The right to a fair trial has nothing to do with past injustices

Okay, so someone by the name of Terry A. Price wants to make an argument that Emmit Till’s situation can be compared to the upcoming trial of the former mayor of Detroit. Now let me try to explain the difference between then and now.

For starters, Mr. Emmit Till’s demise was the result of ignorance and a time in this country when hate, racism and the lack of respect for the fellow man was a sordid and unfortunate time in our history.  What this Price person also failed to state in his uneducated response is that Mr. Till committed not a single crime against his fellow man. Another point of contention that this Price person failed to state intelligently is that Mr. Till was not an elected official who violated the trust of his constituents,  specifically with regard to folk that looked most like him.

So ‘Price’, if you want to take a stab at who is being inaccurate with their arguments, come correct.

Your argument may hold water with some apologists and enablers who do not have a clue about differentiating fact from fiction, but I’m not one of them.

What happened to Emmit Till was a complete travesty of justice, but there is no way to intelligently make a case to compare what happened to Mr. Till with the possibility of the former mayor of Detroit – along with his co-defendants -  not getting a fair trial.

The only attempt at a logical argument that this ‘Price’ person makes is that both sides pick the jury, but it is based on the prosecutor or defense counsel feeling which juror will potentially best serve their need. The notion that folk walk into jury duty thinking about the likes of Emmit Till and the injustice he suffered has no bearing whatsoever on a jury being selected in 2012.

Thing is, ‘Price,’ I am not one of those stuck in the past folk that blames my life at present on that period of time. The upcoming trial facing the former mayor is a situation that has yet to be played out. Your argument in no way speaks to any sort of similarity with regard to the Kwame Kilpatrick and Emmit Till.

The presumption as I sit here typing this post is that all of the defendants are innocent. The past that you speak of did not give Emmit Till a chance. The reality of today is that the former mayor of Detroit has every chance of beating this case.

So again and for future reference, before referring to someone as an idiot, please try to refrain from making a simplistic and idiotic argument. I would have accepted, even respected, a similar argument with regard to the OJ murder trial, but you chose to make  a comparison that is so far from a commonality that it borders on the ridiculous.