Anger and despair swept through many parts of America after a Missouri grand jury decided not to indict Darren Wilson, a white police officer, for killing Michael Brown, a black 18-year-old.
What was behind the wave of emotion? Why do so many refuse to accept the grand jurors' choice not to charge the cop with a crime in the death of Brown, who was unarmed? Why is there such disregard for the new evidence released with the decision?
* * *
"I'm very disappointed and angry," said Shakealia Finley, an economics teacher in Atlanta. "It's a miscarriage of justice."* * *Is Finley reacting rationally or emotionally?
"I think it's both, and I think it's OK to be both," Finley responded. "It's OK to say this is another example of black people in society are not afforded justice. I am able to separate the fact that Mike Brown made a bad decision in that situation. It still shouldn't have cost him his life."
Yes and no. It's OK to have emotions. We really can't avoid it. It's OK to acknowledge our emotions. That's far better than suppressing and denying them. When it comes to a critical decision such as whether to put a person on trial for murder, though, we have to put the emotions on the shelf and look rationally at the evidence.
Another person quoted in the story says it's like lynching. He has the lynching quotient precisely backwards. The people calling for Officer Wilson to be indicted despite the evidence are the lynch mob.
Leave a comment