The Case Dividing America


Written April 3

Update April 5

    In the case that divides America, almost everything has been covered. But looking deeper there is more than meets the eye, was there profiling yes, but its intent was focus on a particular class of person more than race. Both are victims of the system. Both are minorities, where there is more in common than separates, but one paid with his life. The Almighty states, no one has the right to take a life unless it is self defense and we cannot pass judgment on another. What can be investigated is why was a call made to the prosecutor to come in and what factors or who initiated this. Look at the timeline of all calls to all people who would have recommended the prosecutor to leave his home and why. When a person of interest is involved in a crime photos of all injuries are taken leaving no doubt. Finally if you are patrolling in a car you are safe and the threat is outside. If you leave your car for any reason you have no fear entering a situation by choice. Ask were you trained to observe if a person is on drugs or suspicious or was that your bias opinion. Was the a subject wearing a hood in the rain in plain sight as someone about to do something wrong. Were there others in danger or property at risk? Did you ask why are you here as a courtesy or was being black beneath a question and assumed guilty?

   Following a person is stalking and in the eyes of a young black teenager in a gated community fear enters his mind because of the unknown. All parents of minorities when living in upscale areas always warn their kids not go off the beaten track as to be mistaken for a threat and anyone following is perceived as a threat. In this case, self defense does not apply as the driver was told to stand down and by choice put himself in a confrontational situation. Would you have chased him unarmed, no.  If you say yes, you are lying. Then what was the crime, walking down the street to a home in the community being black. It is not your job to police a neighborhood with deadly force, no matter how you try and justify your intent as righteous. Last time I checked, a neighborhood watch group observes and reports.

   You are not trained to do this or authorized, this is the job of the police. Because you stepped away from the safety of your vehicle by choice, a child is dead and this is a responsibility that must be accepted. You cannot bring him back. You cannot spin this and this is the true tragedy in America. There any many cases like this in America, injustices committed and those at blame in many cases just walk away. This is what inspires vigilante justice, which in many cases goes terribly wrong. In America, we need to look at why so many polarized due to hate and race, when it about an injustice of one man against another.  We can all stand behind an injustice as one. Will there be pressure on the prosecutor from outside sources? There already is.


   What is being hoped for was that this case, would just go away, but the public is outraged. Commitments and decisions to back a set of events were made at the time of the incident. All of this poses a risk to people of interest associated with law enforcement. The key here for the defense is to focus on the final event itself as a right for self defense. If one looks closely at all events, the same law the defense is using would have applied for the dead child. He was being stalked, at night by an unknown person as no notification of neighborhood watch was made. This is a fact backed by the cell call to girlfriend. Stand your ground was the only choice of the child as he being pursued. Followed by a vehicle, then exited by a large man and then pursued was a clear and present danger to the child. If the child was legally armed, he not the pursuant would have had the right to stand his ground and protect himself with a weapon, but being unarmed the only choice was his fists. The pursuant by choice put himself in a position of confrontation and was not under a threat of fear as he was told to stay put in his vehicle. All persons when under attack have the right to defend themselves in any manner, as the best offense is the best defense in an unknown situation. The Florida law here stand your ground when taking in all events from first sighting to the death of the child would apply to the child only, to rightfully use this law. In his case he was unarmed and is dead. The defense hopes only the snapshot of the final struggle is primary event the Grand Jury uses to make a decision as jobs and pensions are riding on this. This Grand Jury decision would allow many to questions to be asked especially on how the laws of America apply, but more important if dismissed all will ask what happened to justice for all.

All Rights Reserved: Copyright 2012