The jury spoke on Sanford, Florida on Saturday night and acquitted George Zimmerman of murdering Trayvon Martin. The reaction to the verdict from leading personalities especially here in New York has been shockingly stupid and a clear display of pandering to minority and African American voters who wished and hoped that Zimmerman be convicted and sent to jail for up to thirty years regardless of the facts of the case.
I viewed bits and pieces of the trial that was broadcast throughout the last few weeks on various news websites. What I observed was an exhaustive analysis of evidence from every painstaking and conceivable angle. To insert oneself into this process and render an opinion on what should have happened—not on the evidence— but on the way you would cast a vote for a performer on American Idol is silly, unbecoming and a display of what it looks like to pander.
So I suppose it is therefore no surprise that this is precisely what some of the leading Democratic mayoral candidates did promptly and directly after the verdict was announced. Former New York City Controller, Bill Thompson said, “Trayvon Martin was killed because he was black.” How low and ridiculous can an otherwise smart and sophisticated man be?
Bill DiBalsio said, “This is a slap in the face to justice.” That’s odd, it seems that this comment in particular is a slap in the face to the judge and jury who over the last few weeks examined every conceivable detail of what occurred on the fateful night in February, 2012 when Zimmerman shot Martin in self-defense, according to the jury.
And then there is Anthony Weiner who piled on to this ridiculousness with this: “This is a deeply unsatisfying verdict.” Is he kidding? Doesn’t Weiner know how a verdict is arrived at? Is the objective of our justice system in place so as to render judgments that satisfy people with bad judgment like Mr. Weiner?
And there was Christine Quinn who said, “This is a shocking insult to his family and everyone seeking justice for Trayvon.” What would someone like Ms. Quinn who knows the law and the legal process very well want the courts to do—poll a few hundred people to see what they would like the country to do with Mr. Zimmerman?
Let’s be realistic, these comments are patronizing and condescending and not based on any type of intelligent thought process. Of course it would have been best if there was never an incident that involved Zimmerman and Martin. But there was. Expressing disappointment and saying that there was no justice or that justice wasn’t served is a dishonest assessment. These folks quoted above don’t mean what they are saying. They are just looking for votes in what is shaping up to be a hard fought and close Democratic primary in September. Finally, an honest evaluation.