MAURER: Zimmerman verdict is an affirmation of our system of justice

Against all odds, the jury delivered an honest decision. Photo: Zimmerman receives verdict

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo., July 14, 2013 — The not guilty verdict in the George Zimmerman trial should reaffirm our faith in the American system of justice. Despite sensationalization in the public square and despite inappropriate intervention by the federal government, a jury of six women found George Zimmerman not guilty of all charges.

Reason and blind Justice have made an all-too-rare appearance in contemporary America.


SEE RELATED: State Attorney Corey fires key whistleblower in George Zimmerman case


That this is the correct verdict should be unassailable. As the character Sherlock Holmes famously said, “when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”

That’s not the way the left operates. They have a narrative; they already know the answer. They simply look for instances that prove their narrative. If the facts don’t fit, alter the facts. After all, to the post-modern mind, the facts are all subjective anyway. It’s the opposite of Holmes’ deductive approach.

Consider the odds against this verdict.

From the beginning the media sought to play the story as white-on-black violence. It fits the narrative of the white man oppressing the black man. The only problem is that Zimmerman isn’t “white”; he’s Hispanic. Alter the facts. Presto! The media creates a new racial category, “White Hispanic.” For the story to work, however, the black man as victim must be innocent. Trayvon Martin was pictured as an innocent young teen. Youthful pictures of him were released; more recent ones suppressed.


SEE RELATED: Legally, George Zimmerman should be found not guilty


To fill the role of oppressor, Zimmerman had to be made to look like one. While flattering pictures of Martin were used, the most unflattering ones of Zimmerman accompanied them. Zimmerman was portrayed in the popular press as a vengeful vigilante just looking for the opportunity to shoot someone.

The truth of this case, however, didn’t fit the dialectic Marxist narrative. As time wore on, Zimmerman didn’t appear so menacing. Martin didn’t appear so innocent. The truth is always more complex.

In contemporary America it is not just the media who push the narrative. The president himself commented on the case well before all the facts were known. But facts don’t matter, after all. The narrative does. Recent press reporting indicates that the Justice Department has been involved as well.

The race-baiters Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton have been prominent in pushing the narrative too. Ominous warnings of riots in case of an unfavorable (i.e., “not guilty”) verdict were sounded. These were carefully couched in terms that seemed to say, we know you’re angry, you have a right to demand a guilty verdict, but please don’t riot anyway.


SEE RELATED: Rachel Jeantel’s lack of literacy is a societal problem


All over the country people who knew little or nothing about the case or the law debated about whether Zimmerman should be found guilty. The narrative and those pushing it sought to try Zimmerman in the court of public opinion and find him guilty.

The idea is to pressure the court system to come up with a guilty verdict. The chief of police who believed charges should not be brought was fired. It is mob rule. It is vigilante justice.

It is the Jewish mob shouting, “Crucify him!” to Pilate.

What chance did he have?

Fortunately for Zimmerman — and for us — our Constitution guarantees us a trial by jury. The real vigilantes are those who sought to try him outside the courthouse. While many say he should never have been brought to trial in the first place, a trial is also a protection for the innocent.

Anyone who has actually served on a jury understands that what we read in the press is not the whole story. Our adversarial system ensures that both sides try their best to convince the jury of their point of view, using evidence and testimony. If the narrative is present in the courtroom, so is the defense.

This is not to say that the jury system is perfect. Much depends on the skill of the lawyers and the impartiality of the judge. The jurors, like Sherlock Holmes, must use logic and reason to come to a conclusion. Both sides try to stack the deck during jury selection. But the system, refined through centuries of English and American common law, is the best one yet devised by man.

Confronted with the facts and evidence, the jury found George Zimmerman innocent of all charges. Reason prevailed. Had it not, Zimmerman would have been found guilty. Had the narrative been correct, he would have been found guilty. Had appeals to emotion alone worked, he would have been found guilty.

Justice is portrayed as blind because she is impartial with respect to persons. Equality in the American system of government means equality before the law. Justice means a ruling based on the facts and the law—nothing more, and certainly nothing less.

Despite all the odds stacked against them, Justice and Reason prevailed. Six women had the courage to decide “not guilty” when the mob screamed “guilty.” That they did so speaks to the rightness of their decision.

READ MORE from Al Maurer at Red Pill, Blue Pill


At The Voice of Liberty, we seek to advance the principles of liberty, because tyranny never sleeps.


This article is the copyrighted property of the writer and Communities @ WashingtonTimes.com. Written permission must be obtained before reprint in online or print media. REPRINTING TWTC CONTENT WITHOUT PERMISSION AND/OR PAYMENT IS THEFT AND PUNISHABLE BY LAW.

More from Red Pill, Blue Pill
 
blog comments powered by Disqus
Al Maurer

Al Maurer is a political scientist and founder of The Voice of Liberty. He writes on topics of limited government and individual rights.

Contact Al Maurer

Error

Please enable pop-ups to use this feature, don't worry you can always turn them off later.

Question of the Day
Featured
Photo Galleries
Popular Threads
Powered by Disqus