A trial that was all about race

Signs in front of Seminole County Court, the site of

George Zimmermans second-degree murder trial in
Sanford, Florida, on July 13. Reuters/Joe Skippe
It might have been expected that President
Barack Obamas election might in itself ease
this perennial curse, but it is plainly going to
take many more years and perhaps many more
similar deaths before the truth that all men are
created equal is accepted by all Americans to be
self-evident. Polls show that rather than make
our country more tolerant, the presidents skin
colour has led to an increase in racism,
writes Nicholas Wapshott
WILL George Zimmermans trial for the killing of
Trayvon Martin and the all-too predictable acquittal
change
anything?
Will it prevent racial profiling in the future? No. Will it
keep guns out of the hands of reckless and feckless
flakes? No. Will it ensure that from now on gun

licences are administered more closely? No. Above

all, will it prevent such needless killings from
happening
again?
Certainly
not.
It would have been encouraging to imagine that the
loss of Martins young life would change something,
but it wont. That is the real calamity of this familiar
American
tragedy.
Both the prosecution and defence have insisted that
the case had nothing to do with race but that is a
legal fiction that is hard to credit. Race is such a
toxic issue that both sides risked everything if they
introduced the topic and let themselves open to the
accusation of playing the race card. Race is,
however, the key to understanding why this killing
has received such widespread attention not only
here
but
across
the
world.
The United States itself has been on trial. It is a
shame the nation has been represented by such a
wretched
example.
The shooting to death of Martin may likely have
gone without notice outside of Sanford, Florida, had
race not been the key ingredient. As it was, a
powerful national campaign of indignation
pressured the Sanford police and Florida legal
authorities to eventually take a second look and
treat the killing as murder rather than another
routine summary execution allowed under the
states
pernicious
stand-your-ground
law.

Until the authorities reconsidered, Zimmerman had

been questioned by police and allowed to return
home without charge. On being obliged to weigh the
full circumstances of the case, police changed their
tune, charged Zimmerman, and deemed him so
likely a flight risk he was placed under $1 million
bail. Those interested in justice for all may well ask
how many other similar tragedies go unnoticed and
how many killers are released without due
investigation.
Once again, race in America informs a needless
personal and national catastrophe that draws
attention to the quotidian inequities that undermine
true
democracy.
It might have been expected that President Barack
Obamas election might in itself ease this perennial
curse, but it is plainly going to take many more
years and perhaps many more similar deaths
before the truth that all men are created equal is
accepted by all Americans to be self-evident. Polls
show that rather than make our country more
tolerant, the presidents skin colour has led to an
increase
in
racism.
There is little grounds for optimism, either, that the
passage of time will gradually make America more
tolerant. The younger people are, the more it is
imagined they will have progressive attitudes on
race and other social issues. But Zimmerman was

himself of mixed race, with a father of German

descent and his mother a Peruvian. He was raised
as a Roman Catholic and is aged just 29. To be
young and Christian today is plainly no protection
against
hatred
contaminating
the
mind.
Young Martins death should cause us to stop and
consider the broader principles of policing and
justice. The reckless pursuit of an unarmed black
boy in a hoodie by a vigilante inspired by suspicions
based on race shows how dangerously unjust it is
to use racial profiling as a means to detain
suspected
criminals.
At a federal level, racial profiling is forbidden, even
by the TSA, whose principal purpose is to protect us
from terrorism and who might claim with justification
that perpetrators of domestic terrorist acts have
been, almost without exception, young adult Muslim
men. Yet in cities like New York, which likes to boast
it is a melting pot that welcomes everyone whatever
they look like, racial profiling is a daily occurrence
defended with vigor by the mayor and the chief of
police.
Why do such otherwise wise leaders imagine that
when it is the police who jump to conclusions based
on race it is any different to the travesty of justice
that took place in Sanford, Florida? Because it
works, they suggest. Because we find criminals
that way. Because it saves lives. Are they really

saying that African-Americans are more likely to

commit crimes than others? If so, let them explain
exactly why they believe that is the case. And let
them provide the facts that lead them to such a
sorry
conclusion.
As we have seen from the furore surrounding the
profiling of political groups by the Internal Revenue
Service, shortcuts based on generalisations about
sections of the population prompt widespread fear
and suspicion of the authorities and do an injustice
to those innocently going about their business. If the
IRS used the excuses Because it works, and
Because we find criminals that way, they would be
rightly
ridiculed.
The Martin killing also raises profound questions
about gun laws. Zimmerman applied to become a
police officer, a childhood ambition, but he was
turned down ostensibly on the grounds his credit
record was inadequate. Perhaps they perceived a
driven character intent on less than an even-handed
application
of
the
law.
Rejected and dejected, Zimmerman persisted in his
fantasy of becoming a heroic crime-buster and
enrolled as an eager student of criminal justice at
Seminole State College, cramming on the
intricacies of Floridas now notorious stand-yourground law, a fact he flatly denied to police. He then
volunteered to patrol his neighbourhood for likely

thieves and muggers. It is a pity he chose not to

explain
his
motivations
in
open
court.
To further his failed ambition to be a superhero, he
obtained a concealed weapons license that allowed
him to carry the pistol loaded with hollowed-point
bullets designed to cause maximum injury with
which he shot Martin at point-blank range through
the
heart.
Perhaps, when someone whose personal history
reveals a vigilante mentality and an obsession with
the violent pursuit of criminals is freely granted such
a licence, supporters of the National Rifle
Association have a point: background checks have
little effect on gun violence when they are so easy
to obtain. The alternative would be for background
checks to be thorough and effective, which is easier
said
than
achieved.
On the night he shot Martin dead, Zimmerman
ignored the terms of his concealed gun license,
which restricts the handling of a gun within a short
radius of a home or car, and repeatedly ignored the
instructions of the police dispatcher to stop following
the young man he suspected of being up to no
good. Again, conditions of a concealed gun license,
however restrictive, mean little if they can be so
flagrantly
flouted
without
penalty.
It is deeply depressing to conclude that this dark
night in the wicked story of race in America will

amount to nothing. Yet there may be a lasting

tribute to Martin in that his death may make such
thoughtless killings less likely in the future.
Fantasists with hate in their hearts and guns hidden
in their belts may think twice before they set off to
make a name for themselves. Zimmermans name
will be remembered, all right, but not in the way he
had
hoped.
And the name Trayvon Martin will resonate through
the years as another wasted young life on the long
road
to
liberty
and
justice
for
all.
Reuters, July 14. Nicholas Wapshott is the
former New York bureau chief of The Times of
London. Previously, he was editor of the
Saturday Times of London, and founding editor
of The Times Magazine.