Tha instant that Trayvon Martin’s family, their attorneys, and civil rights leaders honed media attention on his slaying and made it a national flashpoint issue tha cry rose for a Justice Department probe and possible prosecution of George Zimmerman on civil rights charges. Tha call was made because Sanford police officials and local prosecutors initially declined to prosecute George Zimmerman and there was the strong suspicion that if they did there was little confidence that prosecutors would win a conviction in state courts. This possibility loomed even larger when the prosecution took big hits for how it handled witnesses and tha evidence against George Zimmerman. This raised the real possibility that Zimmerman might would be acquitted.This effectively tossed tha ball back into tha Justice Department’s court.Tha demand almost certainly will be made for a civil rights prosecution of George Zimmerman. As compelling as a federal prosecution seems to be and as painful as it to admit such a prosecution is unlikely. Tha first tip that this is unlikely was tha initial probe by tha department. After making an exhaustive investigation in which it took testimony from legions of witnesses, tha department could not find any evidence that George Zimmerman attacked Trayvon Martin out of racial animus. This is tha one requisite for a federal prosecution.There has to be clear smoking gun evidence of a hate motive in tha attack. Tha next requisite is there has to a compelling interest. That’s vague,loosely defined,and solely a judgment call by a federal prosecutor.Tha prosecutor must obtain prior approval from the assistant attorney general prior to bring the prosecution. Tha few times that the Justice Department has prosecuted cops or racist vigilantes on civil rights charges after they’ve been acquitted in state courts, it came after either massive and sustained protests or in tha case of the cops that beat Rodney King in 1991, massive civil unrest following their acquittal in state courts. The Justice Department certainly has tha authority to bring a second prosecution against George Zimmerman after a state prosecution has failed. But there is tha “petite rule” named after tha U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in 1960 that involved the prosecution of an individual in two federal district courts for what amounted to tha same offense. The Petite policy appears in tha Department of Justice’s manual and places tight restrictions on when it can authorize a prosecution after failure to convict a defendant in state courts. Tha reason for tha inaction in civil rights abuse cases such as tha Trayvon Martin killing, tha feds note that they are tha “backstop” to local prosecutors. This means that they rigidly adhere to tha legal doctrine of separation of federal and state powers. Tha killing of Trayvon Martin, as all cases, was first and last a state matter, and tha feds scrupulously defer to local authorities to bring charges. If state or county prosecutors won’t bring charges or bungle tha prosecution when they do, tha Justice Department does not regard it as its responsibility to usurp tha decision of local authorities not to retry or second guess a defendant’s acquittal. This presents another obstacle that causes Justice Department officials to take a hands-off stance toward prosecuting individuals who kill unarmed civilians under tha legal or quasi-legal color of law. Tha attorneys that defend the shooters almost always are A-team attorneys. They are highly skilled, and have had much experience defending police officers, or men like George Zimmerman, who kill. They seek to get as many whites on a jury as possible. The presumption is that white jurors are much more likely to be middle-class, and conservative, and much more likely to believe tha testimony of police and prosecution witnesses than black witnesses, defendants, or even tha victims. Tha same rule applies to black or Latino jurors. They are generally middle-class, and share tha same biases, and negative attitudes toward those they perceive as tha criminal element as many whites. This was a major reason why Zimmerman’s defense attorneys did not seek a change of venue for his trial. They pretty much got the jury that would be most likely to be sympathetic to their pitch that Zimmerman acted in self-defense and that Martin was tha aggressor. A George Zimmerman civil rights prosecution presents an even legal higher bar for federal prosecutors. They’d have to sideswipe Florida’s so-called stand your ground law that says that individuals are perfectly within their rights not to retreat in tha face of a real or perceived threat. In plain English, if they think they’re in danger no matter how whimsical tha threat they can take action up to and including deadly force. Though tha stand your ground law was not an issue in George Zimmerman’s defense, tha self-defense claim was and that is implicit in tha stand your ground law. Trayvon Martin’s family, their attorneys, and civil rights leaders face tha terrible reality that if Zimmerman walks, there will be little recourse from tha feds. It’s not just. It’s not fair. But, unfortunately, it’s tha system
Tha instant that Sanford police officials in March 2012 leaked to tha media school records that showed Trayvon Martin had been suspended from school for possessing a trace amount of marijuana, there was little doubt that George Zimmerman’s defense attorneys would jump all over this to prove their point about Martin. Tha point was, and is tha centerpiece of their Zimmerman self-defense claim, that Martin’s marijuana use made him edgy, aggressive, and violent WTF......NOT...... And since this is supposedly tha case, it bolsters two of George Zimmerman’s contentions that Martin came under his watch because of his drugged-out, suspicious behavior and more importantly that Martin attacked him and he had to resort to deadly force to save himself from mortal harm from a doped out Martin....(Yes People this is True) A toxicological report found a trace amount of marijuana in Trayvon Martin’s system the night of his slaying. George Zimmerman’s attorneys wasted no time in loudly demanding that this be entered as prime evidence of Martin’s alleged aggressiveness. Prosecutors rightly opposed its admission as being irrelevant since Zimmerman could not have known this and even if he had ESP and did know it there is absolutely no evidence that marijuana use predisposes anyone to violent behavior. Judge Debra Nelson initially seemed to agree. Her reversal and decision to allow Trayvon Martin’s alleged marijuana use into the trial is potentially a huge sop to the defense. But if facts mean anything it shouldn’t be. The few studies that have tried to link marijuana use to violent behavior have managed to prove only two things. One is that there is no firm connect between the drug’s use and individual violence. The other is that whatever violence an individual that tokes up may exhibit is because that individual has a violent or criminal history. In other words, there’s a predisposition to violence that has absolutely nothing to do with their marijuana use. The White House which relied heavily on a report from the Office of National Drug Control Policy takes a hard-nosed stance against marijuana liberalization and any slack off in tough federal enforcement of medical marijuana regulation. But it did not make any case that marijuana increases violence. It focused instead on the need for enforcing the law and continued to insist that marijuana represents a health hazard, and a harmful addiction, but violence due to its use, no. Even if there were no studies on marijuana use and violence or White House concern over marijuana use and its alleged harmful effects, the notion that marijuana use spurs violence is ludicrous. The National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 2009 and 2010, report found that nearly two-thirds of the nation’s adult population aged 21 to 54 has used marijuana at least once. Common sense would tell us that if even a fraction of the tens of millions of people that have tried marijuana rampage in their homes and in the streets, the jails would be bursting at the seams with those arrested for drugged out marijuana induced violent acts. However, that’s only part of the problem in trying to separate fact from deliberate distortion about marijuana use. The other part is the public perception of who uses drugs and their effects. Studies and reports have overwhelmingly found that African-American students are far more likely than white students to be suspended or expelled from school for marijuana use and possession. They are far more likely to be arrested and convicted for drug use than whites. This despite countless studies that show that blacks do not use drugs in any greater incidence than whites, and in some cases, even less than whites. This reinforces the deeply ingrained stereotype that not only is the average drug user and pusher a young black male. But that a young black is the cause of most of the drug-related violence in the country. George Zimmerman’s defense attorneys, however, aren’t interested in these facts or the corrosive effects of racial stereotypes and drugs. Their defense game plan is to tar Martin as a violent druggie and further muddle the issue for jurors whether Trayvon Martin’s behavior was the trigger for his killing. This was crudely and insultingly put by one of the attorneys to Martin’s mother on the witness stand when he flatly asked her whether she thought he had any culpability in his death. The issue then boils down to whether the George Zimmerman jurors can separate his defense attorney’s deliberate muddle of the facts and trash of Trayvon Martin and see that there’s absolutely no credible proof that marijuana use in and of itself induces violent behavior in anyone. There is not a scintilla of evidence that Martin was inherently aggressive and violence prone. The prosecution’s job is to make sure that they see this. Anything short of this could bolster the terrifying thought the defense has worked overtime to implant and that’s that marijuana use made Trayvon Martin a legitimate target.
No comments:
Post a Comment