Trial By Media

I am writing this before the Saint Louis County, Missouri Grand Jury decides whether to indict police officer Darren Wilson for shooting Michael Brown. It really doesn’t matter which way this goes, though. The news media have already indicted Officer Wilson and judged him guilty of murder.

Every mainstream newspaper and Television News program has told the story of a poor angelic black boy with his hands raised being shot in the back by a vicious racist police officer for no reason other than the boy was black. Whenever pictures of victim Michael Brown are shown, they are of a much younger Brown – before he became a low-life street thug.

Wilson is the latest victim of “Trial by media.” We may as well dismiss every criminal court and let the media decide a person’s guilt or innocence. As an added bonus, we won’t even need criminal attorneys.

The hapless Darren Wilson is not the first person to be tried and destroyed in the media. Recent high-profile cases include George Zimmerman (Trayvon Martin case), O.J. Simpson, and the officers in the Rodney King case. It seems the media aren’t happy without at least one every month or so.

I remember a woman (can’t remember her name, though) who drove her car into the ocean and drowned her three young children. The media did all but draw horns and a tail on her picture. It’s been a while, but I seem to recall that she was eventually convicted in a real court and received a relatively light sentence. When she got out of prison recently, she had to change her name and appearance then move to another state to keep from being hounded by people with hatred in their hearts. Of course, the media finally found her and publicized her location, new name, and even her picture. After all, they wouldn’t want the public to think she had paid for her crime.

By now, you might be thinking that I am trying to justify people getting away with crimes. Nothing could be further from the truth. I simply don’t believe that people should be tried in the media even before a crime has actually been determined. Especially by the left leaning media – which is most of them.

In the Wilson/Brown case, there are two radically differing stories being told of the occurrences that day. Each report of the happenings is slanted to one side or the other but mostly toward Brown’s side. What is the truth? Does it matter? A Grand Jury panel was convened August 20 to determine if there is enough evidence to try Officer Wilson for killing Brown. A decision was announced as forthcoming on November 24. It took that long to weigh all the evidence.

Nearly every day that this Grand Jury worked on the case, the news media had to shove the case in the face of the public. “Any day now the Saint Louis County Grand Jury will release its findings.” Every day this case festered and kept the protesters in Ferguson, Missouri in the front of the news. Every day some new “community organizer” would put his face out there and tell the crowd to be peaceful – wink, wink.

Ain’t riots grand? The rioters get free stuff, the print media sell more newspapers, contractors get paid to repair the burned and looted stores, more people watch TV news, Al and Jessie get more air time, talk shows have something to talk about, everyone makes money off them except the poor store owners that will take a big hit on their insurance premiums.

I have to wonder just how many other killings – Black-on-Black, White-on-White, or Black-on-White – have occurred during this time without the media stirring the pot of discontent. Maybe the news media didn’t think there would be enough emotion to stir up a good riot.

As I said, why even bother having courts? We could simply let the news media decide who is innocent or guilty. After that, vigilante justice could take over and lynch whomever the media decides is to blame.

Maybe I missed something when I read the first Amendment. Is there anything in it that gives the news media authority to try people for perceived crimes?

The Fifth Amendment says, “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury…” Then again, the Forth Amendment is quite clear on the issue: “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.”

I guess the constitution only applies in cases that don’t pique the attention of the Liberal media. Then again, Mr. Obama seems to think the Constitution is just a suggestion for the current ruler anyway. But I digress.