What If It Had Been Me?

George Zimmerman, the creepy-ass cracker

What if George Zimmerman had gotten out of his car and followed me on that fateful evening? OK, I’m a white 50-something guy. I don’t usually wear a hoodie (but I do occasionally). I tend toward khakis and polo shirts. I’m not particularly menacing. So, you think, what possible reason would Zimmerman have for following me? Well, that’s the point, isn’t it: he wouldn’t have. 

He likely followed Trayvon Martin because Martin looked like Zimmerman’s idea of a young man up to no good, or, in his own words to the police dispatcher, one of those “fucking punks.”

But let’s suppose that Zimmerman was feeling unusually vigilant the evening he sees me walking the streets of the Twin Lakes community and decides to follow. Trayvon Martin’s girlfriend testified that Martin told her that he was being followed by a “creepy-ass cracker.” I suppose this was a case of reverse profiling: Martin assuming bad intentions based on Zimmerman’s appearance. Of course, I would not have employed the term “cracker” to describe Zimmerman.  I would have thought, “Who is this creepy asshole following me?”

  

Following someone is not innocent or neutral behavior. It is predatory. It is threatening. In a different context we call it stalking or hunting.

 

Trayvon Martin, the fucking punk

One of the things we learn in Biology 101 is that under a perceived threat an animal will either fight or flee. Humans are animals. Our “fight or flight” instinct is hard-wired into us. Most likely, if some creepy asshole tracked me around a neighborhood, I would challenge him. After all I’m a white guy in my 50s. Generally I believe that I have the right to be where I am and act accordingly.

I wouldn’t have been particularly polite or deferential towards George Zimmerman. “What the fuck are you doing?” are my likely words. Maybe he identifies himself as the “neighborhood watch.” But he’s not wearing a uniform, he doesn’t carry a badge, and, in fact, he has no legal authority whatsoever. I know this and likely tell him to “piss off.” Maybe I threaten to call 911 if he doesn’t cease & desist, but that’s a white-guy-in-his-50s reaction. Trayvon Martin wouldn’t have called the cops.

Perhaps the confrontation ends then & there. Or maybe George Zimmerman doesn’t like his “authority” questioned. He is, after all, the self-appointed fist of the homeowners association and protector of the community. He’s carrying a loaded 9 mm automatic pistol. He is empowered. He’s not a man to be trifled with. 

So Zimmerman strides towards me. He’s five feet away, four feet away, three feet away…I drop down and attempt a two-legged takedown. It’s a basic wrestling move I learned in 7^th grade and practiced a thousand times. Now we’re rolling on the ground. Things are out of control. Zimmerman reaches for his pistol, presses the barrel against my chest, and pulls the trigger. Bang, I’m dead.

It’s worth taking a close look at the timeline for the killing of Trayvon Martin. As Zimmerman exits his truck against the wishes of the police dispatcher, Trayvon Martin is on the phone to his girlfriend, telling her he is being followed by this creepy-ass cracker. The phone call ends about 7:16 PM, presumably the moment Zimmerman comes upon him. At 7:16:11 PM there is a 911 call reporting a fight. A gunshot is heard on the 911 recording at 7:16:55 PM. The fight between this 29 year old adult man and the 17-year old boy lasts less than a minute. Before another minute has passed a police officer arrives on the scene, but Trayvon Martin is already dead.

If you believe that my scenario, the one where I am killed by George Zimmerman, is ridiculous, then the likely “ridiculous” part is Zimmerman following me in the first place. Everything else is typical of the string of unintended consequences, the unraveling of reasoned behavior, which often happens when human beings confront one another and try to decipher each others’ intentions. 

And, if you don’t believe that Zimmerman would have followed me, a white guy in his 50s, then you must also accept that he profiled Trayvon Martin. That is, he presumed Martin’s malicious intent and my benign intent based on our appearance.

It’s crazy.  George Zimmerman initiates the confrontation, and then, after things spin out of control and he shoots Trayvon Martin, he is allowed to claim self-defense. I argue that he voided any claim of self-defense when he got out of his car to pursue Martin. Is this really the behavior Florida's "Stand Your Ground" legislation was designed to protect?

As proverbs says, when you sow the wind, you reap the whirlwind.

Juror B-37 has spoken out publicly. She believes Zimmerman’s “heart was in the right place,” but he exercised poor judgment. I suppose she means his intent was to protect the community, and, thus, good & pure. But there is a reason that police officers go through extensive training before they are issued a badge and gun. It’s to prevent events like this. 

As is often said, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

What juror B-37 doesn’t acknowledge is that Zimmerman’s actions were reckless. Because he chose to carry a gun and act like police, he should be held accountable for his reckless behavior. Whether this is 2^nd degree murder, manslaughter, or some other infraction, I cannot say, but it is an injustice that he walks away from this trial a free person.