Had Martin been white, this would’ve never happened perhaps.
Perhaps.
That’s the thing the criminal court cannot allow. The jury, as the speaker from our example, could not find irrefutable evidence that Zimmerman killed Martin because he was black, even though it may have appeared that way, especially to America’s black community.
It’s painful case from all around. A man was killed in the street on a dark rainy night and the killer was allowed by the court, in broad daylight, to walk free.
From the stand point of the jury and the court, it is difficult to prove that Zimmerman did what he did because he was racially motivated. It is easy to suspect that he was guilty of racial profiling. On a recorded 911 call, for example, Zimmerman was heard saying:
“This guy looks like he’s up to no good or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining, and he’s just walking around looking about…. Yeah, now he’s coming toward me. He’s got his hands in his waistband. And he’s a black male.”
Yeah, it is easy to see that Zimmerman is racially prejudiced against Martin, but it is difficult to conclude from evidences like those recordings that Zimmerman would carry out his prejudices so far that he would kill Martin just because he was black.
Or wearing a hooded sweater. Or on drugs. Or “got his hands in his waistband.”
In other words, the jury could not be sure. They did not have, as the speaker in our example puts it, smoking gun evidence, evidence that is irrefutable.
【Smoking gun evidence?】相关文章:
★ Book 3 unit 11 The fireman can help 教学随笔
最新
2020-09-15
2020-08-28
2020-08-21
2020-08-19
2020-08-14
2020-08-12