UN experts urge United States to wrap up review of Trayvon Martin case, examine laws

[[deleted user]]

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.

http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp...

[Robert]

Anyone can be legally killed under this law, by trying to tie it to one group this effort will not go anywhere.

[[deleted user]]

Robert wrote: "Anyone can be legally killed under this law, by trying to tie it to one group this effort will not go anywhere."

While it "can" be used to kill anyone, the statistics show that this law is disproportionately negatively effecting African Americans and pointing that out is not illegitimate.

[Robert]

It doesn't matter if it adversely effects one group in particular, all of this crap nowadays is designed to withstand counter attacks by a single source but not by multiple sources. Divide and conqueror, united we stand divided we fall, etc., etc.

[[deleted user]]

It is not divisive to acknowledge racism.

[Robert]

I wasn't saying that, if only Afro Americans objected to his death, it would not have gone anywhere, but because everyone crossing all races, creeds, most beliefs said something about it something did happen. It is best to get people with no up front apparent personal stake in the situation involved, this will short circuit most narrowly targeted arguments put up in defense of the issue as the various reasons put forward to various groups will be seen to contradict each other. This issue was framed around Trayvon Martin and not any old person so after the dust settled the law is still there.

Re: Hearing on “Stand Your Ground” Laws: Civil Rights and Public Safety Implications of the Expanded Use of Deadly Force

http://www.civilrights.org/advocacy/l...

Here is the numbers:

"[vii] In cases where the defendant was black and the victim was white, there was little difference between stand your ground states and other states (1.4% versus 1.1%). However, when the defendant was white and the victim was black, 16.9% of the homicides were ruled justified in stand your ground states and only 9.5% in non-stand your ground states. John K. Roman, Race, Justifiable Homicide, and Stand Your Ground Laws: Analysis of FBI Supplementary Homicide Report Data, Urban Institute"

here are the the words:

"Finally, a report could include a set of best practice recommendations directed to state governments, including state attorneys general, prosecutors, and judicial officers, in order to ensure that laws, policies, regulations, and judicial precedents do not increase or sanction racial profiling and disproportionately target African Americans, Latinos, or other minority communities."

So where are the numbers for Latinos, or other minority communities? The way this is framed one could be led to believe that Latinos, or other minority communities are not adversely effected the same way African Americans are by stand your ground laws. Do you actually believe that to be true? They had to write it but they wrote it in a way to have minimal impact.