After Zimmerman, What Next? Judge Billy Murphy Speaks Out About The Trayvon Martin Case
Baltimore, MD (PRWEB) July 31, 2013 -- A member of the Board of Governors of the Maryland Trial Lawyers Association and the Board of Directors of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and the recipient of the inaugural Charles Hamilton Houston Award for Lifetime Achievement in Litigation, the Firm’s founder and senior partner, Judge William H. “Billy” Murphy, Jr., graduated from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology with a B.S. in electrical engineering in 1965 and a J.D. from the University of Maryland School of Law in 1969 where he was a member of the Law Review. When the Governor of Maryland sought an attorney to serve on the Judicial Appointments Committee, Governor Ehrlich called the Hon William H. "Billy" Murphy “an attorney who has won more cases in front of more judges in Maryland” a man respected and known across the state for his legal acuity and expertise inside and out of the courtroom. These are his thoughts on what should happen following the controversial ruling in the Trayvon Martin case.
When a Florida jury found George Zimmerman not guilty of shooting an unarmed Trayvon Martin, the verdict was met by outrage from millions of fair-minded people of all races, including most of the black community.
It is appropriate for people to be angry at this verdict. I am angry. But our collective anger will mean nothing if it is not paired with well thought-out action designed to change. Here are the actions where I recommend we channel our focus:
1. Encourage U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder to prosecute Mr. Zimmerman under the federal civil rights laws—which make the unjustified intentional shooting of a fellow human being a federal crime—by signing petitions like the one at the Center for Media and Democracy’s website.
2. Spread the word, as forcefully as possible, that "Stand Your Ground" laws are a terrible, terrible idea—not just for people of color, but for all Americans.
Two recent articles highlight the dramatic impact of these laws, and deserve your attention. Both the Tampa Bay Times’ “Florida 'Stand Your Ground' Law Yields Some Shocking Outcomes Depending On How Law Is Applied” and NPR’s “'Stand Your Ground' Linked To Increase In Homicides” provide statistical evidence that demonstrate how these statutes have been harmful, not helpful, to our community. In the 25 states where Stand Your Ground laws have been enacted, homicide rates have actually increased by seven to nine percent over states without such laws.
Simply put, these laws remove an individual’s duty to retreat from a conflict in public even when he can safely do so. Here's what the judge told the Trayvon Martin jury the Florida law meant for their case:
"If George Zimmerman was not engaged in an unlawful activity and was attacked in any place where he had a right to be, he had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand his ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony." On July 12, 2012, Judge Debra S. Nelson read the charge to the jury after the defense and prosecution completed their formal arguments. The documents are listed here.
Before this radical change in Florida law was made, almost every state in the union had required—since the Declaration of Independence in 1776—that rather than use deadly force in the first instance, a person attacked in public is required to make all reasonable efforts to retreat.
Despite my enormous respect for the jury system, I know there are times jurors get it wrong for a variety of reasons. In this case, the "Stand Your Ground" instruction required by this insidious law led, I believe, directly to the wrong outcome.
3. Seek the repeal of these laws everywhere. In Florida and the 24 other states with "Stand Your Ground" laws, there should be mass demonstrations, mass emails, texts, letters and face-to-face conversations with legislators. We should run candidates against those legislators who introduced or sponsored "Stand Your Ground" laws in those states.
4. Hold two Florida politicians in particular—Senator Marco Rubio and former Governor Jeb Bush (both of whom are considering presidential runs in 2016)—accountable for their past involvement with “Stand Your Ground” and demand they act to repeal it.
5. The African American and Hispanic/Latino communities must continue to work closely together. African Americans should not assume the lone Latina juror, George Zimmerman or U.S. Senator Marco Rubio speaks for that community any more than Latinos (or anyone else) should assume either Justice Clarence Thomas or Dr. Ben Carson speak for blacks.
The Hispanic/Latino community knows "Stand Your Ground" is bad for everyone; we all should be allies in the fight to end it.
6. Aggressively protect the right to vote for all Americans. Getting rid of “Stand your Ground” will require harnessing the electoral power of a broad coalition of Americans—a power that can only be expressed if everyone has equal access to the voting booth. The recent Supreme Court decision limiting the Voting Rights Act will make this harder, so working to deal with and correct this change in the law must be a priority.
Moving forward on these important issues would be, I feel, a fitting outcome of our anger from this verdict. And with hope, in some small way, a fitting tribute for Trayvon himself.
Karen McGagh, KCM Communications, http://www.kcmcommunications.co, 443-632-4217, [email protected]
Share this article