My friends that love following trials that have a national
following (maybe international) are loving the George Zimmerman trial for
second degree murder of Travon Martin.
Obviously these trials take on a circus like atmosphere with
prosecutors and defense attorneys prancing like peacocks in front of the media.
Is justice served? Are the trials fair? It is hard to say
especially when the trial basically is conducted in the media with networks
like CNN spending millions on coverage of these trials and shall we say
EXPLOITATION of the insatiable public appetite for controversial trials.
In the Zimmerman case you have “race” as the flashpoint issue
even if race was not a motivating factor or not a factor at all; it does not
matter…the defendant was white and the victim young and black.
Zimmerman was definitely a person with a problem.
Neighborhood Watches are supposed to “watch” and “report” if trouble is spotted
or suspected. Zimmerman reported alright, he called 911 constantly but he also
carried a gun which is asking for trouble…and he got it.
Martin was a teenager walking home from the store who
noticed he was being followed and sensing trouble, attacked instead of waiting
to be attacked; he got shot and died.
So how do you judge this case? Zimmerman should not have
been doing what he was doing but when he did shoot, he shot in self-defense.
You don’t want Zimmerman to get off with no punishment which
usually people do when self-defense is their reason for shooting an assailant
but was Travon attacking Zimmerman as a means of self-defense also?
Wow-we need a King Solomon to decide this one…
What Would King Solomon Do in Zimmerman Case?
ReplyDeleteBy Larry Buford
Testimony today in the George Zimmerman trial revealed that both the mothers of Trayvon Martin and Zimmerman claim that the voice screaming in the background of the taped 911 call is the voice of their son.
The claim brings to mind the biblical story of King Solomon who – in getting to the truth of two women claiming the same child – wisely ordered to have the child cut in two to satisfy both parties. In doing so he was able to draw the emotion from the heart of the true mother. Here’s the NIV account of 1 Kings 3: 16-28:
[Now two prostitutes came to the king and stood before him. 17 One of them said, “Pardon me, my lord. This woman and I live in the same house, and I had a baby while she was there with me. 18 The third day after my child was born, this woman also had a baby. We were alone; there was no one in the house but the two of us.
19 “During the night this woman’s son died because she lay on him. 20 So she got up in the middle of the night and took my son from my side while I your servant was asleep. She put him by her breast and put her dead son by my breast. 21 The next morning, I got up to nurse my son—and he was dead! But when I looked at him closely in the morning light, I saw that it wasn’t the son I had borne.”
22 The other woman said, “No! The living one is my son; the dead one is yours.”
But the first one insisted, “No! The dead one is yours; the living one is mine.” And so they argued before the king.
23 The king said, “This one says, ‘My son is alive and your son is dead,’ while that one says, ‘No! Your son is dead and mine is alive.’”
24 Then the king said, “Bring me a sword.” So they brought a sword for the king. 25 He then gave an order: “Cut the living child in two and give half to one and half to the other.”
26 The woman whose son was alive was deeply moved out of love for her son and said to the king, “Please, my lord, give her the living baby! Don’t kill him!”
But the other said, “Neither I nor you shall have him. Cut him in two!”
27 Then the king gave his ruling: “Give the living baby to the first woman. Do not kill him; she is his mother.”
28 When all Israel heard the verdict the king had given, they held the king in awe, because they saw that he had wisdom from God to administer justice.]
The testimony of a mother carries a lot of weight. I wonder what King Solomon would do in this case?