Monday, June 03, 2013

Whatever Happened to the Tea and Skittles?

The wheels of justice turn so slowly in our country I had almost forgotten about the Martin/Zimmerman affair. As Zimmerman is about to go to trial, in spite of asking for a delay, the whole sordid episode has now re-entered my increasingly dim mind.

I confess I would not be able to serve on a jury in this matter as I basically (however unfairly and prematurely) suspect that Zimmerman is guilty. This is mainly because I find it unlikely that a 17 year-old boy, being followed by a larger unknown (and not Black) man, would have turned on him and attacked him. Martin apparently had a drink of iced Tea and some Skittles (I guess this is a form of candy) and was returning to his father’s home from a 7-11 store. On the phone with his girl friend he apparently reported he was being followed and did not know why. When Zimmerman was asked whether he was following Martin he said he was, and was told he did not have to do that. Apparently, according to Zimmerman’s account, he was returning to his car when Martin approached him from behind and attacked him.

So what happened to the tea and skittles? Did Trayvon Martin set them down somewhere and then attack Zimmerman? Did he just casually throw them away and attack? Were they ever found? Did anyone pay any attention to this? Were they found near the attack site? Were they found on the clothes of either of the participants? Did Martin attack Zimmerman with tea and skittles, and if so, how? Zimmerman’s account makes no sense to me. His defense is the questionable Florida “Stand your ground law.” If Zimmerman was indeed walking back to his car how was he “standing his ground?” If he was the aggressor how was that standing his ground? Remember, Zimmerman was armed with a semi-automatic pistol and was apparently much larger than Martin. It makes far more sense to me to believe that Zimmerman was the aggressor, confronted Martin, and then a fight ensued. Why would a boy attack a larger man, who may have been armed, unless he was himself being attacked in some way?

Zimmerman was armed although as a neighborhood watchman he was not apparently supposed to be (he did have a permit to carry, however). He was a volunteer watchman who went armed and deliberately looking for some kind of trouble. Martin was an unarmed teen-ager on his way from a 7-11 store. I suspect that if Zimmerman was attacked by Martin it was Martin that was “standing his ground.” Anyway, what do I know about it? The accounts given vary depending upon who gave them and when they were given. They are somewhat inconsistent. Although I believe Zimmerman’s scenario makes no sense, I also believe he is certainly entitled to a fair trial – but so is Trayvon Martin who isn’t even being charged. Of course people have always been entitled to self-defense, the Florida law was/is unnecessary and has led to nothing but big trouble, a green light for killing (especially young Black males).

It appears that Daryl Issa is also armed (with power) and out looking for trouble. While Holder and President Obama may be guilty of something-or-other they are not guilty of whatever it is that suits Issa’s fancy at the moment. He said he would hold a hearing every week and he seems to be living up to that ridiculous pledge. What a creep! Wouldn’t it be nice if the Republicans would actually participate in governing and give up trying to make scandals out of ordinary acts of everyday public life. Of course mistakes are often made, and of course things sometimes go wrong. In the Republican case mistakes seem to be always made and imaginary wrongs are their stock-in-trade. If they cannot be voted out of office in 2014, especially in the House, I fear things will just get worse and worse. No government can withstand constant obstructionism forever.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

I am asking myself the same question. What happen to the skittles and Ice Tea.