Withholding Judgment in the Trayvon Martin Case

One of the things that I have learned in my 12 years as a criminal defense attorney is that the media invariably gets it wrong.  If I had a nickel for every time the media coverage of one of my cases was misleading or flat out wrong ... okay, I'd probably only have about $3, but that's still a lot of nickels.  That's why I get frustrated at posts like this one and this one that start talking about "the facts" of any particular criminal case.

Media coverage without question impacts the ability of jurors to deliberate in a fair and impartial manner.  When the media saturates the air and the interwebs with "facts" about a case like this one, it damages the criminal justice system in subtle, yet unmistakable ways.  Often times the public becomes enraged by a not guilty verdict when the news coverage presents the case as open and shut.  The Casey Anthony case is an excellent example, as is the initial case against the officers in the Rodney King beating. 

This type of backlash against legitimate verdicts - arrived at by jurors who listen to the entire case and hear only admissible evidence - leads to a perception that the criminal justice system is broken.  That, in turn, leads to citizens either attempting to avoid jury service or (even worse) actively trying to become jurors so that they can single-handedly "fix" the system.

As difficult as it is - especially in these high-profile cases - the correct approach is to: (1) acknowledge that Trayvon's death is a tragedy; (2) wait and let the criminal justice system do its job.

Pat Robertson on Tim Tebow: It would serve the Broncos right if Manning hurt his neck again.

This doesn't strike me as a very Christian sentiment.  One can debate whether Tebow was treated poorly by the Bronco organization, but Robertson seems to be almost rooting for Manning - also a Christian, by the way - to get injured.

Really?

Rejoice!!  America's problems have been solved!!  Unemployment, debt, gas prices, and all of the other ills facing society are no longer an issue.  How do we know this?  Well because Dick ("Dick") Durbin (D-IL) has called a hearing to investigate the NFL's bounty program, that's how.

Last time I looked, NFL commissioner Roger Goodell had already overreacted ... err ... punished the franchise responsible for the bounty program.  The fact of the matter is that football is a violent sport.  Professional football players are all supremely talented.  They make millions of dollars to exhibit that talent for guys like me (and gals like my wife).  And while going out with the intention of harming someone should never be condoned, Congress has no business sticking its nose into the NFL's. 

Trayvon Martin and the Criminal Justice System

What better to inspire my first blog post than the sad case of Trayvon Martin.  Anyone not familiar with the case can see a helpful timeline here:

This case has led to an explosion of media coverage and punditry focusing on race and Florida's concealed carry and self-defense laws.  Some have called for a change in Florida law.  According to the Huffington Post, for example:

Critics of the 2005 self-defense law said its broad wording led to a perception among Florida residents and law enforcement that the use of deadly force is justified in almost any circumstance in which a person perceives themselves to be in danger. The self-defense doctrine has also been invoked as a defense by hundreds of people involved in fights and shootings, complicating formerly straightforward criminal cases, legal experts said.

Sounds sinister, doesn't it?  Like a recipe for "High Noon" style shootouts on the public streets.  The problem for the critics - read, liberals - is that Florida's law is not particularly unique.  California law, for example, is remarkably similar.  A person in California "need not retreat" from an attacker, "may stand his ground to defend himself" and may even "pursue his assailant" until any danger has passed.  And yet, there have been no outbreaks of vigilante race justice in the Golden State due to the passage of this law.

The fact of the matter is that Trayvon's case should be sorted out by a jury.  Fortunately, both Florida and the Federal government appear to be empaneling grand juries to look into the incident. Given the relative ease for prosecutors wanting to secure an indictment, George Zimmerman will likely be facing charges.  Then a jury of his peers will have the opportunity to sort out whether Zimmerman reasonably believed himself to be in imminent danger of death or was merely a vigilante responsible for gunning down an innocent boy.

Any discussion of this case must necessarily touch on the subject of race.  The usual suspects are out attempting to stir racial tensions up further.  There have been allegations that audio tapes capture Zimmerman muttering racial slurs.  The question is: so what?  Even if Zimmerman was motivated by race - as opposed to a desire to be a tough guy neighborhood cop - what does that have to do with anything?  Trayvon's death is a tragedy whether the motive was racial or not.  There are no "lessons" to be learned here.  No "larger issues" that must be dealt with.  There will always be folks a little too willing to do violence.  And no amount of "dialogue" will change that.