What I Learned from
the Zimmerman Trial





Mega Fix


TWA Flight 800



Jack Cashill's latest book: "If I Had a Son"

Order your copy of Jack Cashill's
"If I Had a Son"


September 6 , 2013 - AmericanThinker.com
© Jack Cashill

I learned many things attending the trial of George Zimmerman in Sanford, Florida, and watching it online, but one thing I learned was fully unexpected, and it was this: the Republicans may never win a national election again.

This observation has nothing to do with the February 2012 shooting of Trayvon Martin, nothing to do with race, nothing to do with policy, and everything to do with the way people, especially women and young people, increasingly get their information.

Jury selection, a tedious affair even in a celebrated trial, served as an ad hoc focus group on American media habits. Defense attorney Don West summed up the thrust of it with a totally unexpected knock-knock joke at the outset of the defense’s opening statement.

“Knock-knock,” said West. “Who’s there?” he continued. “George Zimmerman. George Zimmerman who? All right, good, you’re on the jury.” What impressed observers on either side of the divide was just how many people—many of them well educated and employed—could have known so little about the most divisive criminal case in the nation and the most disruptive in the history of Seminole County, Florida.

Several potential jurors admitted to having no real source of news other than what they picked up on Facebook or at the water cooler. Juror B29, a female who made the jury, may have inspired the knock-knock joke. “I don’t like watching the news, period,” she told West. “I don’t read any newspapers, don’t watch the news.” She had “no idea” about the case. Ironically, her indifference to the news may have assured Zimmerman his acquittal.

On the other hand, the cluelessness of several eyewitnesses helped the State of Florida build its case against Zimmerman. Their testimony provided direct proof, if any were needed, of the corrupting influence of months and months of disinformation from the major media.

The foreign-born Jeannee Manalo lived very near the site of the encounter. In her first interview with law enforcement in March 2012, she admitted to not seeing much, just “two shadow [sic] . . . . One was on top of the other. I don’t know which one.” Nor at the time could she distinguish which of the two was bigger. By the time of the trial, however, Manalo had concluded that the one on top had to be Zimmerman, as “the top was bigger than the bottom.”

The photos she saw repeatedly on the news convinced her Martin was a child. Defense attorney Mark O’Mara produced some of the photos she might have seen: the iconic photo of a youthful Martin in his red Hollister shirt, two photos of a preteen football player, and the photo of Martin in his hoodie. Manalo innocently confirmed these images as the source of her perception. In reality, of course, Martin was at least four inches taller than Zimmerman and, at 158 pounds, all but fully developed.

Jayne Surdyka, a former school teacher, lived alone in a townhome just north of the site of the fatal confrontation. She told the court that she initially heard a confrontation between two males, one with a dominant, aggressive voice and the other with a softer, meeker tone, “It was someone being very aggressive and angry at someone.” From the imagery Surdyka gleaned in the media, she presumed that Zimmerman was the aggressor. “I truly believe the second yell for help was a yelp,” said Surdyka. “It was excruciating. I really felt it was a boy’s voice.” Before the trial, she had never seen a photo of a bloody Zimmerman, a testament in itself to the breadth of media bias and the myopia of even college-educated professionals.

The State called still another female eyewitness to testify, in this case through her interpreter. A blonde Columbian, Selma Mora Lamilla saw little and had little to say. Curiously, the State failed to call her outspoken, English-speaking roommate, Mary Cutcher. In the six-week-long hysteria between Martin’s shooting and Zimmerman’s arrest, Cutcher, a massage therapist, was easily the most visible of the eyewitnesses. Her message was one that the media wanted to hear: the police were ignoring eyewitnesses like herself and her roommate whose testimony challenged Zimmerman’s innocence.

To spread this message, Cutcher appeared on local TV, on CNN’s Anderson Cooper 360, on Dateline NBC, and at rallies and press conferences with the Martin family and their attorneys. The media then sought out more reticent witnesses, all female, to echo Cutcher’s theme. Although Cutcher admittedly did not see the struggle, she fully bought into the Trayvon-as-child narrative that the family’s advisers had crafted from day one. “It sounded young. It didn’t sound like a grown man, is my point,” Cutcher told NBC’s Lester Holt of the screaming she heard that night. For the record, the seventeen-year-old Martin had a deep voice.

Ignored by the media were the words Cutcher told the 9-1-1 operator on the night of the shooting, namely that there was “a black guy standing up over him [the shooting victim].” The audio of this call was available to the media within weeks of the shooting. Cutcher’s flagrant misperception should have disqualified her as a serious witness, but the media liked what she had to say too much to bother with the evidence.

Sequestration helped preserve the six-woman jury in their collective innocence and quite possibly saved Zimmerman from conviction. The jurors had little idea of the terror that awaited them when they found Zimmerman not-guilty. This terror would prove especially unnerving for B29, a Puerto Rican of African descent and the one member of the “all-white” jury to vote originally for a second degree murder conviction.

It was only “as the negative news reports about their verdict erupted,” said ABC’s Robin Roberts uncritically, that B29 “crumbled.” “I literally fell on my knees and I broke down,” she confessed. “My husband was holding me. I was screaming and crying, and I kept saying to myself I feel like I killed [Martin].”

These women were brighter than average. Given three full weeks of their rapt attention, the defense attorneys were able to convince them of the truth. But with the fracturing of the media into hundreds of diverse outlets, most of them frivolous, no candidate has that kind of hold on any citizen, let alone those who pay more attention to “The Real Housewives of New Jersey”—B29’s favorite show—than they do the future of the republic.

Worse, as the Zimmerman trial proved, the news that low-information voters do digest comes from a nearly monolithic news/ entertainment industry witlessly keen on cultural Marxism and soft-core socialism. So pervasive was its messaging in the Zimmerman case that it persuaded even eyewitnesses to believe that big was small and up was down.

Republican strategists who soften policy to appeal to those who don’t pay attention will only succeed in alienating those who do. To reach these people will take a communication channel that has yet to be invented, a cataclysm of scary proportions, or a pop icon at the head of the ticket.

Snooki, are you still peeved about Obama’s tanning tax?

Although the pub date of “If I Had A Son” is not until October 29, the publisher has released a Kindle version in part to discourage Holder from taking federal action: http://amzn.to/15pm4nZ



Who is Jack Cashill?




to top of page  


Subscribe to the Cashill mailing list. It's FREE!

Receive political news, invitations to
political events and special offers

Home | Professional | Personal | International | National | Regional | Books & DVDs | Articles By Title | Email Jack
copyright 2005 Jack Cashill



























eXTReMe Tracker