Hall of shame (but will they have any?)

John Lott: We never should have witnessed a Zimmerman trial – prosecutors, pundits – even named conservative pundits – and others thought they knew better than the local authorities. They didn’t. They should be ashamed.

Shapiro: Zimmerman’s not guilty verdict shines troubling light on prosecutor’s decision-making

“A prosecutor’s job is to do justice for everyone—and that includes protecting the defendant’s constitutional rights and ensuring he is not wrongly prosecuted without probable cause.” [emphasis added]

Daniel Greenfield: The Zimmerman Verdict is Still a Win for the Race-Baiting Left

“As I wrote a number of times, this was never about the real George Zimmerman and the real Trayvon Martin. This was about the race-baiting left’s use of race for political power. They don’t have Zimmerman in jail, but they weren’t out to just put him in jail. They were out to put all of us in jail.

The jury’s verdict reminded them of the limits of their power and the power of the media, but such humbling moments never last. They just redouble their efforts.”

Joel Siegel: George Zimmerman verdict: New York City mayoral candidates berate not guilty verdict is a catalog of ignorant statements.

Walter Russell Mead: The End of the Zimmerman Trial illustrates the confusion. On the one hand is the “boy” and the minimization of the event and claims that “People will take whatever meaning they want from this case.”

“Nobody really knows or can know if the verdict in the trial is justice for either Trayvon Martin or George Zimmerman. Procedurally the trial seemed fair, and enough unbiased observers predicted this outcome that it is hard to call it a surprise. Law and justice don’t always point in the same direction; the state had to meet a tough standard and in the view of the jury, it failed.”

Those who paid attention to evidence and law called a clear case. That clearly indicate some can see justice. Those who ‘will take whatever they want’ are not looking for justice for all.

Also see Jacobson: Guardian removes column: “Open season on black boys after a verdict like this”The Guardian had to remove an over the top premature post. Jacobson illustrates and highlights the misconceptions in the Guardian article about the evidence prevelent in the case. Key items are the reduction in age of Martin, the ‘iced tea and skittles’ as just a boy’s snack, the confusion about the agressor, and the racism.The article has been re-posted with minor adjustments and illustrates just how far into intellectual dishonesty the issue can get.

It is a marker for social norms. On the one hand we have the contingent who put a teen that revelled in fights, engaged in illegal drug use, and consorted with gang members and similar ilk hailed as a hero while a young adult who stepped forward to participate in neighborhood security and assisted others in his neighborhood in many ways is considered a villain. It seems the most vocal and outspoken in the society have declared their hero and it really does not speak well of them – as does the anticipation of their violent and illegal behavior in their expression of their hero worship.

No shame? One can wonder if these folks have any idea of the concept.

Comments are closed.