Second Opinion

As society become more immersed in social media, the world’s traditions are anything from simple. Recently, we get to watch, if not participate, in the growing power of social media in changing the world.

The worst of all is something that should not be complicated even further, the judicial system. When we heard about George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin, the courts were never prepared for the storm of public outcry that spewed from the depths of social media.

When the fateful shooting happened it was several weeks until Zimmerman was arrested, the police didn’t even consider charging him after questioning him. We watched and responded through tweets, updated statuses, and even filed a petition calling for Zimmerman’s arrest with over 2.2 million signatures, driving the courts to take action as we called for justice.

Even as the trial progressed, we were relentless in our opinions and pushed heavily for the suppose of all sides. We flooded Skype with calls to the juror that testified through Skype and even found then circulated photos of a defense attorney’s daughter. Even as Zimmerman was found not guilty under the protection of the infamous “Stand Your Ground” laws, we continued to bombard every available target with out verbal abuse and support.

This is absolutely unacceptable.

The sacred virtues and principles that the judicial system is built upon establishes the foundation that anyone accused of a crime has the right to an unbiased judgement from his peers based on the legal precedent set by centuries of scholarly decisions and logical arguments.

To invoke the conveniences of social media to pervert this process in an attempt to change the normal course of business is an attack on something much higher than we have the right to intrude on, save those of direct involvement. While the outcomes of the Zimmerman trial may have been held within the legal boundaries and accordance, the beast we have created armed by social media might just be a danger that may justify a second opinion.