Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

DonViejo

(60,536 posts)
Thu Mar 6, 2014, 05:28 PM Mar 2014

Zimmerman, Dunn and what went horribly wrong: Author Lisa Bloom talks to Salon

From implicit racial bias to "stand your ground," Lisa Bloom says dangerous forces are distorting criminal justice

PAUL ROSENBERG


With the recent second anniversary of Trayvon Martin’s death, legal analyst Lisa Bloom released a new book on the rash of shootings of black teens, “Suspicion Nation: The Inside Story of the Trayvon Martin Injustice and Why We Continue to Repeat It.” In addition to thoroughly re-analyzing the case and the trial in Part 1 of the book, answering questions about the case you didn’t even know you had, she devotes three chapters in Part 2 to underlying factors responsible for the repetition: implicit racial bias, America’s armed-to-the-teeth gun culture, and “stand your ground” laws.

“Implicit racial bias” refers to biases we aren’t even aware of having, but which researchers since the 1990s have become increasingly skilled at detecting and analyzing. Bloom’s analysis, however, focuses particularly on how these invisible forces — often directly at odds with our conscious intentions — interact with all-too-solid, virtually immovable institutional structures, such as education and the law. In hindsight, Bloom’s book helps us recognize how the effects of these interactions profoundly shaped, and ultimately deeply distorted, the course of events, from those leading up to Trayvon’s murder, to those that transpired in the trial and its aftermath.

Salon recently spoke with Bloom; a condensed version of our interview follows.

Let’s begin with why you wrote “Suspicion Nation.” Books about major crime trials are a major sub-genre unto themselves, but this didn’t strike me as your typical example of that sub-genre, so, what was your motivation for writing it?

I’ll take that as a compliment, thank you. I’m not really a crime genre writer/person either. I’m a legal analyst and I’ve covered every major crime story and legal story in America about the last 18 years. And it’s typically gone that I’ve covered the story — oftentimes it’s a very emotionally compelling case — and then it’s over and I move on to the next one, moved though I was by the case. In this one, I was not able to move on, and a few months after the trial was over I just was very disturbed by what I saw. But I wasn’t completely sure that the case was such an injustice. I had the sense that it was, but I couldn’t be sure.

more
http://www.salon.com/2014/03/06/zimmerman_dunn_and_what_went_horribly_wrong_legal_analyst_lisa_bloom_talks_to_salon/
10 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
1. I hope this book helps me understand how ZiMurderer got off, and why lots of people support him.
Thu Mar 6, 2014, 05:35 PM
Mar 2014

I know the simple answer -- bigotry, gun nuttery, Florida's lax gun and self-defense laws written by the gun lobby, etc. But, there were 6 people on that jury. Not one had the guts to stand their ground and do the right thing.

 

amandabeech

(9,893 posts)
8. The prosecution's two key witnesses, Dee Dee and the medical examiner,
Thu Mar 6, 2014, 10:46 PM
Mar 2014

did not come across well on the stand, and I think that part of the problem was that the prosecutors did not prepare those witnesses thoroughly.

The prosecutors seemed to think that emotions alone would get them the verdict they wanted. Their closing arguments were virtually devoid of facts, and nowadays juries used to watching crime shows on TV want to see those forensic facts or they won't convict.

At least that's how my lawyer's eyes saw it.

bossy22

(3,547 posts)
9. my laymen's eyes saw it the same way
Thu Mar 6, 2014, 11:31 PM
Mar 2014

The prosecution IMO over-charged with trying to get him on Murder 2. Not to mention the prosecution witnesses were terrible on the stand as you pointed out.

 

amandabeech

(9,893 posts)
10. I watched on CNN which had a former prosecutor and a current Florida
Fri Mar 7, 2014, 12:33 AM
Mar 2014

defense attorney doing the commentary. I thought that MSNBC's commentator was too wedded to her own theories to provide an even-handed analysis of the actual trial.

Anyway, after the prosecution's case, the former prosecutor, who had really been rooting for them, said, "Well, they sorta proved it." The defense attorney pointed out that the standard was "beyond a reasonable doubt."

At the end of the case, the defense attorney said that the prosecutors, against whom he had represented many defendants in Jacksonville, habitually over-charged defendants, particularly minority male defendants, in order to try to get them to plead guilty to ridiculously long sentences. The guy was incensed, and rightfully so.

Anyway, that same defense attorney is now defending Alan Grayson in his divorce case. Alan will be well represented, and if he should take the stand, he will be well prepared.

trublu992

(489 posts)
2. Saw her on TVone. She is really good at explaining
Thu Mar 6, 2014, 06:18 PM
Mar 2014

the complications of how these unjust verdicts get handed down. She also explain the complexities of race and how Black boys/men/ people are perceived by juries and law enforcement.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Editorials & Other Articles»Zimmerman, Dunn and what ...