Two verdicts, both acquittals, both widely seen as unjust, and two radically different responses

[markpkessinger]

Last edited Thu Jul 18, 2013, 06:06 PM - Edit history (1)

In the wake of the Zimmerman verdict, I'm seeing lots of people around the web, from varying political persuasions, arguing that it is wrong to criticize the jury in the Zimmerman case, and waxing all pious about the sacrifice jurors are often required to make, etc.

But I have to wonder: where was all that coddling, all that understanding of the juror's plight, all of that reticence to criticize, when a major black celebrity was acquitted at trial of the murder of his white wife and her white Jewish boyfriend? Like the Zimmerman verdict, many felt O.J. Simpson was permitted to get away with murder. Following the Simpson verdict, i seem to recall endless newspaper articles, television news specials, and political pundits thundering away about "jury nullification," whereby a mostly African American jury that acquits a black defendant is accused of deliberately refusing to convict. Of course, the nullification theory was never anything more than somebody's untested hypothesis. But it sure got a lot of play.

Yet, in the Zimmerman case, we seem to have sort of the opposite. A (not all white, exactly, but certainly non-African American) jury acquits a fellow non-African American in the killing of a young, unarmed black male, and suddenly the jury is exalted and placed beyond the realm of criticism, and nobody is supposed to make any assumptions about them whatsoever.

Coincidence? Or yet another example of the insidious racial double standard that afflicts our justice system?

[brush]

1. Good points.

I had thought of that but you're on the money.

The zimmerman jury chose to overlook the several huge lies that zimmerman was caught in.

[geek tragedy]

2. both verdicts were heavily laden with racist baggage nt

[etherealtruth]

5. No doubt about it

Jurors voted (as all jurors do) with their personal biases and prejudices .... but, these two juries didn't even try to separate themselves from their failings

[sinkingfeeling]

3. Very true.

[markpkessinger]

4. .

.

[NoGOPZone]

6. I both noticed and expected the double standard

One thing though, the OJ jury wasn't all black, if that's what was meant by a black jury.

[markpkessinger]

7. Point noted and text corrected accordingly

Thanks!

[naaman fletcher]

8. What?

and suddenly the jury is exalted and placed beyond the realm of criticism

I've noticed about 98% of Duers posting nasty things about the jury.

[markpkessinger]

9. This wasn't directed at folks on DU . . .

. . .I was talking about pundits and commenters across the web, some conservative, some liberal (including former President Jimmy Carter). If I was directing it towards fellow DUers, I would have said so.

[naaman fletcher]

10. ah ok. nt.

[malaise]

11. Yep

I raised this in a post some days ago

[dsc]

12. One point to consider is that the Zimmerman jury deliberated 11 hours

while the OJ jury deliberated less than 4. Now, I frankly felt both juries reached the verdicts the evidence and law compelled, but I can see criticizing a jury that only took 4 hours to reach a verdict in a trial that lasted months.