A charge of Murder in the Second Degree has been brought against George Zimmerman in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin. The charge has been filed at the sole discretion of special prosecutor Angela Corey, rather than trough the findings of a grand-jury indictment. Such a maneuver is allowed under Florida law, but it certainly does not instill one with any faith in the objectivity of the prosecutor despite her claim that they "...do not prosecute by public pressure or by petition."
Quite obviously she is, well, mistaken we'll call it. If it were not for public pressure or petition, she would not have even been assigned to this case to begin with. The police investigation failed to uncover enough evidence to support even a charge of manslaughter, much less the much more serious charge of murder. The police had originally recommended to the local prosecutor that the neighborhood-watch captain be charged with manslaughter, despite the fact that the physical evidence and witness statements corroborated his claim of self-defense. So what new evidence has this special prosecutor uncovered that the police and local district attorney did not? Obviously she is not saying now, but instead stated, "That's why we try cases in court." Frankly, that much I do agree with too. It's a travesty that this case has been tried in the media already from the start. Given the amount of lies spun about this case and pressure to lynch the shooter at this point, it is hard to imagine that there is even much hope for a fair trial at all at this point. Which of course goes right back to why this matter is being handled by a special prosecutor in the first place.
She claims that she has enough evidence to not only prove that Zimmerman should have known better than to shoot Martin, but that he was in fact cognizant that doing so would be a crime. That he did not just act in a negligent manner which caused the teen's death, but that he willfully and intentionally killed the boy knowing unambiguously that what he was doing was wrong. That he flat out lied about defending himself and killed the teen in cold blood, on a whim, without any planning or forethought. If such evidence is to be believed, then we must also accept that the local police and prosecutor are woefully inept at their jobs at the very least, or that they intentionally dismissed the facts of the case in a corrupt, even criminal manner. Can we expect this special prosecutor to follow up this investigation to hold these public officials accountable? Maybe I'm just a cynic, but I doubt it.
So that is where we wind up at this point. Either the local officials are incompetent to a point bordering on criminality, or this prosecution is indeed the product of a witch-hunt rooted in political pressure, media lies, public-mob frenzy, and racism.
Also check out:
Arbitrary Arrests and the Rule of Law
As a footnote here, I would also like to point out how the media is still intentionally slanting this story in a manner so as to portray Zimmerman as the villain. An article by the Associated Press reads in part...
"A video taken about 40 minutes after the shooting as Zimmerman arrived at the Sanford police station showed him walking unassisted without difficulty. There were no plainly visible bandages or blood on his clothing, but Zimmerman may have had a small wound on the back of his head."
Okay, so he was walking unassisted. What difference does that make? He never claimed to have broken legs. Without difficulty? How is the media able to determine what Zimmerman's level of pain or pain management might have been, from a few seconds of police station surveillance video? No plainly visible blood or bandages on his clothing, okay, that doesn't prove anything either. Just because the camera didn't capture it, doesn't mean it wasn't there, or that he wasn't attacked. Is one obligated to be bleeding profusely with broken bones before they may invoke their right to defend themselves against a violent attacker? Not in my book, and certainly not under Florida law. But finally, when this article tells us that Zimmerman "may" have had an injury to the back of his head, we can plainly see the disingenuous nature of the article. The original, unaltered video CLEARLY shows an injury to the back of his head consistent with his claim that his head was being beaten into the sidewalk. This AP article also leaves out, conveniently enough, the fact that Zimmerman also had a broken nose, and that all of his injuries were documented by both police and doctors, and that those injuries were consistent with his statement.
By pointing out the obvious media slant here, it is not my intention at all to lead you, the reader, to conclude that Zimmerman is in fact innocent of any crime. He might very well be guilty of killing that boy in a criminal manner. Indeed I do have my own suspicions, but they are not based on spin. My intent here though is to show how you are being lied to by the corporate press, and that so far, there is no real evidence which has come to light that would substantiate any criminal charges against the shooter. It sets a very dangerous precedent to give propaganda and rhetoric a priority over facts and the presumption of innocence through due-process. The tragedy of that boy's death will never be mitigated through an erroneous placement of blame or an emotional appeal to vengeance.
For more on how the media has butchered this tragedy, check out this article:
Trayvon Martin Shooting Death Propaganda Machine