Clan Mondo is going to Lost-in-the-Woods County for a few days to visit Mrs. M’s family, but the Spawn remains asleep, doubtless dreaming of mastications foregone, and we haven’t even packed yet. In the meantime, I’m also gearing up for the semi-official release of the Berries album, which will make a semi-official debut at the show we have scheduled in a week here in downtown Mondoville. I’ll post info on how you out-of-towners can snag a copy in the days ahead.
Meanwhile, of course, much of the nation is focused on the trial of George Zimmerman for the death of Trayvon Martin. I’m not an attorney, nor did I stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night. However, from what I understand of the law and from what I’ve seen of the trial (a significant amount, because Mrs. M has followed it closely — I think in part out of a sense of preparation for what’s coming our way, as jury selection is scheduled to begin in one month), I would be surprised at a murder conviction. I wouldn’t be surprised at a manslaughter verdict, and I wouldn’t be surprised at an acquittal, as I think there’s a real burden of proof issue here (which was demonstrated in the original police investigation).
Trayvon Martin was not Emmett Till. Neither is George Zimmerman the hero of some sort of Death Wish fantasy. I think David McElroy sums things up nicely:
I think both of these guys were responsible for the confrontation. Either one of them had the power to walk away before it escalated, but neither did. They’re both responsible in the moral sense.
Martin wasn’t the baby-faced innocent victim that some people want to see. Zimmerman isn’t the racist murderer that some want to see. They’re just two people who made some bad decisions that added up to someone getting killed.
McElroy’s article is brief, but I think sensible. Give it a read, and I’ll see you when I get to Lost-in-the-Woods County.