons who vote Republican simply have a different view of the world on issues like this(thank God that there are exceptions). A Washington Post poll recently confirmed this. Moore is right. You are viewing this microscopically. I am viewing this macroscopically. Therefore, we will never see this eye-to-eye. But I appreciate the dialogue.… Read more »
Richard, Specifically, you have not addressed my “misstatements.” Neither have you demonstrated a racial bias on my part. Let’s admit we all engage in a certain level of racial profiling in various context & situations. Are you denying that you have never done this? Beyond my honest admission-you failed to show any racial bias on my part. And you deny that Zimmerman’s baseless adjectives toward Trayvon were prejudice speech on his part. You write it off to frustration or irritation at the slow response to the 911 call. Quite frankly, unbelievable. If you are going to level those inaccurate, and… Read more »
Richard,
But we are the elite (or elect), the cremedelacreme of Spiritual knowledge and we know all, see all and tell all. Sometimes we sound like tinkling bells and sounding cymbals. I wonder what the Catholic priest are blogging? Bet they have a few answers. Are there any Muslim blogs that are talking about this? You know we are going to have to hand this race thing over to them to deal with one day anyway. What is the Muslim’s answer to racism?
I lived and ministered in 3 muslim contolled countries. One-on-one I had absolutely no problem but when there were 4 or more and only me there prejudice was very evident. I chose not to respond in kind but to keep on treating them as I would want to be treated. Didn’t always work!
Sadly, I feel that racial tension will always be with us until Jesus returns but that doesn’t justify it.
Richard,
Amen.
I think you hit on a fourth point in Dwights post. Approach people like you want to be approached. “Therefore, whatever you want men to do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.” Matthew 7:12
I often disagree with President Jimmy Carter, but he has some interesting comments on George Zimmerman:
Former President Jimmy Carter says the jury in the George Zimmerman trial “made the right decision” based on the evidence and the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the neighborhood watch volunteer acted deliberately and was not defending himself.
“It’s not a moral question,” Carter said in an interview with Atlanta NBC affiliate WXIA television. “It was a legal question, and the American law requires that the jury listens to the evidence presented.”
http://abpnews.com/ministry/people/item/8688-carter-supports-zimmerman-verdict#.Ue_Z0PIo66k
David R. Brumbelow
Correction: above I said “the law there does prevent a neighborhood watch person legally carrying a gun from getting out of their truck” when plainly I should have said “does NOT prevent.”
K. Gray,
You gave context, which is always important, but you did not answer the question: Based on what factors did Zimmerman form his opinion of a young man he’d never met before that dreadful night? Your context & response did not answer that question. I’m assuming that-that was your intent. I appreciate your commentary here.
I’m not a mind or heart reader so I don’t know. I will say this: the evidence showed there had been many break-in attempts at The Retreat, not many had been caught, Zimmerman was a neighborhood watchperson who was out that night on an errand, Zimmerman thought Martin was acting odd and suspicious in the rain at night at The Retreat, called 911, and described the “suspicious” behavior. (I read a list of Zimmerman’s prior calls. He called 911 about people’s garage doors being open, a child unattended in the street, a pit bull, etc.) Was that suspicion based on… Read more »
David B.,
What do you believe that Zimmerman based his 911 commentary regarding Trayvon on prior to their physical altercation–when he referred to Trayvon as “suspicious,” “a f…ing punk,” and a “a…hole.” What in your opinion did Zimmerman base these comments on?
Jimmy Carter’s position is a plausible one. You and I agree on that. The outstanding question is, did race play a factor in Zimnernan’s treatment of Trayvon? If not race, what would cause Zimmerman to have such a negative opinion of a person that he had never met?
Dwight: what if the truth is that we *can’t* know if race played a factor? You seem to be expecting us to try to reliably read the mind of a stranger, where majority of the public information available about the character of *both* participants is partial and conflicting, in some cases misleading, and in some cases deliberately twisted. I think you have vastly overrated the ability of humans to read minds in such circumstances.
Add to that the fact that he may have made those comments because of the man’s apparent age and the fact that he didn’t recognize him. Onlly somone looking for a reason to be offended would conclude Zimmerman was a racist.
And let me state once again, the black community has no right whatsoever to be angry about this verdict.
Ben,
I am not asking you to read his mind. I am asking you to be logical. His opinions had to be based on his observations. And what he observed was race, age, clothes, and gender. Pick one. It doesn’t matter. Neither one of those were a worthy reason to call the law or approach Trayvon with a weapon. Either one of these reasons don’t constitute being labeled the names Zimmerman called Trayvon. You all should be just as outraged by this as Moore, Obama, and 86% of Black Anericans are.
“I am not asking you to read his mind.” I believe you are. or close enough. You are asking me to discern the motives of a stranger, as though I was God, looking into his heart. Now, I understand that in today’s Bulveristic public discourse, it has become commonplace to speculate on someone’s motives, and then assume that those speculations must be true, to the point where it has become standard practice. I don’t agree with doing that (as my own complaints about Bulverism should show). “His opinions had to be based on his observations.” Ha! You do read blogs,… Read more »
Ben, I don’t have to read Zimmerman’s mind. He told us exactly what he thought of Trayvon in very explicit terms. People of color understand exactly what Zimmerman meant and what his motivations were. Every Black man in America–as Obama intimated–has experienced what Trayvon did that night. You can deny the obvious as long as you like. But to have such an opinion of a complete stranger constitutes prejudice–which means to prejudge–at the least, and racism at the worst. I will allow you to live with denial–but it is an experience that most Blacks undergo daily. Therefore, we can’t live… Read more »
Other possibilities are: youth, style of dress, composure, etc
My question to you is this, I think you said that once Zimmerman disregarded the 911 operator’s request, he was at fault for whatever took place, are you saying that Trayvon could have justifiably killed him? Once Trayvon started beating up Zimmerman are you saying Zummermsn deserved whatever Trayvon did to him even death!
Adiel,
Absolutely not. What I am saying is that you shouldn’t be able to pick a fight with an individual based on clothes, age, gender, race, etc. , & then, when you start to lose the fight, you pull out a weapon, kill the person; and claim self defense. It is something wrong with a law that permits what happened in Samford, & the killer goes free. Inasmuch as we all are acknowledging that the initial confrontation was based on some arbitrary external factor.
I must have missed something in this case. Where did you learn that Zimmerman started a fight with Trayvon?
It’s my understanding that Zimmerman rounded a corner and was jumped and pummeled by a younger, more atheletic individual – not the other way around.
Richard,
We all know that Zimmerman started this encounter. He profiled Trayvon based on external factors, called 911 & documented his negative & baseless feelings toward Trayvon. And then confronted him against the counsel of the 911 dispatcher. Had Zimnernan’s stayed in his car & minded his business we wouldn’t have had this problem.
We all know that Zimmerman started this encounter. He profiled Trayvon based on external factors, called 911 & documented his negative & baseless feelings toward Trayvon. –
And not one of those things he did merited his being physically assaulted which you seem more than willing to give a pass on.
Fact–if Trayvon hadn’t unjustly assaulted Zimmerman, Trayvon wouldn’t have died.
Dwight, So, you’re saying that Zimmerman should’ve just layed there and let Trayvon pound his head into the pavement? and killed him? Let’s move beyond the fact that Zimmerman did a bonehead thing by getting out of the truck and confronting a young man in a hoodie, who was unknown to him, and who was looking into windows of houses….let’s get beyond Zimmerman’s and Trayvon’s racist words….AFTER Trayvon was on top of Zimmerman…pounding his head into the pavement….are you saying that Zimmerman should’ve just let Trayvon beat him to death? that Zimmerman had no right to defend himself? to keep… Read more »
David,
None of us know for certain what took place that night. If I saw Zimmerman’s weapon, or if he threatened to kill me with it, and there was no opportunity for me to escape, I probably would have behaved as you allege Trayvon behaved. Zimmerman placed Trayvon in a position to kill or be killed. And of course we know the end of the story. But the one who did not follow the operators instructions is the responsible party from my vantage point.
Dwight,
If I saw you in a hoodie, I wouldnt be afraid of you. But, if I saw you in spandex, or in a speedo swimsuit, then I would be very afraid….well, maybe afraid is not the right word….
🙂
David
are you saying that Trayvon could have justifiably killed him? – See more at: https://sbcvoices.com/how-to-handle-a-trayvon-zimmerman-moment-by-wm-dwight-mckissic-sr/#comment-200132
Great point because it sure sounds like a way of saying that Trayvon’s attack on Martin was justified.
Dwight, Wouldn’t it be great if we got to the point that we judge based on the content of character and actions and not on race at all? Zimmerman, because of previous break-ins, and previous examples there of people causing trouble and getting away with it, likely would have directed that crude language at me (a white boy) if I were there looking in windows and acting suspiciously. Maybe, just maybe, race was not a factor at all. When a white man gets cut off in traffic by another white man, he thinks the guy who cut him off is… Read more »
“Looking in windows & acting suspiciously”…When did that happen. Who said that he was looking through windows? Was it Zimmerman who needed an alibi or someone else? Hadn’t heard that before. And, exactly what made Trayvon suspicious to you & Zimnerman? He was walking to his dad’s house with skittles, tea, & a cell phone. What exactly is suspicious about that? Did the notion of him looking through windows come up in the trial? Where is the evidence of that?
Dwight,
If a white boy(17 or 18 yrs old), with a muscle shirt and tattoos on his arms, comes walking into your neighborhood late at night….and, he’s wearing a bandana on his head….let’s say that he has a scruffy beard….and you look out your window…where you live….and you dont know him…dont recognize him as a neighbor….would you keep looking out your window to see where he was going? what he was doing?
I would.
David
David, Probably not. But even if I did, your scenario does not fit the Trayvon -Zimmerman situation. Trayvon was not dressed in the manner that you describe, nor was he dressed in a way that would have been threatening or suspicious fro my vantage point. For sure, what I would not have done with regard to your scenario, is to confront the person, based on externals. Blacks are very sensitive to judging people based on externals. We have been victimized by that from the inception of this nation. If Trayvon had burglar tools in his hands, or was indeed appearing… Read more »
Dwight, I dont know where they’re getting that info. But, Dwight, if I saw a white man in a hoodie, with a scruffy beard come into a convenient store in Memphis…late at night….and, it was just me and the clerk in the store….I would get very nervous. I’m just being honest with you. I dont care if the man was Black, White, or Latino….if he comes into a convenient store in a big city, late at night, and he looks kind of rough looking….I’m not gonna sit here and act all spiritual….I’m gonna get nervous. Why? you might ask….well, it… Read more »
Dwight,
You can get the 911 transcript from
http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/326700-full-transcript-zimmerman.html
and see where the Trayvon clothing description and housing comments derive from. Although people are not quoting perfectly the transcript, you will get the factually quotes there.
On whatever skin color: any combination of clothing that obscures face, build, and is baggy enough to conceal a weapon makes me nervous. I’ve got enough drug-addicted white people in this county that will kill for enough Sudafed to make more meth to let race be a bias on that one. When I lived in Memphis, time was a factor, too: the same group at 5 PM was more nerve-wracking at 11 PM. When I worked fast-food, the same small group that was not alarming when in the restaurant until closing time had me scared when they were in the… Read more »
Coming back to now, instead of arguing the case over and over:
What do we actually do, now?
Surely we do not want to start imprisoning people because it makes us feel better after verdicts we disagree with, do we?
I guess this is my question: short of advocating locking up Zimmerman to satisfy the “macroscopic” issue in spite of a jury trial finding him not guilty (which is not the same as innocent), what do we actually do?
Because I think that the road from ignore jury verdicts we don’t like leads someplace very, very bad.
Doug, In the early ’90’s a White Canadian gentleman, now living in Arlington, Tx. woke up one morning, and after a few beers, he decided that he wild go out and randomly shoot the first Black Man he saw. After riding for several blocks, he spotted a Black Man outside doing mechanical work on his car. He pulled out his pistol and killed him. He was arrested and charged with murder. None of the facts in the case were disputed. The jury found him guilty, but guess how many years the sentence was? ZERO!!! That’s right he was not sentenced… Read more »
I can’t see where having a Federal investigation other than those which have already occurred will help anything. If the feds bring charges, there will be plenty of people who will think that the Obama administration has unconstitutionally subjected Zimmerman to double jeopardy for political purposes. If the feds charge and the verdict is guilty, you will probably have the Hispanic community protesting (if they’re not protesting just from the double jeopardy aspect). If the feds charge and the verdict is not guilty we’re right back where we started. I think it’s best to look for solutions other than going… Read more »
Dwight,
Are you speaking of the Christopher William Brosky case in Texas?
On what legal grounds do you think the Feds can place Zimmerman on trial for, the FBI already concluded this was not a hate crime. When should double jeopardy be an issue? Lots of issues need to be considered before we advocate double jeopardy trials.
Surely it’s a different case than that, given that the Brosky case was of a juvenile perpetrator who was not the actual shooter. The actual shooter in that case got 40 years, after all.
Also, Brosky was convicted on a state charge, not a federal one. The state went back and charged Brosky with conspiracy to murder someone, and convicted him on that count.
Which allowed a sentencing on that count–what makes no sense there is why they didn’t just fix the sentencing mistake in the first place and give him the prison time the jury recommended.
That is why I ask Dwight for clarification. I know a little about the Brosky case and it is the only case in Texas that I know of that matches some of Dwight’s criteria. Although Brosky ultimately was sentenced on conspiracy charges and sentenced for 15 years that he served and now lives in Canada but was from Arlington. Brosky was involved in a true hate crime and although the jury tried to sentence him to 5 years in prison and 10 years probation because of a confused jury on sentencing instruction it turned out by some unique Texas law… Read more »
John K.,
I don’t recall the shooter’s name, but the man who was shot last name was Thomas.
That kind of travesty is a different problem: a man was convicted of murder and then let go. He should have been thrown under the jail. Here, a man is found not guilty. A federal trial is possible, although the longer it takes, the more I doubt it will happen. I actually expected Zimmerman to be arrested on federal charges on his way out of the courthouse after the not guilty verdict, honestly. If there is no evidence, only inference, should we still want Zimmerman in prison? This is not a case of someone even hiding his actions, but of… Read more »
Doug, If the long awaited federal charged turn to naught, then we would have exhausted all legal remedies to redress this issue. At that point we will do what many of us have done, & that is to put this matter in the Lord’s hands. God has the final word on this matter. And He said, “Vengeance is mine.” Therefore, I am convinced, that in His own timing & in His own way, God will Handle George Zimmerman. We must simply put this matter behind us & move on after we hear the results of whether or not federal charges… Read more »
If anyone is still inclined to thrash out the details of this incident, I highly recommend that you read the exhaustive article on Wikipedia before continuing. it seems to include information from all sides, and handles things pretty evenly-handed, from what I can tell. *This* is what the media should have produced, if they were really as objective, fair and balanced as they claim. The folks at Wikipedia have put them to shame.
Oh how I want to tell the devil to stop smiling and rubbing his hands with glee!
Mr. McKissic, I sense you are hurt. I refuse to sit on the devil’s bench. So I hope to meet you someday on this earth and hope that I am your sister in Christ — as you are my brother in Christ — no matter my skin color or how I vote. And now I’m going off to cry. For real.
K Gray, I am hurt. Your perception is correct. But I am a big boy and can take it. This conversation simply reminds me of a few things that my mother taught me–for which I am grateful, or else my hurt would be much deeper, and it has given me a deep appreciation for my President–which up to this point I have not had—-and a better understanding and appreciation for my people. I will get over this and be fine. But you are right; at the moment I am saddened and hurt. Thanks for sensing that and acknowledging my pain.… Read more »
We as christians can’t expect the world to judge righteously. Spiritual discernment is only for a man who is born again and his mind is on things above where Christ is seated. Our faith in God and our humble hearts is our protection. The enemy is Satan (spiritual) not man (flesh). Let’s not forget who we are actually at battle with. We need to be in unity. One heart in Jesus our Savior and our Lord. If Jesus is with you when your walking down the street you don’t have to listen to a spirit of fear. Take a moment… Read more »
Jeffro,
Amen and amen. If we are prepared as you have put it, the moment will take care of itself.
If I’m understanding Dwight a little bit (which I may not be), cases like Treyvon are focused on by the black community because these cases at least superficially look like what they fear: the return of a situation where blacks can be mistreated and the law just looks the other way. It’s emotional, and given the background of the American Black community, I can understand the emotion, and I can’t tell them “Don’t feel that way”. At bottom, they fear being killed by non-blacks and having the law dismiss it more than they fear being killed by other blacks. On… Read more »
Ben,
I find your comment here so offensive, demeaning, insulting, and devoid of facts and truth ’til it is probably best for me not to respond; other than to say that to label the “macroscopic view” as “emotional is an assault on the 86% of us who hold that view tantamount to the groundless, baseless, prejudicial–and flat out wrong allegations that Zimmerman made on Trayvon.
So, I’m not understanding you correctly. Thank you.
Perhaps I am missing something – what “allegations” were those? He certainly made “assumptions” based upon previous experience, yes. Believing falsely those assumptions is a problem, and mitigated this tragedy, both before and after and continuing onward today. The question before us today is, “what are we going to do as ministers of the gospel to promote the Kingdom of God, as brothers and sisters in the Family of God?” Unless we deal with that question, we will always be subsumed with these tragedies that seek to divide us rather than unite us. Who exactly benefits from this? “Qui bono?”… Read more »
Dwight: Thanks for posting this. Your post and many comments like it offer a window into the thinking in the African American community on this subject. As a lawyer, when I heard the facts surrounding this case, I suspected that Zimmerman would be not be found guilty. The standard for conviction is beyond any reasonable doubt. This defendant had a lot of objective proof that was favorable to him which would create reasonable doubt. Most of us are seeing the situation in that way – as a legal matter. But what Dwight’s post and Moore’s comments make clear is that… Read more »
Louis, Sure, we all hold feelings about this on both sides. I acknowledged early on in this thread that reasonable people could view the facts of this case–and based on the reasonable doubt clause– reach a not guilty verdict. I further acknowledged that I do not hold the view that the jurors were racists, or anyone such as yourself, Dave and others who hold that the evidence did not rise to the level of surpassing the reasonable doubt threshold were racists, or without a factual basis for their conclusions. Now having said that, just as the Supreme Court often have… Read more »
I agree that it is important to emphasize that feelings matter and feelings matter even more so when they are not stand-alone but are supported by facts from a specific historical context. Moore noted that when he stated that we have “a legal system that does seem to have systemic injustices as it relates to African Americans with arrests and sentencing.” With this quote, Moore is at least one of the first prominent conservative Southern Baptists to acknowledge that racism or racial injustices have a clear structural component. In the past, the approach of white conservative evangelicals has been to… Read more »
I’ve refrained from commenting for several reasons: 1. I generally find myself agreeing with Dwight, and this time I was even in more agreement with him than usual. 2. I worried that just showing up and saying that actually would distract from what he had written. 3. I suspected I was missing a layer or two of meaning and wanted to spend more time reading and considering what he wrote. I want to kind of lay out my journey with this piece. As I’ve written before–and I think it’s worth repeating just in order to provide a context for my… Read more »
Pastor McKissick: It appears that the majority view of the black community – of which I am a member – is that Zimmerman presumed Trayvon Martin to be a criminal because Martin is black, and that sole act makes Zimmerman responsible for everything else that happened afterwards. This view is adhered to despite the fact that Zimmerman was 100% right about Martin! He speculated that Martin was on drugs, and Martin did indeed have drugs in his system. He speculated that Martin was a thug, and Martin indeed in the past year had A) been found with marijuana on school… Read more »
Job, Thanks for your comment here. I am honestly glad to dialogue with one of the 14% of Black people who view this case the way you do. Bill Cosby, Charles Barkley, and one rapper whose name escape me at the moment also see things the way that you do. Just read where Eric Holder, and of course President Obama, both lawyers as you know, see things more in line with how I and 86% of African Americans view this case. Of course, being in the minority on most issues relative to the Black Community is usually where I stand.… Read more »
Pastor McKissic: I do not know if Zimmerman’s assessment of Martin was justified. I just know enough about Martin’s background to say that it is wrong to presume that Zimmerman made assumptions about Martin based solely or even primarily on his race. Again: the criminals in my neighborhood are different in their behavior, demeanor, the way that they carry themselves etc. than the law abiding ones. Also, I have seen plenty of people who are on drugs. How do they look? Like they are on drugs. Whether they are young, old, white, black, rich, poor they aren’t hard to spot.… Read more »
Job, Thanks. I honestly don’t know what “acting stone” means. Could you help me understand that? Isn’t the jury responsible for weighing the evidence to see if GZ was actually in danger? GZ did not testify in court to being in danger. The problem in Florida may be the law that allows the aggressor to wrap themselves in self defense. Do you honestly believe if Trayvon was the one feeling as if his life was being threatened, would he have been exonerated by the same jury, based on the same set of facts & law? Any man who would beat… Read more »
Dwight: I really appreciated Todd Littletons take on this post. I agreed with him totally as I do see your point. I hope and pray and have been even stronger since knowing you that others would understand, even if they do not fully agree, the Black communities outrage on this verdict.
Debbi, Thanks. God has used you to be a source of blessing and encouragement in my life now for almost 7 years. Even on those rare occasions when we are on different sides of the opinion poll, I deeply appreciate your ability to ably articulate and defend your position. Thanks for being a friend and encourager. Thanks for providing a much needed voice who offers a perspective that we would not ordinarily get. And I might add, one that is substantive and significant, informative and inspiring. I want to encourage you in the words of Scripture: “Be not weary in… Read more »
Job, I can appreciate your interpretation of “associating his hand in his pocket with being black” but I am not convinced that your understanding of this comports with what GZ had on his mind that night. My reading pf that statement is that GZ was intimating to the 911 operator that TM had a gun in his pocket. Why, because GZ had a gun in his pocket. As I recall he later said that he wondered if TM had a gun. That is what the gun statement was about from my vantage point. But again, I don’t find your interpretation… Read more »
Dwight,
Debating the merits of the Martin-Zimmerman issue is one thing, but using the case to promote the POTUS as a great humanitarian is quite another. He is not. His record on abortion is that of a barbarian.
Like our grandmothers said when we were kids, “Babes it is just a fact, you can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear.”
CB, Glad to hear from you. I vehemently oppose abortion, gay rights/marriage, and irresponsible and out of control federal spending. But on this issue the POTUS has performed stellar. Sort of like Daddy Bush did on the Rodney King issue. He handled that quite well, and made me proud that I voted for Daddy Bush. President Obama’s remarks and response thus far on this issue has been therapeutic and refreshing. Only Russell Moore’s response I think has excelled the President. President Obama has a heartfelt identification, and can feel the pain of our community in ways other people simply cannot… Read more »
Nate, As important as abortion is, there are other important life issues to consider that would fall under the category of “Humanitarian.” Politicians have been trying to pass Health Care Legislation since the ’30’s, because they recognized that it was a great humanitarian cause to do so. Lily Ledbetter, who was denied equal retirement benefits for the same job classification as her male colleagues, was given by President Obama her full benefits. That was a great humanitarian gesture. The Trayvon Martin remarks by the President was a great humanitarian act. He effectively and affectionately, addressed the pain of millions of… Read more »
Dwight, I respectfully disagree with your opinion on that. You can certainly claim that POTUS has made, what you believe to be, helpful statements concerning this trial, but every definition I gave (per Webster) shows this President is a complete and abysmal failure to the plight of the unborn.
I don’t know if this post will be deleted as my previous one has been, but again, I must disagree with you, in the strongest possible terms, of categorizing this President as a Humanitarian.
Nothing wrong with disagreeing, Nate. In fact, I agree with you, that Mr. Obama’s abortion policies undo just about any good he could do on other issues.
But, we have to guard our words – especially when we are discussing issues like race.
Jay,
Please read my comment # 46 addressed to. Clark Dunlap. It also responds to your posting here. In short, the judge instructed the jury to use their “common sense”. Based on the common sense jury instruction finding GZ guilty was a no-brainer.
Yet the jury found him not guilty. The jury now has “no brains.” God have mercy.
Rob
Rob, Juries vote as individuals; not as a group. As an individual juror for me it would have been a no-brainer—based on the “use your common sense” jury instruction. Obviously, for other jurors, their brains led them to a different conclusion. In the Dred Scott decision a judge or jury ruled that a Black person was only 3/5th of a person/human being. For you & I that would have been a no-brainer to vote as a judge or juror against that notion. But it wasn’t for him/them. My point is simply this: what is a no-brainer for one person is… Read more »
I’ve read the Trayvon Martin case jury instructions.
Attorney Gray, Seriously, you recognizing my pain, and expressing empathy seriously ministered to a couple of days ago. I have gotten over the hurt, in part due to your feeling my pain. Thanks again. Last night, I listened to one of Trayvon’s family lawyers say that the jury was instructed to “use their common sense”. Is that what you read? I know that is what she said in response to the juror who is now saying-“Zimmerman got away with murder”. TM’s lawyer said in response, based on the common sense jury instruction that juror would have been justified in voting… Read more »
In the Dred Scott decision the Supreme Court ruled that slavery was an institution of the states, and the Federal Government had no say. This was taken only partially from the reading of the Constitution that a black (slave) person was only 3/5th of a human being and therefore did not count. Ultimately the Dred Scott decision was a political decision of seven jurists (in a 7-2 ruling) – a ruling by the way that was made predominantly by Democrats appointed by Democratic presidents. The real purpose of the 3/5th quota was to deny the slave (Southern) states the ability… Read more »
Rob,
Thanks. Your commentary here was a studied & well thought out. The Dred Scott analogy may have been a little over the too, but I could not think of a better way to illustrate my point. I appreciate your acknowledging that minority jury decisions aren’t inherently emotional decisions
You a smart, articulate and reasonable guy. Whenever my schedule lands me in Missouri, I would love to fellowship with you. Thanks for the words of affirmation. And thanks for addressing the pain.
So tell me CB how Bush (both Bush’s and a Reagan for that matter) stopped divorce again? Yet Christians hail the above as the greatest thing since Churchhill.
that should be abortion. But speaking of divorced, Regan was and did not stop abortion. That’s two strikes by your view isn’t it?
Dwight: Thanks. I don’t feel that you are being harsh at all toward me. My comment should not be read as saying that people who agree with the jury verdict are basing their decisions on fact and people who so not are motivated by feelings. I am saying that both sides are motivated by feelings, and in the case of many African Americans that needs to be understood when addressing this situation. I am not saying that they are being anti-rational. I am saying that people look at facts based on feelings. When speaking about this matter, that needs to… Read more »
Louis,
Thanks for your clarifying your comments. I understand them much better now. I agree with everything you said in your last comment. Ironically, both sides believe that feelings, not facts, were/are the key motivating factors with regard to where one lands on this issue. I find that quite interesting. Thanks again for your response. it was most appreciated.
Louis,
I might add, you are 100% correct. It was/is important to acknowledge the real pain and disappointment that African Americans are feeling with regard to this issue. Dr. Moore addressed the reality and validity of that pain, as well as the President. Agree with or disagree with; Fine. But please recognize my pain. I appreciate you and BDW for seeing the significance of this, and the freshness of Moore’s remarks.
You are welcome. I also thought that BDW had some good things to say.
Look, folks, some of the comments here have gone over the boundaries of good taste. I am not a fan of the president. Didn’t vote for him and wouldn’t. Abortion is the main reason, but there are many others. But expressions of hatred for the president about abortion are just not helpful to this discussion. You can hate the president all you want, but keep it to yourself. I think we can raise the level of conversation above what it has been in several of the comments made. By the way, for those who consistently accuse me of unfairness and… Read more »
Someone, I was looking at “Victim Mentality” on Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victim_mentality Looking at some of those traits that have been attributed to blacks, I saw similar traits that have developed over the years in whites based upon some of the complaints whites have had, for example, toward Affirmative Action. It seems that some of those traits affect us all, but in different ways. I would like to see someone develop the idea if they see it, too, for a future post. Such a development of victimization on both sides may build a wall on the race issue that is not easy… Read more »
Pastor McKissic:
Please see my post above. Thank you.
Rather than facts and feelings I’d say this: first there is evidence. Then the jury can draw reasonable INFERENCES from the evidence.
On this thread, first we had some misunderstandings about the facts. Checking the facts really helped. Then we discovered we were drawing different inferences from those facts. People will do that. It’s a cloudy area, reasonable inferences. That’s why I don’t usually second-guess a jury from afar. (I’m a retired attorney).
K. Gray,
Thanks for your perspective here. I can’t take issue with your view that evidence is the most important matter here. Didn’t know that you were an attorney. Did know that you were a linear thinker, informed, perceptive, and empathetic.
Like Louis, your being an attorney and a laywoman, provides for an interesting, informed, and much needed perspective here.
It really is an enlightening discussion and I hope we have grown in good ways. The heart of the matter is death and its aftermath, and — in Christ — resisting Satan’s wiles. I hope my linear thinking (busted!!) doesn’t overshadow that. I reread the President’s speech. He took the moment to speak for and about the African American community– with a nod to the jury system. On that day before the Trayvon rallies, he said his remarks might be “useful” and overall I hope they were. He identified personally with African American experience and context — of course that… Read more »
I hope that Dr. Mckissic realizes that in order for him to render “his” verdict apart from the formal jury, he must admit that he must have heard every word the “real” jury did in order for his verdict to be fair. Did you hear every fact, every testimony, every minute, Dr.? I bet not. Second, if Travon Martin had continued on his way to his fathers house without doubling back to confront and hump Zimmerman, he might still be alive. He had four minutes to meander on around to Dads place, but no, he preferred to double back and… Read more »
This is a critical and counter-intuitive fact: the criminal justice system does NOT have “systematic injustices as it relates to African-Americans”. Numerous studies since the 1960’s show that while more blacks are incarcerated and for longer times, and it is NOT due to race, but rather criminality. Our system is not unfair. If you state otherwise, show proof.
J. Craig, I heard a prominent White lawyer on CNN–I believe his name was Mark Geragos(sp) who once represented Miachel Jackson–say that he is in the courtrooms, and is working within the criminal justice system everyday. And he emphatically stated that it is systemically racist. He also stated that Blacks are given greater sentences for committing the exact same crime. I know other lawyers, including my brother, who share the same opinion. So, if you want to believe otherwise, be my guess. But I have been observing this all my life & I have also seen Blacks dealt with with… Read more »
Dwight:
If people would just look at the facts. It is a fact that Blacks are given longer sentences for committing the same crimes as others.
Dwight, I want to thank you for having the courage to come to this blog and share your perspective, knowing that there is a substantial lack of understanding on the part of most of us when it comes to issues involving race. Few white people, myself included, do not have the kind of frame of reference required to have the kind of understanding or empathy needed to experience the emotions that surround incidents like this. We are not that far down the road, in a historical sense, from the Civil Rights movement. Most of us do not have parents or… Read more »
The person called Maddy–supposedly Juror 29-B offered this in an interview (the text is from an USAToday article: Maddy said the case was not about race as far as she was concerned. “George Zimmerman got away with murder, but you can’t get away from God. And at the end of the day, he’s going to have a lot of questions and answers he has to deal with,” Maddy said. But, she added, “the law couldn’t prove it.” I think it is potentially problematic to add the thoughts of jurors to their official actions from a standpoint of interpreting the verdict… Read more »
BTW: I suspect threading breaks because deleted sequence ids are getting reused. Don’t know if Tony has the skill to look at that (or the desire), but it seems a likely explanation. If the deletion action could save off hidden ids instead of merely deleting them, they might not get reused. (PURE SPECULATION…I don’t have code to look at.)
My brothers, I’ve been out of the net for the last couple of days interfacing with law enforcement personnel at the State, County and local levels. Even with my background it was enlightening to say the least but I kept up with most of the posts thru my phone. My disagreement with Pastor McKissic’s statement in the lead paragraph has already been documented in this post but I would like to say Pastor McKissic is correct when he states blacks have a history of mistreatment. What I disagree with is the inherent belief that because of past mistreatment any person… Read more »
Richard,
I am largely in agreement with your remarks here. And the discussion even under this or another post need to shift to, where do we go from here? How do we bridge the gap?
I have been praying for direction about this discussion. It is very important to me to only speak what I heard from God. He said ” Will you forgive Zimmerman?” I said “yes, Lord I forgive him.” He said” Ask me if I will forgive him.” I said” Lord will you forgive him?” He said” I will forgive you both.” Than I remembered Jesus on the cross. Saying” Father forgive them they know not what they do” Also Jesus said” If you do not forgive men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.” God is good and His… Read more »
I am an ‘outsider’ who occasionally views this blog and who has never commented before. First of all, I want to commend (most of) those who have commented for their evident commitment to speak with love and humility their deeply-felt concerns and conclusions. Secondly, the distinction between legal reasoning and ethical reasoning must be recognized. If one approaches this issue from the standpoint of ethical concerns and reasoning, it may distort one’s legal reasoning and conclusions. Likewise, if one approaches the issue from solely from a legal standpoint – as jurors should do – one’s conclusions will fall short regarding… Read more »
Mark, Thanks for sharing your perspective. Quite interesting. As I said to Louis the lawyer, when SCOTUS votes 5-4 or jury votes are divided, how does one determine which side was driven by emotions? Could it be that neither side was driven by emotions, but they simply interpreted and processed the evidence, facts, and information differently? It is fascinating to me that those that I talk to that view this matter as I do think that persons like yourself, and the majority of people on this thread, and the jurors were driven by emotions, and a bias against Rachael G.?… Read more »
Mark, I agree with you about Job’s comment. It was one of the best in this thread. Your analysis is very good, as well. Again, I believe that Zimmerman was over zealous, and did something stupid….he should’ve stayed in his car and followed Trayvon until the cops got there….he should’ve never, never did what he did….it was stupid….a bad decision…but, not criminal. Also, Trayvon did something very dumb and overly aggressive. He attacked a man for following him. It was just a huge display of bad choices that led to a tettible tragedy. Hopefully, we can all learn from their… Read more »
David,
What proof do you have that TM attacked GZ first? Where is that documented?
The trail of recidivist history, with regard to TM.is astounding ? This thread reports that he was walking along peering in windows. There is not one shred of truth to that. Now we learn that TM hit GZ first. This is truly amazing. Unless you can prove that, it would be wise to retract the statement.
Mr. Whitten,
Are you Mark Weldon Whitten, author of The Myth of Christian America? Or a different Mark Whitten?
Or “hard-hitting” Mark Whitten of baseball fame?
Praise God that He used some of our weakness as balm for you! He truly is good. I read the whole 27 pages of jury instructions, which doesn’t take long. They are at NPR here: http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013/07/12/201410108/read-instructions-for-the-jury-in-trial-of-george-zimmerman. The instructions show what the jury had to decide. Both prosecution and defense agreed to them. They contain standard Constitutional criminal rights all defendants get, plus the Florida law that applies. And juror B29, oh my. That is as nice a thing as I can say. She is anguished for the Martins but I think she is very, very unhelpful. In that same interview… Read more »
K. Gray,
Thanks. At first opportunity, I’ll read the jury instructions.
I will bow out now and may God bless you all.
Dwight: I have been off of this post for several days and have not read all of the entries. But because it was listed last, I saw your question to David about TM attacking GZ first. I may be mistaken, but I believe that was the proof in the case. In his recorded statements that were introduced, I believe GZ said that he was on his way back to his car when TM jumped him, or something to that effect. As I understand it, GZ says he followed TM, and was returning to his car when TM appeared and attacked… Read more »
Louis, I will be traveling today & have limited time to respond if you have a follow up comment/question. I should have qualified my question to David, with the qualification being someone other than Zimmerman making such a statement. Of course, what else would GZ say? He murdered the only other witness in his case. So what we have left is the testimony of s man who was arrested for assaulting a police officer, resisting arrest, two charged of domestic battery against a woman, and two alcohol related arrest. Furthermore, his pre-trial statements are contradictory & some were proven to… Read more »
Correction: I’ve now seen juror B29″s interview segments in ABC’s story. She was asked if she stands by her vote still today: “I stand by the decision because of the law.” Although her heart protested, “…we had to grab our hearts and put it aside and look at the evidence.” She said maybe if people would read the law they would understand the choices the jury had. Her heart says Zimmerman is guilty. “Guilty of what?” “Guilty of killing Trayvon Martin.” But she says they could not find the intent for a murder charge. Robin Roberts says some people believe… Read more »
I saw something similar – that her position was (to simplify) that George Zimmerman was morally guilty of murder, but legally not guilty.
I honestly don’t see how one can differentiate between the two. At least 86% of African Americans apply the judge’s instructions regarding “common sense” to mean that if he us morally guilty if murder & he pulled the trigger….then he is legally guilty if murder. If this juror means that GZ truly acted in self defense—-if she really buy’s that–then GZ is not morally or legally guilty of murder? I don’t believe that you can split the baby like that. I appreciate this juror speaking out. I think that her conscience is bothering her because she realizes that she &… Read more »
“What I am trying to say…” Not what Zimnernan’s is trying to say…” Autocorrect messed that one up. All the other–& there are many–typos are mine. Sorry about that.
I think the difference between moral guilt and legal guilt would be a result of the the fact that God’s law is perfect, but our laws aren’t. In this case, I think what the juror was saying (and what probably reflects my view on the matter) is that George Zimmerman was morally guilty because he pursued Trayvon Martin and initiated the contact which resulted in him shooting the man dead. However, there is evidence that he was assaulted. As I understand it, the law in Florida allows me to use deadly force if I believe I am in danger. Hypothetical:… Read more »
That’s where I am–this is a case where the law is specific in terms of what “murder” is, but I cannot escape thinking Zimmerman could have, and should have, made different choices that avoided killing Martin. When you are carrying a firearm, you should think in terms of avoiding confrontation, because you know that a physical confrontation carries the possibility of deadly force. You should not be emboldened to confront because you’ve got a gun, but respectful of the power in that compact space. I think the law is inadequate to address what happened that night–I think the “not guilty”… Read more »
And, I feel the same about you. You add greatly to our dialogue here.
I especially appreciate the patience you show when people provoke you. I wish I was more like that.
And, no, I’ve not read the rebuke of Dr. Moore. It does not surprise me that he is getting hit. He is being tested by fire in his first months on the job, isn’t he?
I only meant to correct my own remarks about juror B29, not anyone else’s. Hope that is clear. You almost have to take notes on her interview to understand it.
I bow out in sympathy with juror B29’s struggle, and our own.
@Pastor McKissick: Sorry it took me so long to get back. “GZ did not testify in court to being in danger.” Please understand that not taking the stand to testify in your defense is very common in criminal trials. (If you recall, O.J. Simpson did not take the stand either.) In our justice system, the defendant does not have to establish innocence. Instead, the prosecution only has to establish guilt. All the defense has to do is poke holes in the prosecution’s case, and that can usually be done without the accused needing to take the stand. Of course, defense… Read more »
Dwight: You asked me about an article related to the jury that was on the Associated Baptist Press website. I read that article. The author suggests undoing several hundred years of Western jurisprudence, and even ancient jurisprudence, when he advocates for jurors who by their background (racial or otherwise) have some sympathy to the parties or the victim in a case. I believe that it is a fundamental to achieving justice that we explicitly seek after neutral jurors who are not connected to the case by sympathy. I agree that there are flaws with the jury system. Today it is… Read more »
I think that this thread is a true case of “Come, Let us reason together” I have significant difficulties with how Brother Dwight views this case, but this thread has helped me understand where he is coming from. I think their are several things that we can agree on. If it is the case, and I believe it is, that Blacks get harsher sentences than other races, it is contrary to the ideals of Christianity and the ideals of the American nation. It should be remedied, today, not tomorrow, today. Equality in sentencing is a civil right as far as… Read more »