I am pretty unbiased on the issue of the grand jury deciding whether to indict the police officer who shot Michael Brown.
Here is why: I don’t live in Ferguson, Missouri; I don’t know Officer Darren Wilson; I did not know Michael Brown; and I am not serving on the Grand Jury for this case.
Further, the Grand Jury process has not been concluded. I have confidence in the legal system. Some folks do not.
I would like to say something about the expectation of rioting by people who will be disappointed if the Officer is not indicted. They are not on the Grand Jury either. Consequently, they are not hearing the evidence. Therefore, a decision to riot would be based on something other than the evidence. It would be based on a judgment that such persons have already made about the only result acceptable to them. That is, by definition, “pre-judging.”
That is the essence of prejudice.
So, the irony is that the officer is accused of killing Michael Brown for racially prejudiced reasons and the people threatening to riot are prejudiced about what the outcome of legal proceedings should be — based on race. Officer Wilson is white. Michael Brown is black. Would race be an issue if they were both the same race? This is about racists accusing others of being racists.
On the playground this is addressed by the old mindless comeback, “I know you are but what am I?” Remember, whatever the other person calls you, just say that back. It creates a standoff.
On the playground that is very immature.
When adults engage in this same behavior, it is different. It is dangerous as well as immature.