Rev. Al Sharpton was plently active whipping up a racial frenzy about the killing of Trayvon Martin. Readers will remember that Martin, an unarmed black teenager, was shot to death by George Zimmerman, a "white Hispanic" (as the NYT called him). The police initially did not arrest Zimmerman, apparently on the theory that he acted in self defense -- or, at the minimum, that there was insufficient evidence that he did not
so act. This provoked a storm of protest, resulting in the replacement of the original prosecutor, and by Zimmerman's indictment and trial. He was acquitted, almost certainly because the jury believed just what the police did from the outset -- that it could not be established that Zimmerman acted other than in self defense.
The acquittal sparked yet more protest. I have never been able to pin down precisely why this was so, but it seems to have been to make the "point" that black people are perpetually in danger of getting gunned down by whites, and, in this racist society, nothing will be done about it.
My own view of it is that race has no place whatever in the criminal justice system, much less in prosecution decisions about individual cases. Killers are no more or less culpable because of their race, and victims are no more or less dead. Race simply has no moral significance, and thus should have none legally either. But I appear to be on the losing end of that argument, courtesy of activists like Rev. Al.
Query, then, why has he not chimed in on the story below?