Truth Matters

I wrote this and sent it to the Miami Herald about the Martin – Zimmerman debacle. This was quite a bit after the incident. I had time to think through the facts.


To Miami Herald

I want to offer a neutral look at the Martin – Zimmerman issue. I doubt that either man left home expecting to maim anyone that day. Zimmerman was out there doing “his job”. Zimmerman found Martin “where he should not have been”. At some point Zimmerman contacted police and confronted Martin. Both men, at one point or another, had the opportunity to walk away. Neither walked away. If Zimmerman tried to physically restrain Martin, Martin had three options: (1) submit and wait for police, (2) try to escape and run. (3) Martin apparently chose to stay and fight. When Martin had Zimmerman down and was in control he could have broke off and ran, but did not. Rage had apparently taken over and Martin continued the fight. At this point Zimmerman felt his life and well being were seriously threatened, pulled his gun and shot. If Zimmerman had pulled his gun before being taken down the fight would have been for control of the gun. That apparently did not happen. It is a sad thing that Mr. Martin lost his life over such a inconsequential affair, but, the fact is that Mr. Martin had control of the situation as far as being co-operative or confrontational. He chose confrontational. He could have turned his back and ran away – and lived !

Mark Rawlins

There are similarities in the Michael Brown case and the Travon Martin case. I know Zimmerman was just a security guard – that position gives him some authority, but, not as much as a public servant. Police officer Darren Wilson does have authority and responsibility to uphold the law. Citizens have a responsibility to obey the law and our Public Servants.

First and foremost: Michael Brown and Travon Martin could have and should have obeyed the officers. That is known as being a “law abiding citizen”!

Second : They both chose to be confrontational – chose violence over peace.

Third : White Officer and Black Civilian. Might the result have been the same if the Officer been Black? All else being the same, I think the result would probably have been the same. Unless, they might have been less confrontational with a Black Officer, or the Black Officer may have been less confrontational, even to the point of letting the criminal walk away.

In the heat of battle people often act differently than they normally act. Putting SIX bullets in someone seems excessive to me. But, I wasn’t there. I heard a report that Mr. Brown hit the Officer hard enough to break the eye socket. Then started to walk away. At this point the Officer told Mr. Brown to stop and get on the ground. Mr. Brown turned around and moved threateningly toward the officer and continued forward. At this point the officer pulled his weapon and fired, probably per his training…At this point all bets are off. Police are trained to handle these situations but when your life is on the line – and if panic sets in – who’s to say what Normal Is.!

Could someone claim temporary insanity during an “In the heat of battle” episode? What else would explain six bullets? How else to explain the last shot being delivered while Mr. Brown was on the ground? Oops – that didn’t happen – “mistaken” report! Panic ! – Hate ! – Fear !?

Big Question ! Are we at the point that black men are provoking law enforcement officers into violence with the objective of getting rich from a large lawsuit and settlement?

What do we expect from our enforcers of the law? Do we just let criminals turn and walk away when they don’t want to be arrested? What to do when a suspect strikes or threatens an officer? Should the officer just “turn the other cheek”? This seems to be the opinion of the protesters, CNN News, and most of the perpetrators of the “news” these days.

Speaking of CNN – When they reported on the Eric Garner case they kept repeating that Mr. Garner said 13 times “ I can’t breathe , I can’t breathe!” . If He is talking , He is breathing!!!! Further, CNN never, that I heard or heard about, offered anything close to balance as far as covering the Police’s side of the facts of this case, or any of the other cases.

Why is the media fomenting race riots instead of reporting the truth in the Michael Brown tragedy ? Every report I have seen or heard sensationalizes the lies and misrepresentations of the supposed witnesses and ignores the testimony of witnesses who give a thoughtful balanced and truthful report, black or white. There were several witnesses who reported that Michael Brown was at fault and the officer was within his rights to defend himself. Apparently CNN could not find there witnesses.

Mark Rawlins