Trayvon Martin

United Nations Weighs In on Zimmerman Trial

No, really

|

A group of United Nations independent experts today called on the Government of the United States to finalize the ongoing review of the case involving the death of teenager Trayvon Martin, an African –American teenager who was shot in 2012 by a neighbourhood watchman in the state of Florida.

"We call upon the US Government to examine its laws that could have discriminatory impact on African Americans, and to ensure that such laws are in full compliance with the country's international legal obligations and relevant standards," said human rights expert Verene Shepherd, who currently heads the UN Working Group of Experts of People of African Descent.

The death of Trayvon Martin sparked a new debate about racial profiling in the United States after the unarmed black 17-year-old was shot and killed in Florida by George Zimmerman, a neighbourhood watchman. Mr. Zimmerman, who argued that he acted in self-defence and with justifiable use of deadly force, was found not guilty of all charges against him.

NEXT: California City Looking to Halt Oceanfront Rave; Organizer Calls It 'Overkill'

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. So what is their point?Are they trying to say that even though there was nothing that indicated racial bias in this man protecting himself from a wanna be gangster, he should be considered guilty just based on him being white?Did no-one read the transcript of the testamoney?Even Martins girlfriend that was on the phone with him testified Martin had gone home then went back to confront Zimmerman. He started a fight and got his tough guy ass shot for it. So shut the fuck up already. It’s none of your goddamn business anyway.
    We don’t need the opinions of someone who doesn’t even understand the rudiments of fair trials by jury.

    1. their ideology isnt concerned with rule following.

      its concerned with uneven results. its like the new england firefighters who sued cuz minorities scored lower on tests. they said the test itself was inadmissable cuz minorities left behind thru using it as criteria. any criteria whatsoever, that minorities score poorly on, is inherently off limits.

      they start from a place where all races are equal, and work backwards from that ‘fact’. so if minorities end up losing to whites in statistically significant numbers, proves racism.

      for them 2 facts
      1) races have identical talents, strengths, tendencies (except when honoring nonwhite cultures; then they must be given deference)
      2) outcome equality is the highest purpose

      its not hard to see why they do what they do when you understand where they are coming from.

      i have to agree that there is some truth in their pov. but it ignores another truth, that you reap what you sow. ppl fail and prosper based on their actions. there does exist cause and effect. how things play out falls in between these pov. their ideology certainly isnt close enough to reality to consider making it law.

      so if blacks commit 55% of all murders, then any law that punishes murder is inherently illegal, in fact, if they commit even 14% of murders its unfairly targeting them. this is how their dogma works. until they gain more momentum they wont be going after issues like murder. start small with college admissions, or assaulting a neighborhood watchman.

  2. I think the EU truly hates us for our freedoms.

  3. “A group of United Nations independent experts”

    What does this mean? Who are these people?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.