I am astonished that the MDJ printed a letter so greatly filled with assumptions and prejudices as that on Tuesday by Melissa Anderson, “Who is more racist? Obama or Zimmerman”?
The writer engaged in two of our favorite indoor sports: reading others’ minds and making assumptions based on those “readings.”
The writer accused Trayvon Martin was “hiding his identity under a hoodie”? How does she know that that was his reason? It was raining. Since when is a hoodie a suspicious garment? If I, an elderly white woman, wore one, would anyone consider it suspicious? I doubt it.
Sunday night, I drove home in the rain and saw a young black boy walking while wearing a hoodie. Should I have viewed him with suspicion and called the police? (Or better yet, leave my vehicle and stalk him with a gun?)
Also, the writer “knew” of Martin’s “possible” plan to “hook up” with one or more of his “felonious “brothers” ... while being their watch dog while they burglarized? What assumptions!
And she “read” Zimmerman’s mind as well: “Perhaps he reasonably believed he could be jumped by not only Martin, but his several buddies.” (There is no evidence of such buddies). Zimmerman had been told on the phone to leave the situation alone; if he feared being jumped, it was because he disobeyed that order and left his vehicle. So who was where he had no business being?
And the writer further accuses Martin of “walking where he had no business at that time of night.” What right does the writer have of declaring what time someone can walk outside? It was early evening; Martin was walking to visit a friend; how was he “where he had no business”? That statement is reminiscent of the signs of yesteryear in towns that told Negroes to get out of town by sundown.
The writer has made herself judge and jury. A jury has already rendered a verdict; who is being no business she has to be?
Sara Hines Martin