By Selwyn Duke

What would it have taken for the jury that acquitted George
Zimmerman to find him guilty? Well, try this on for size: imagine that instead
of emerging from his encounter with Trayvon Martin bloodied with a broken nose,
he didn’t have a scratch on him. Imagine he had also admitted he confronted
Martin with gun drawn and hadn’t actually been attacked — but had shot Martin simply
because the teen was running at him. Lastly, imagine Zimmerman was built like a
brick outhouse, had trained in a few martial arts and even competed in
martial-arts tournaments. Is it conceivable there could have been an acquittal?

Luckily for Zimmerman, the above was not his scenario. But
those were the facts in the
case of another man who shot and killed an unarmed 17-year-old.

And there was an acquittal.

The case was however, different in two apparently
significant ways: the teenager was white and the shooter was black.

The man’s name is Roderick Scott, and he shot teen
Christopher Cervini in 2009 in Greece, New York. As with Zimmerman, Scott was aware
there had been crimes in his neighborhood; unlike Zimmerman, Scott wasn’t a
neighborhood-watch volunteer. But after observing some individuals preparing to
break in to a neighbor’s vehicle on an April 4 night, Scott grabbed his handgun
and walked outside “to stop or detain the criminals,” as he put it. He then saw
someone rummaging around inside the vehicle and saw two suspects altogether, at
which point he drew his weapon, chambered a round, took a shooting stance and
ordered the teens to freeze, prompting one them to run off. But the other,
Chris Cervini, charged toward him yelling that he was going to get him, claims
Scott. Having already warned the criminals he was armed, Scott testified
that he then shot the teen so he would not “kill me or hurt me.”

Other similarities between the two cases are that Scott was
also faced with a manslaughter charged and was judged by a mostly white jury.
But then there are some more differences. The national media didn’t pick up his
story and make it a cause célèbre. We didn’t see news outlets plaster articles
with a picture of a smiling, cherubic, pubescent Chris Cervini or NBC doctor a
tape to provoke racial unrest and make Scott appear a bigot. We didn’t see the
DOJ send operatives to NY to foment demonstrations, and Eric Holder never
contemplated civil-rights charges against Scott. And no one said “It’s now
legal to shoot white kids in America.”

Oh, yeah, and the best information has it that Cervini was
not armed with a bag of Skittles.

It is also inconceivable that muscular martial-arts
competitor Scott couldn’t have taken the teen down in mere seconds with his
bare hands. But I suspect he was a no-nonsense type, that his attitude was, “If
those punks make one wrong move, I’m gonna’ smoke ‘em.” But this is conjecture.
Scott is a human being, deserves fair treatment, and I accept that reasonable
doubt existed in his case. From a practical standpoint, however, that wasn’t
the main reason why — unlike Zimmerman — his case proceeded without fanfare.
It’s not the main reason he is not now a marked man.

It is that he wasn’t guilty of DWW.

At least since the first high-profile Defending While White
case — Bernhard Goetz’s in 1984 — it has been clear that liberals have it
exactly backwards (as usual). They feel that whites get favored treatment after
inter-racial confrontations, but the reality is that if there’s any gray at all
when it’s black vs. white, the journalism runs yellow. The media can have that
story they love: privileged white oppressor guns down helpless black babe-in-the-woods
victim. And then it’s sort of how your sex can be whatever you want today.
Hispanics become white, a teen thug becomes a child, a defender becomes an
attacker and lies become truth.

One thing Martin’s defenders are right about, however, is
that black kids just aren’t safe on the streets of America. After all, homicide
is the leading cause of death among black teens. In fact, as liberal Juan
Williams wrote
last year citing DOJ statistics based on a 2005 analysis, “Almost one half of
the nation's murder victims that year were black and a majority of them were
between the ages of 17 and 29. Black people accounted for 13% of the total U.S.
population in 2005. Yet they were the victims of 49% of all the nation's
murders.” But then there’s something else the DOJ tells us.

Ninety-three percent of these black victims were killed by
other blacks.

That doesn’t leave much left over for other races, so what
percentage of black and white homicides involves whites killing blacks?

Three percent¹.

Moreover, this includes justifiable homicides (defensive
situations), and only a minority would be incidents in which an older white man
kills a black teen. And very, very few of those would be considered murders.
Yet Eric Holder’s DOJ now behaves as if this phenomenon is such an epidemic
that federal power must be used to stamp it out.

Of course, if Holder truly cared about blacks and not just
agendas, his focus would be on the true epidemic of blacks killing other
blacks. And if he cared about truth, he would actually publicize the findings of
a study conducted by his own DOJ in 2011. And here is a sampling
of them from Investor’s Business Daily:

[E]ven though black men between the
ages of 14 and 24 make up only 1% of the U.S. population, they represent 27% of
all the nation's murderers.

…While blacks make up just 13% of
the population, they're responsible for more than half — 53% — of the country's
murders.

The 36-page study, which analyzed
race-based crime data spanning three decades, found that whites were twice as
likely to be murdered by blacks than the other way around….

Note that the DOJ included Hispanics in its “white”
category. If only non-Hispanic whites are considered, however, the US murder
rate is comparable to that of Western Europe (because of this demographic
reality, the murder rates in New Hampshire, Vermont and Iowa are lower than Britain’s).

Conclusion? If you’re a prospective murder victim in
America, the probability is good that your victimizer will be a black youth.
This is why the DOJ study also tells us, “[N]early 40% of all justifiable
homicides were blacks defending themselves against violent blacks (and that
doesn't include all the black cops killing black thugs),” writes IBD. And we don’t hear much about this.
But what if you’re a white person who must defend himself against a violent
black youth?

You may be charged with DWW.

Then the media can publish its baby pictures. It can talk
about how you murdered a “child” as it murders your reputation and perhaps your
chances for a fair trial. It can twist the truth. And it can state idiotic
things, such as that your “injuries weren’t life-threatening,” as some said
about Zimmerman (wait until you have life-threatening injuries before defending
yourself and you may not be able to defend yourself).

And if you think DWW is problematic here, just look overseas
to South Africa, where whites are sometimes imprisoned on trumped-up charges
after defending themselves. Moreover, the nation’s ANC-led government started
disarming the white population in 2010 and, wrote
Frontpage Mag in March:

Thus, white farm families were
forced to relinquish their last line of defense against the tens of thousands
of criminal gangs roaming the countryside–armed with AK47s. [sic] and as
Genocide Watch noted on
its website last July one more step was taken as well. “The government has
disbanded the commando units of white farmers that once protected their farms,
and has passed laws to confiscate the farmers’ weapons,” it reported.
“Disarmament of a targeted group is one of the surest early warning signs of
future genocidal killings.”

Speaking of which, Genocide Watch places the imperiled South
African whites at stage six in the genocidal process.

Stage seven is extermination.

Much like what some plan for George Zimmerman, the DWW
transgressor with a $10,000 New Black Panther bounty on his head.  

        ¹Data
are from the FBI,
the Census Bureau, and the Department of Justice (details)                    

               Contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on Twitter or log on to SelwynDuke.com 

                                       © 2013 Selwyn Duke — All Rights Reserved