So the trial is over and Chauvin is in isolation for his own protection. The judge has promised a quick sentencing. I will not comment on how I feel about the verdict, the jury has spoken. I do question how much of that speech is based in evidence and how much in societal pressure. A lot was riding on the "proper" verdict being delivered. According to our president the correct verdict was achieved, and in fact, that verdict should be repeated a great number of times to ensure justice has been served. The court of public opinion appears to be the most important court in the land these days. The popular decision must be reached or there will be consequences. In my opinion this is just the first step on a very slippery slope in American justice. Will trials ever be fair, unbiased, and weighed solely on the merits of the case again? It is certainly going to be quite a difficult bar to reach given the propensity for the media, especially social media, to reach a verdict before any evidence has been heard at at all. This trial we heard, "believe your eyes" that is what the prosecution repeated over and over again. Let us not forget that is the stock and trade of a magician, getting you to believe your eyes. Misdirection is also a very useful tool. That was the reason the prosecution didn't want to talk about Floyds' past, but presented character witnesses praising what a great man he was. The truth is, it doesn't matter whether he was a bad or good character. That had no bearing on what was being tried. What was being questioned was the method used to restrain a combative suspect. That is what was on trial.
And now we heard a collective sigh of relief. sorta. I am of the opinion there are those that are merely catching their breath. This whole thing isn't over, not by a long shot. There will be the sentencing, anything less than the maximum is not going to be acceptable. If you have any doubts about that I fear you are being quite naïve. My advice would be take off those rose colored glasses and get a clear view. A perceived advantage has been gained and it will not be wasted. The whole narrative of systemic racism in policing has been bolstered, just as planned. The media will keep fanning the flames in an attempt to deflect any criticism from themselves. Sometimes called the "white" apology I see this all as lacking in sincerity and good faith. No, this whole thing has turned into survival mode from corporations all the way down to neighborhoods. Either agree with the crowd or be shouted down, burned out, looted or intimidated in some fashion. It is the only path to justice!
Now it is true that statistically speaking more blacks are killed by the police than whites. Even fewer Hispanics and native Americans are killed as well. That is just simple facts. On the street in everyday life we all operate on perception. It doesn't make much difference what training you may or may not have had, you will respond to your perception of the situation. The training you do have is designed to condition you to respond appropriately. That's the reasoning behind training. Still like a soldier in the field it is sometimes difficult to remember the training film when the bullets are flying over your head! And that is where the human factor comes into the picture.
Why is it that blacks, and that now includes anyone that self identifies as black, have a disproportionate amount of interaction with the police? That is a stat often overlooked or simply explained as, systemic racism. That was first brought to light as "profiling." Watching and looking for those most likely to be involved in a criminal activity is called profiling, until it isn't. Then it is called "predictive policing" when the Chief of Police or the Police Commissioner is a person of color. That's how that works.
The question to be answered here is why are blacks disproportionately involved with the police? I'd say it was perception. Many of the young black people in the country today go to great lengths to project a certain image. You can call it fashion or fad or something else but it does create an image. The white kids are doing the same thing, just attempting to promote a different image. I've said it before and stand by it, identical twins one dressed in a three piece suit and the other in "gangland" style are being watched. A crime is committed out of sight of the police, those twins are the only ones in the area, which one is most likely to have committed the crime? Depends doesn't it, on what crime was committed. It has nothing to do with race, it has to do with perception. Change the perception and you change the narrative altogether.
The bottom line is you can't trust your eyes. We all know that and yet refuse to admit to it. I could change the style of my dress, go to some place were I am not known, and be perceived in a totally different manner than what I am. As a result of that I will be treated differently. We all know that! That is why we dress the way we do. We dress to create a perception, a reflection of our inner desire to be whatever. The cool kids dress cool, and the nerds dress like, well nerds. That is just in general how humans perceive each other. I'm no cop but if I met someone in a dark alley at two in the morning I'm going to figure this person isn't a good guy, no matter the color of the person. It is at that point I begin to process whatever information I perceive, sometimes correctly, sometimes incorrectly. As an experiment dress yourself as a Priest, go somewhere you are unknown and see how polite people are to you. Then go back there dressed like a bum and see what happens. That is what I'm talking about. Perceptions not racism. Culture and community. Knowing what to expect. This may come as unexpected to you but research shows that the killing of black suspects is not a white policeman problem, but rather a policing problem. It is just that when a black cop shoots a black suspect it's hard to declare racism. It happens more often than you know.
Here's the study I read: Study Shows Black Cops Just as Likely to Kill Black Suspects as White Cops (theroot.com)
Did you watch the case from start to finish? Did you see EVERY video they offered in court? Did you hear the testimonies of both sides? The videos presented from all sides told the story best, but I'll bet you didn't watch. I know the way you think, too. In this case, JUSTICE prevailed.
ReplyDelete