Did George Zimmerman Get Away with Murder?

William Saletan, Slate, July 26, 2013

Did George Zimmerman get away with murder? That’s what one of his jurors says, according to headlines in the New York TimesWashington PostLos Angeles TimesChicago Tribune, and dozens of other newspapers. Trayvon Martin’s mother and the Martin family’s attorney are trumpeting this “new information” as proof that “George Zimmerman literally got away with murder.”

The reports are based on an ABC News interview with Juror B29, the sole nonwhite juror. She has identified herself only by her first name, Maddy. She’s been framed as the woman who was bullied out of voting to convict Zimmerman. But that’s not true. She stands by the verdict. She yielded to the evidence and the law, not to bullying. She thinks Zimmerman was morally culpable but not legally guilty. And she wants us to distinguish between this trial and larger questions of race and justice.

ABC News hasn’t posted a full unedited video or transcript of the interview. The video that has been broadcast—on World News TonightNightline, and Good Morning America—has been cut and spliced in different ways, often so artfully that the transitions appear continuous. So beware what you’re seeing. But the video that’s available already shows, on closer inspection, that Maddy has been manipulated and misrepresented. Here are the key points.

1. The phrase “got away with murder” was put in her mouth. Nightline shows ABC interviewer Robin Roberts asking Maddy: “Some people have said, ‘George Zimmerman got away with murder. How do you respond to those people who say that?’ ” Maddy appears to reply promptly and confidently: “George Zimmerman got away with murder. But you can’t get away from God.” But that’s not quite how the exchange happened. In the unedited video, Roberts’ question is longer, with words that have been trimmed from the Nightline version, and Maddy pauses twice, for several seconds, as she struggles to answer it. “… George Zimmerman … That’s—George Zimmerman got away with murder. But you can’t get away from God.”

You have to watch her, not just read her words, to pick up her meaning. As she struggles to answer, she looks as though she’s trying to reconcile the sentiment that’s been quoted to her—that Zimmerman “got away with murder”—with her own perspective. So she repeats the quote and adds words of her own, to convey what she thinks: that there’s a justice higher than the law, which Zimmerman will have to face. She thinks he’s morally culpable, not legally guilty.

2. She stands by the verdict. ABC’s online story about the interview ends with Maddy asking, “Did I go the right way? Did I go the wrong way?” But that’s not the whole quote. In the unedited video, she continues: “I know I went the right way, because by the law and the way it was followed is the way I went. But if I would have used my heart, I probably would have [gone for] a hung jury.” In another clip, she draws the same distinction: “I stand by the decision because of the law. If I stand by the decision because of my heart, he would have been guilty.” At one point, she says that “the evidence shows he’s guilty.” Roberts presses her: “He’s guilty of?” Maddy answers: “Killing Trayvon Martin. But as the law was read to me, if you have no proof that he killed him intentionally, you can’t say he’s guilty.” That’s the distinction she’s trying to draw here: Killing is one thing. Murder or manslaughter is another.

3. She thinks the case should never have gone to trial. According to ABC News, when Roberts asked “whether the case should have gone to trial,” Maddy answered, “I don’t think so. … I felt like this was a publicity stunt.”
{snip}

7. To the extent she feels racial or ethnic pressure, it’s against Zimmerman. In the Nightline video, Roberts notes that Maddy could have hung the jury. Roberts asks: “Do you have regrets that you didn’t?” Maddy pauses, tilts her head, and thinks about it. “Kind of. I mean I’m the only minority. And I feel like I let a lot of people down.” In the GMA version, Maddy’s reference to being the only minority has been seamlessly edited out. But this theme returns in other clips. “I couldn’t do anything about it. And I feel like I let a lot of people down,” she says. And again: “I feel like I let ’em down. We just couldn’t prove anything.” She feels the anger and the cosmic injustice. But they don’t change her legal judgment.

{snip}

Topics: ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • MekongDelta69

    Even before I read “Juror B29’s” interview, I knew she was going to be the only black juror.

    Anytime the race of the ‘perp’ (or ‘perp’ sympathizer), is NOT mentioned, you KNOW who it’s going to be.

    It’s just too easy…

    • IanJMacDonald

      She’s not black. She was identified as “Hispanic” (which of course is not really a racial categorization, sow e can assume that she is mestizo).

      • johnbull88

        She looks like she is not rich.

  • IstvanIN

    The alien elite have made the media nothing but propaganda machines. Rather like all the bad press and distorted views the Bolsheviks spread about the Romanovs and the Czarist government while covering up the Holodomor. The positive side is that they are getting caught more often with their pants down.

    • Mike Lane

      They’re walling themselves in (if you know what I mean).

    • Aditya Vivek Barot

      What holodomor, tovarich? The Soviet Union is a glorious workers’ paradise where our men and women and laughing and playing in the streets, on the beach, everywhere. There is no inequality, no strife, no nothing. This is homo sovieticus!

  • David Ashton

    I don’t think this completely exonerates her, but it certainly doesn’t exonerate the BSM. You could say GZ was over-zealous and you could say it was a pity TM had to be killed, but the evidence and the law were quite conclusive. The real evils are: the lying and conflict-inciting BSM, the Obama-Holder-Sharpton-Sybrina claque, the emergent Socialist Worker/CPUSA street gangs, not to mention the ongoing “black” crime rate.

    • johnbull88

      I thought they were all National Socialist. Don’t forget communism is over.

      • David Ashton

        I am not quite sure what you are getting at. Marxist theories in various forms are sadly still influential in western academia. The Socialist Worker/
        International Socialism people are Trotskyites and violently “anti-Nazi”. They have been involved in the Trayvon protests, and Gary Younge’s falsification in their publications was reprinted by The Guardian, one of our two leftist dailies (the other, sometimes more leftist, is The Independent), without publishing any alternative view. Look at the IS and CP websites.

  • This is the same network that retouched the photos of the back of GZ’s head in order to conceal the pressure cuts TM inflicted there by repeatedly bashing his head against the ground. An FCC that was worth a tenth of its budget would revoke ABC’s broadcast license.

    • MikeofAges

      ABC (or any other network) doesn’t need a broadcast license to function. It is a media corporation which supplies content to individual licensed radio and television stations which individually choose to affiliate. I would say, under the antitrust doctrine of vertical integration, the network could not own the media outlets. Maybe a few, but not all of them. Vertical integration was what broke up the movie monopoly and forced the movie industry to separate production, distribution and exhibition. It should have been applied to the computer software industry from the beginning. The underlying operating system, user interface and applications should have been forced to separate. As it is, we live under the Microsoft monopoly, the key to which is that it is almost impossible to create a competing operating system which can run Windows programs. This is due to the intermingling of the three elements within the proprietary operating system so that applications can not be designed which will run without windows.

      • If you don’t like Microsoft, use Linux or Apple. Of course you won’t get to run everything you want. There are lots of software features I hate, like MacAfee (wholly owned by Intel), which used to interrupt other applications to demand money for “updates”. Crashing a game we’re running doesn’t make me want to pull out my credit card and call them; it makes me want to administer them a prolonged claw-hammer aversion-training seminar. We now use Norten on the household LAN, because it is free with our internet service.

        Refusing to use Windows is like a greaserito who won’t speak English. Said greaserito can’t do anything useful, so it doesn’t matter what languages it can or can not speak.

        • MikeofAges

          Never actually paid for windows, except for one system I bought new around 1999. Just another feature of the corrupt, anarcho-tyrannical world we live in. Bill Gates and his partners modeled their business practices after Apple, which did integrate together hardware, operating system and application. Apple overtly hoped to create a monopoly, but failed. Their business is legal because their market share is small. Microsoft avoided scrutiny because they stayed out of the hardware business. Also, in the early days, there were many versions of DOS in which Microsoft application would run.

          Only when Windows 95 came out did Microsoft become a vertical integration monopoly. Either no one in government understood the issue, or the fix was in. Probably the latter.

          One of the worst things Microsoft did was to sabotage the original Java. The idea behind Java was to create a program which would run in any operating system. Application then would have been created which would have run within Java, so that you would have complete portability between Windows, Apple, UNIX, DOS and perhaps other. When Microsoft got their hands on Java, they created tweaks which they claimed would “make it run better” within Windows, but which, because they were proprietary, also destroyed the portability of applications and files. Speaking of claw hammer therapy, Microsoft should have gotten an immediate dose of it from the Justice Department over that one. The only antitrust suit Microsoft ever faced was over Internet Explorer. By the time that suit was heard, Microsoft’s effort to monopolize the internet already had failed.

          Gates and his buds make up for their sins by being extraordinary tolerant of software piracy by the “down and outers” of the world. I think the balance sheet is still in their favor. A new version of Windows should cost about $19.95.

          Another corrupt Microsoft practice is the deliberate sabotaging of the functionality of old software when new versions come out. There are always problems with the intercompatibility of new version of old programs and old operating systems or vice versa. Or changing file formats require updated software, which then requires a new operating system. Microsoft has toned this down in recent years because business users have complained about problems accessing old files. But I am sure the problems are deliberately engineered into the software to force users to constantly purchase upgrades. Sometimes, new file formats are legitimate. Other times, not. But there is no reason for compatibility problems between old and new versions except that someone decides to make it that way.

          • Nathanwartooth

            Yeah I just built a computer not that long ago and saved about 100 dollars by not paying for Windows.

            They make so much money from selling it to computer manufacturers who sell them at Best Buy, etc. that they could afford to just give it away to people who build their own computers.

            When you only have one choice for an operating system and it costs 100 dollars or more, there is no way I’m going to pay for it.

            I wonder if Microsoft pays Apple to keep putting out newer versions of their operating systems. If Apple just said “eff it” and stopped making it, Windows would become an illegal monopoly. I don’t think Linux is going to cut it in court.

          • MikeofAges

            I’m not sure if what Apple does affects Microsoft’s monopoly status. It has to do with market share. To get back closer to the topic, you might want to consider that the affirmative action-disparate impact system applies antitrust law to race and treats whites as a monopoly entity subject to special punishments and restrictions. Same with religion. Christianity is treated as the monopoly religion subject to restrictions other religions are not subject to. See, everything is cut from the same cloth and goes through the same nexus of the 14th Amendment.

          • Some of our computers here can only run Win-98 Second Edition, Win-98 Two will still run Neverwinter Nights.

  • Robin Roberts is a a true low life. If she wasn’t the color she is, she would be nothing more than a reporter for a small market TV station.

    • Romulus

      She’s a triple victim class!! Black, female, cancer patient.

  • bigone4u

    I feel like an idiot for believing the absolute truth of the original story. I will write on the blackboard 100 times, “The MSM can never be trusted. I will not be fooled again.”

    • Nathanwartooth

      Yeah people said she sounded like a crazy person contradicting herself, and now we know why.

  • Puggg

    Why is ABC hyping GZ-TM to no end?

    I bet you a whole box of doggy biscuits that the books coming out about the matter will be published by Hyperion.

  • Spartacus

    So… They lied about the original interview ? Could it be this particular dark-skin was actually honest from the get-to, and they just put words in her mouth?

  • [Guest]

    Isn’t it time they got over their failure to lynch Zimmerman and come up with another fraud “the evil white man did it” story to get all the usual suspects into a lather about?

    Hmmmmm. How about Oscar Grant?

  • Romulus

    A groid ,is a groid, is a groid!!. You can feel the black undertow in her voice. Had the jury been majority black, he would have hung. It appears implied, in my estimation.

    • johnbull88

      Even better. I personally think only rich people like myself should sit on a jury. Middle Americans and poor Americans are just too stupid.

  • IKantunderstand

    I’ve said it before, allow me to say it again: Our ruling elites HATE US. They HATE regular go to work, go to church, take care of our families, non sexting of our weiners to other women (other than our wives, which we also don’t do) White people who pay our taxes, mow our lawns, recycle, don’t rob, rape, shoplift, drink occasionally, pay our bills on time, only have the number of children we can afford, in other words, the elites HATE regular Americans. You know, the kinds of Americans who populated this country just a few decades ago. Do you think this country is getting better? Do you think diversity is our strength? We have gotten to the point where a jury of your “peers”, is completely meaningless. Welcome to diversity! You will never, ever, again, have a jury of your “peers”. There will be NO SUCH THING. We White people have NO peers. And when HUD has their way, they will make certain, that NO White defendant will ever be judged by a jury of his peers. Whites will be judged by a jury of Rachel Jeantels, or worse. Could someone please explain to me how our criminal defense system is going to assure Whites that they will be judged by a jury of their peers? We are talking immigrants who can’t read English, don’t know our legal system, or as in the case of Muslims, believe in Sharia. This is the future of our legal system? How is being judged by a group of low I.Q. immigrants considered to be our “peers”? Do we need to rethink this? The war against Whites is intensifying, hour by hour. Fellow Crackas, fight back like your life and those of your dependents rely on it.

    • MikeofAges

      The elites hate all who “regular go to work, go to church, take care of [their] families … pay [their] taxes, mow [their] lawns, recycle, don’t
      rob, rape, shoplift, drink occasionally, pay [their] bills on time, only
      have the number of children [they] can afford, in other words, the elites
      HATE regular Americans.”

      They hate blacks (there are some), Hispanics and Asians who do the same, but use them for their propaganda purposes. Still, their primary purpose seems to be to berate, demoralize, undermine and marginalize the white Middle American.

      I’m not sure what their end game is. I’m not sure they even have one in mind. The elites are as drugged up, wasted by alcoholism and dumbed down by mass entertainment as everyone. Their conceit is that mass culture is not created by them, but but due to the demand from “below”. Not possible, though. What media corporation is controlled by anyone other than the elites? They choose and produce the content, and send it out for everyone else to consume.

      • johnbull88

        Let them fight each other. As long as they don’t give us rich people trouble.

        • MikeofAges

          One man, one vote, one time. That idea has has many corollaries. For the rich, maybe one great party, one generation, one time. They’ve always lived like that and can’t tell tell when the wheels are ready to fall of. There is no historical parallel to the demographic mass of the impoverished and economically distressed of today’s world.

          What I think is, the non-European masses ultimately do not care if their pressure puts an end to modern civilization. “Whitey” restored to his traditional existence is not a source of discomfiture to them because then he is not longer so separated from his aboriginal identity. It is the “machine” that is hated.

          • johnbull88

            I am just sick and tired of the non- rich. We just want to maintain our privileges in the world. If you lot want to fight yourselves good luck. Lets hope you destroy yourselves in the process.

          • MikeofAges

            Me too. I have to be one of them, and they really drag me down. No stamina. Rationalize their condition. Lack of clear thinking on issues that affect them. Sell out for a nickel or a dime. Of course, the rich have no integrity whatsoever. They’re very prone to self-serving, narcissistic thinking and people are afraid to stand up to them, thinking something terrible will happen to them. The only problem is, it’s happened already.

            They say, “The rich and the poor are alike. It’s the middle class that’s different”. Always worked for me. I’ve actually been poor and I would agree totally. But I leave the rich I’ve had contact with very troubled. They think I am middle class because I am white and can speak articulately, but the crap they pull just doesn’t work on me. Not mentally. The middle class people I have worked with just think I am troublesome and contrary. The poor — any color — realize pretty quickly that I still have my “homie” card in my back pocket.

            I doubt you are rich. But maybe you are. Who knows? You ought to telegraph a little better whether you are being satirical, sarcastic or literal. I could see a rich person who was tired of his own kind mocking them like that.

          • johnbull88

            Lets hope your middle class taxes support the poor and not us rich people. We can afford clever accountants and you cannot.

          • MikeofAges

            You’re full of beans, dude. There are no tax breaks for the middle class, other than the obvious ones like the mortgage interest and charitable contributions deductions. All of the clever accountants in the world could not save wage and salary income from taxation. If you actually are rich and you can afford anything, it’s buying lawmakers to make clever laws to help you avoid taxation. The accountants just keep track of everything for you so you can continue to social butterfly around without a care in the world.

          • johnbull88

            We the rich are the masters of America. The middle class and poor need to know their place. You are all parasites. We are much superior than you don’t forget.

    • Romulus

      The push towards a one world court is the lefts answer.
      The question im asking myself ( but probably already know the the truth about)
      Is “WHO’S GOING TO RUN IT???????!!!!”

      • johnbull88

        Its we the rich that is going to run this court and not you middle classes and the poor.

  • Steven Bannister

    Honestly, watching the unedited video it DOES seems like she thinks Zimmerman got away with murder and she wished there was a way to convict him. Fortunately, it appears the smarter white people on the jury held her to the actual letter of the law.

  • Anne M.

    So…she still regrets that she had to make a decision based on fact instead of “because of [her] heart”? If that sort of attitude weren’t so widespread (and encouraged), that publicity stunt wouldn’t have worked so well, now would it? I really find it ridiculous how much emotionalism controls public opinion, but I guess that’s why I’m not the kind of person who empathizes with degenerates.

  • IanJMacDonald

    WOW! You are right, she clearly is a Negro. Thanks for clearing that up for me. The media kept referring to her as “Hispanic” and so I took that to mean “mestizo” since “Hispanic” is not a racial category but a cultural-linguistic category. (Some Hispanics, e.g., B-29, are Negro while other “Hispanics” are obviously white.)

    • Nathanwartooth

      That’s because the MSM wanted to get Blacks more agitated and so they lied about there being a Black on the jury.

      If it had been known that there was a Black on the jury, not as many people would have protested. Since a lot of people thought it was unfair that there were no Blacks on the jury.

      • IanJMacDonald

        “Honoring a jury summons” is on the list of Stuff That Black People Don’t Like (along with ghosts, dogs, and registered mail). Blacks tend to avoid jury service, and then black “civil rights leaders” whine when a jury ends up with no blacks or not “enough” blacks.

  • Hans Schneider

    In Toronto a knife wielding arab was shot by police in a street car. Needless to say, hundreds of leftists started demonstrating yesterday.

    • johnbull88

      You sure they were not National Socialist. Never met a left wing Arab in my life. What did they look like ?

  • johnbull88

    The next trial should take place in Zimbabawe lol

  • johnbull88

    Maybe they might go back to Germany in the future and get their revenge.

  • johnbull88

    Thank God she is not rich as well.

  • johnbull88

    When are you middle americans going to beat the crap out of the poor, so we rich can have it all.

  • MikeofAges

    No known spouse(s). No reported children. No past amours reported. Military brat (officer), daughter of a former Tuskegee airman. Shares name with another famous person (good for extra curiosity points and a little free helium in her balloon). Raised in Mississippi, graduated from integrated state college in Louisiana. No graduate degree. I’d say she’s about an eight-fer with all of that.

    Probably married to her career. Likely does not have much originality.

  • johnbull88

    Just keep fighting amongs yourselves. How about a fight with a poor man tonite and lets see how brave you are. We the rich would not help you.

  • Romulus

    Your hubris may be your undoing. Surely you don’t think that wealth makes people untouchable, do you? That would be naive in the extreme. History is on the side of revolutionaries and liberators! Remember the old saying,… Don’t pee in the wind, you might get wet!