My Impatience: Where Is Justice For Trayvon?

These are facts: on February 26, 2012, George Zimmerman shot and killed Trayvon Martin. You already know all about these facts and have been debating their significance for a couple of weeks: Trayvon Martin was 17 years old, unarmed, and had with him a cell phone, iced tea, and Skittles; George Zimmerman had a gun. The Sanford, Florida police refused to arrest George Zimmerman, claiming I think incorrectly that Florida law prevented his arrest. He’s been at liberty since. He’s been uncharged since. Almost a month later, on March 22, 2012, when no arrest had been made and public opinion about the case was boiling over in demonstrations and media attention and criticism, Special Prosecutor Angela Corey took over from the local Prosecutor. She will be the one who decides what charges, if any, are warranted. The whole world is watching. And the Feds are doing their own parallel investigation to decide whether to bring a civil rights prosecution in federal court regardless of what Angela Corey decides. We are now 37 days after the death of Trayvon Martin. We are now 9 days after the appointment of Angela Corey. And there is still no arrest.


I’m impatient. And fearful. I wonder aloud whether the delay in making this arrest is stupidity, incompetence, racism, politics, or a combination of some or all of these. I wonder why justice is delayed in this case. I wonder why George Zimmerman has not been arrested. And I am sorry to admit that I fear that the delay means that Florida will not charge George Zimmerman with a crime.

How long does it take to decide whether to charge George Zimmerman with a crime?

Even if one were to discard virtually everything from the initial Sanford Police investigation, even if one were to start all over again from the top with new, more detailed interviews of the very few witnesses who saw or heard anything, even if one were to review and re-examine whatever forensic evidence there is, how long can it possibly take to develop enough information to make a decision, to decide whether to charge George Zimmerman with a crime?

And how long can it possibly take to decide whether to charge police officials with obstruction of justice or official misconduct or tampering with witnesses? How long can all of this take? Apparently it can take a very long time. How long should this actually take? Not long.

This isn’t a complex bank or securities fraud or terrorism conspiracy case. No. This is, sad to say, an all too common homicide case. We know who the victim is. We know who the shooter is. We have some witnesses who saw or heard something. We have whatever physical evidence was accumulated. We have whatever medical and other forensic evidence there is. This, when all is said and done, is not a complicated case. It’s a sensitive case, yes. It’s an important case, yes. But above all else, it’s not a complicated one.

Let’s remember, if we possibly can, that the ultimate decision about whether George Zimmerman is guilty is definitely not the decision prosecutors now face. That ultimate decision, the decision of whether Zimmerman committed a crime, has to be made by a court or a jury, and his guilt has to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt by competent evidence at a trial. And that’s not the decision the prosecutor now faces. It’s not. The present decision is simply this: charge Geroge Zimmerman with a crime, or don’t.

You can formulate this question in other ways. You can ask whether there is enough evidence to charge George Zimmerman with a crime. Or you can ask whether there’s enough evidence to believe that Zimmerman probably committed a crime. You can parse the standard. You can evaluate the words. You can formulate the words in many different ways. But ultimately it’s not complicated: the prosecutor has the discretion to charge George Zimmerman if she believes there is probable cause that he committed a crime. She’s not required to charge him with anything.

How long can it possibly take to make that relatively simple determination? Not long. In routine homicide cases, the decision is usually made within hours. And then there’s an arrest. In more complicated homicide cases, there’s an arrest and a prompt grand jury presentation, usually within days. How many cases can anybody cite in which it’s taken more than a month to decide whether to charge a shooter (who is not a policeman) with a homicide? How many cases can anybody think of that are in this category? I’ll tell you: I can’t think of one. Tell me I’m wrong if you can find a single one.

So I am impatient. It’s a truism that justice delayed is justice denied. And now, here we are, nine days into the second prosecutor investigating the case, and more than a month from the death of Trayvon Martin, and still no arrest. And no communication from the prosecution. This is a disgrace. And it’s a dishonor to Trayvon Martin and his family. So I am impatient.

And I regret to say that I have begun to fear that the quest for justice for Trayvon Martin will include the refusal of Florida prosecutors to charge George Zimmerman with a crime. What else, I ask you, could take this long?

In Memoriam

From the New York Times:

On June 21, 1964, three civil rights workers disappeared in Philadelphia, Miss. Their bodies were found buried in an earthen dam six weeks later. Eight members of the Ku Klux Klan went to prison on federal conspiracy charges; none served more than six years.

Let's Fight Hate

In the continuing post Prop 8 fall out, the Mormon Church is ramping up its attacks on gay people, slurring gay people and even accusing them of domestic terrorism. The campaign of hate continues to rage, just as it simultaneously continues to claim that it is a victim of attacks. Let's fight back.

I know. The Mormon Church denies that this was ever a campaign of hate. There I pointed that out. In a wonderful circumlocution, the Church even denies that its work on Prop 8 is anti-gay. No, it's about being "pro- marriage," they say.

Jump with me across the broom.

Oh, it's "pro marriage" all right:

Suggested talking points were equally precise. If initial contact indicated a prospective voter believed God created marriage, the church volunteers were instructed to emphasize that Proposition 8 would restore the definition of marriage God intended.

But if a voter indicated human beings created marriage, Script B would roll instead, emphasizing that Proposition 8 was about marriage, not about attacking gay people, and about restoring into law an earlier ban struck down by the State Supreme Court in May.

“It is not our goal in this campaign to attack the homosexual lifestyle or to convince gays and lesbians that their behavior is wrong — the less we refer to homosexuality, the better,” one of the ward training documents said. “We are pro-marriage, not anti-gay.”

Right. It's about being pro-marriage, but only for certain, selected people. As I've said before, you can put all the whip cream you want on dung, but it doesn't make it a dessert. Similarly, with Prop 8, you can circumlocute and equivocate all you want, but it's still about barring gay people from their pursuit of marital happiness, and it's about imposing on those who are married an involuntary, state constitutionally based divorce, their families and children be damned.

This morning's New York Times reports that Mormon involvement in Proposition 8 was huge, even for them:

“We’ve spoken out on other issues, we’ve spoken out on abortion, we’ve spoken out on those other kinds of things,” said Michael R. Otterson, the managing director of public affairs for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, as the Mormons are formally called, in Salt Lake City. “But we don’t get involved to the degree we did on this.”

Also, we learn that the Mormons were a large percentage of early volunteers, and, of course, that they gave gigantic amounts of cash to the Prop 8 effort. And then we have this obvious anti gay slur:

[T]he extent of the protests has taken many Mormons by surprise. On Friday, the church’s leadership took the unusual step of issuing a statement calling for “respect” and “civility” in the aftermath of the vote.

“Attacks on churches and intimidation of people of faith have no place in civil discourse over controversial issues,” the statement said. “People of faith have a democratic right to express their views in the public square without fear of reprisal.”

Mr. Ashton described the protests by same-sex marriage advocates as off-putting. “I think that shows colors,” Mr. Ashton said. “By their fruit, ye shall know them.”

That's a nice, biblical touch, paraphrasing Matthew 7:16 (in the King James and elsewhere it's not fruit, it's "You shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?") apparently to call gays "fruit". I'm not alone, I see, in noting the slur. I hope I'm not being hypersensitive; I'm just sensitive to discrimination in its many disguises.

And then we have this accusation, apparently made without the benefit of any proof whatsoever that "teh Gay" are terrorizing the Mormon Church:

A day after it received hoax mailings containing a white powder, the Mormon church on Friday blamed opponents of California's gay marriage ban for recent "attacks" while an allied group condemned "acts of domestic terrorism against our supporters."

Investigators have not publicly cited any evidence that the mailings were linked to the Mormon church's support of the measure, and a gay rights group in Utah denied that gay protesters were involved....snip....

Church leaders released two statements Friday, one saying they were disturbed the church was being singled out for taking a position on the California amendment, the other assailing "attacks" and vandalism of church property by "opponents of Proposition 8."

"We call upon those who have honest disagreements on this issue to urge restraint upon the extreme actions of a few," church President Thomas S. Monson said in a statement.

This is out of control. And it's been out of control for far too long.

I'm on the wrong coast, thousands of miles away from California, and I'm infuriated. This battle shouldn't be supported only by GLBT people, it should be supported by all of us. Prop 8 isn't going to affect my hetero marriage of 30 years. But this kind of discrimination and oppression is something that all of us, gay and straight, all of us should be fighting tooth and nail.

I've already gotten out the check book, and I'm going to have to do it again. I'll give money to those fighting Prop 8 in the court. I'll do what I can to support organizing and protests.

Please join with me in this. I omit the obligatory quotation from Pastor Niemoller to frighten you into helping. Let's just do this because it's the right thing.