Trayvon must not die in vain

By Garth A. Rattray

I fully expected the not-guilty verdict in the Zimmerman trial. The entire affair came down to whether Zimmerman felt that his life was in danger, so the jury of six women deemed that he used his firearm in self-defence.

Although Zimmerman was found not guilty, he was certainly not innocent. He profiled Trayvon both socially and racially. He wrongfully assumed that Trayvon was up to no good (there had been burglaries in his neighbourhood). Zimmerman followed Trayvon while driving in his car (he outright disobeyed the explicit instructions from the 911 dispatcher not to do that), then he went one step further and came out of his car to follow Trayvon on foot. In my mind, all that goes way beyond neighbourhood watching. That constitutes stalking.

Furthermore, anyone who carries a loaded firearm has already decided that he or she will take the life of another human being under certain circumstances like feeling endangered. That suggests that Zimmerman must have known that by alighting from his vehicle with a loaded gun and walking around to find the person that he was 'watching' (effectively stalking), a confrontation could have ensued, and, therefore, he was willing to kill if he thought that it was necessary. Nonetheless, he persisted. I doubt very much if Zimmerman would have followed Trayvon on foot if he was not already armed with a deadly weapon.

And so the genesis of the sequence of events that led to Zimmerman killing 17-year-old, unarmed, schoolboy, Trayvon Martin, began with a wrong and very biased assumption followed by disobeying the police dispatcher, overzealous vigilance, and his being emboldened because he was armed and ready to kill.

WE WILL NEVER KNOW

Since we only have the word of the sole survivor, obviously, we will never know who initiated the physical conflict that was terminated by the killing. We will never know if Zimmerman was the aggressor. We will never know if Zimmerman already had his gun drawn when he confronted Trayvon. It seems somewhat strange that Zimmerman evidently never used his fists or his hands to fight back. Sometimes the one who initiates an attack loses the advantage to the person defending himself or herself and ends up on the bottom - as Zimmerman did.

Since Zimmerman was the one who followed and stalked Trayvon, why didn't the stand your ground provision in Florida law apply to Trayvon instead of Zimmerman? In my view, if Trayvon was a 17-year-old Caucasian schoolboy, he would still be alive today. And I also wonder what a jury would have decided if the conditions were exactly the same but if the killer were an African-American man and the victim a 17-year-old Hispanic schoolboy making his way to his father's home only carrying candy and a soda.

DEATH MUST NOT BE IN VAIN

Trayvon's death must not be in vain. This entire matter boils down to human rights and social and racial tolerance. I hope that the State will investigate if Trayvon's civil rights were violated. And the family should seek redress by suing for wrongful death. Trayvon's death should herald an organised and systematic change of attitudes.

Here, too, in Jamaica, we often engage in prejudicial behaviour and social and racial profiling. Since we are predominantly of African origin, the prejudices are manifest between shades of colours, texture of the natural hair, straightness or flatness of the nose, size of the lips, language spoken, area of residence, sexual orientation, educational background, occupation, financial status, social standing. I could go on and on.

We, too, should look at the tragedy of the killing of Trayvon Martin and desist from judging others wrongly. We should stop treating others differently from those that we like and respect.

Garth A. Rattray is a medical doctor with a family practice. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and garthrattray@gmail.com.