David Draiman on George Zimmerman Trial: 'There is No Greater Pimp Than the Media'

"Politicizing this event is irresponsible, abhorrent, and selfish," says Disturbed frontman.

Ultimate Guitar

As the jury officially found neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman not guilty of murdering Trayvon Martin, a 17-year-old from Sanford, Florida, the public erupted, rising numerous questions and debates on the subject.

The shooting occurred on the night of February 26, 2012, as Zimmerman started following Martin for looking "up to no good or he's on drugs or something" and ultimately killing him. As the prosecutors have pointed out, the teenager was unarmed and carrying nothing more than soda and candy.

The Saturday's (July 13) acquittal verdict caused a massive series of various reactions across the US and the world, including comments from the music domain. Among the most prominent rock musicians was Disturbed frontman David Draiman who gave his opinion of the entire trial via Twitlonger.

"The case is over and a verdict has been given," the vocalist said. "Now; No matter what your own personal opinion may be on the outcome of this case,

"1. No one is justified in acts of violence or destruction as a result of this.

"2. Politicizing this event (as the liberal and conservative media have both done) is irresponsible, abhorrent, and selfish. There's already far too much racial tension and baseless hatred in this world, and those on either side who try to use this as a means of furthering their political agendas, fear/hate mongering, or furthering their own rise to fame or power, should be called out and should be ashamed of themselves.

"3. There are a plethora of examples of both justice and injustice all over the world, every day of our lives. This is not, nor should it be made to be a black or white or Hispanic issue."

Draiman then focused on other issues, as well as the media, saying, "So all of you out there, get off of your soapboxes, cut the crap, move on with your lives, and let's focus on all of the other atrocities that occur all over the globe (like the school massacre in Nigeria which the media has basically glossed over in favor of the Zimmerman frenzy).

"There is no greater pimp than the media," the singer concluded. "They are experts in whoring something out until it is broken, dried up, and no longer of use to them. Do not let yourselves be manipulated by this sleight-of-hand bullsh-t."

The list of rock musicians who gave their opinions on the case also includes Rage Against the Machine guitarist Tom Morello, Testament axeman Alex Skolnick and Anthrax's Scott Ian. You can find their comments below.

Repeal of Voting Rights Act, NSA spying on everybody, drone murders, global warming denial, Zimmerman verdict, Walmart. #LetsStartOver

Tom Morello (@tmorello) July 14, 2013

W respect 2 friends, family & fans who live in Fla: the justice system there feels like a tumor affecting the entire US #FedUpWithFlorida

Alex Skolnick (@AlexSkolnick) July 15, 2013

My reply to Alex was re this link. @AlexSkolnick: Fla. Justice: Zimmerman shoots teen goes free; this woman: http://t.co/GpRxw0lz2v

Scott Ian (@Scott_Ian) July 15, 2013

Trending stories

103 comments sorted by best / new / date

comments policy
    Nero Galon
    People can complain all they want about hypothetical situations and their rights. The fact is that by law Zimmerman is innocent on self defence, as for that woman that is on for 20 years for shooting her roof.... That is total bullshit and should be getting more attention because that is injustice.
    Yeah, at the end of the day his injuries were enough to cast reasonable doubt on the events. Since there were no reliable witnesses he cannot be convicted beyond reasonable doubt. we will never know for sure who assaulted the other party first.
    Zimmerman technically isn't innocent, he's not guilty. As for the woman, read more into the story. My view is she discharged a firearm in a room with her kids nearby, putting them in harms way. Still though, she obviously felt threatened in some way and chose to act instead of run. 20 years is too harsh, but she didn't want to accept the plea deal.
    Not to be a total ass, but the system does declare us all innocent until proven guilty. Therefore he has always been innocent, just as everyone until proven guilty by a jury of their peers. Learn the system before posting inaccurate info.
    In America, there is no such thing as a warning shot: every bullet has the potential to cause grave harm. You never discharge a firearm without being absolutely positive of what is beyond your target, or able to accept the responsibility of the target potentially dying, which makes warning shots incredible dangerous and irresponsible. There was actually a similar case in New Hampshire recently, where an elderly citizen was arrested for firing into the ground in order to stop a robber. There is no such thing as a warning shot, people need to learn that, especially when dealing with others who may be armed---because if you discharge a firearm in my general direction, I would be legally justified in shooting you.
    Its more about the fact that this kind of thing is within the law in the first place, many supporters where pointing how they didn't arrest him until after weeks of protest as though that justified the handling of this case, if a black man was even on the scene of a white teenager being shot there would have someone in jail in minutes. This was simple case of a paranoid man making a reckless decision against the orders of police and him lying about his injurys to appear more justified in the level of force he used. I actually feel sorry for him as couple years for manslaughter would be a much more humane consequence than what he has to live with now.
    " a black man was even on the scene of a white teenager being shot there would have someone in jail in minutes. " Oh yeah? Youre psychic now? You have the magical ability to pull hypotheticals out of your ass and be certain of them? This examples everyone uses is the most childish immature thing I have ever seen. Google Daniel Adkins. Black man shot a hispanic man and wasnt arrested.
    Zimmerman was a paranoid. Paranoia doesn't constitute actual threats.
    Let's not forget this is the same state that let Casey Anthony walk free... #NevervacationinFL
    Regardless of who is making the comments to the media, this doesn't belong on a music site. This belongs on TMZ, Fox News, CNN, or MSNBC.
    I agree in regards to your views of this news being on the wrong website. That said, Draiman has hit the nail right on the head with his opinion regarding this case. This was never about race, it was a case of self defence and if anything, profiling of a person based on their attire, not the colour of their skin. The media should be ashamed of themselves for race baiting the American public as well as idiots like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton for further encouraging it. Race relations weren't perfect as they were already but this has made it all so much worse and all those celebrities on twitter need to stop spewing bullshit on an incident that they didn't witness and on two people none of them probably knew either
    He's spot on with this. The only reason this got attention is because of Zimmerman's and Martin's skin colors. That is all.
    Regardless of the facts presented to us, only two people know for sure what really went down that night. One of them is a dead 17 year old boy. Take T. Martin and make him White, and I'm willing to bet that 3/4 of the US would have never heard about this case. Racism will always exist and the media will always be there to make sure everyone is aware of it. Look at Paula Dean.
    It's sad how much the media publicized this event. People are dying all the time, sometimes even more unfairly, but no one ever has an outrage about them. Suddenly this story, with excessive misinformation and signs that neither party is completely innocent, becomes everyone's rage source that will probably die down in a few weeks anyways.
    Draimen's statement was well structrured, thought out, and well written...unlike Device's last effort.
    Anytime an "unarmed teenager" or anybody else for that matter, decides to confront someone they don't know in a dark, unlit area they're responsible for whatever happens to them. The shooter was stupid to get out of the car, the kid was stupid to move on someone he knew nothing about. In the shooter's defense, next time any one of you get your nose broken by surprise, then knocked to the ground and mounted, head hitting the ground and blows raining on you how much you consider what amount of force is justified. In the span of about 30 seconds....
    Well the thing is that at this time most of us act based on our emotion not by analysing the situation 100% through. That doesn't mean our acts are instantly justified. We still have to face the consequences, that's why we have trials. At this moment we all think that our life is in danger. Hell.... Even if I insult somebody and somebody hits me because of this I might feel that my life is in danger. That doesn't justify killing someone
    My favorite guitar website is now (or has been) part of the biased liberal media..... Second paragraph of this article is perfect evidence....
    The second paragraph is literally nothing but facts.
    But UG completely ignored the confrontation, going from George Zimmerman following a kid straight to the death of Trayvon Martin. There is no mention of the in-between, and that really is everything in this case. The way it was presented paints it in a really obvious liberal-bias.
    George Zimmerman was on the neighborhood watch and he reported Martin walking around at 11 o'clock at night, because there was a series of break ins in the area by a black man. George Zimmerman reported it to the police. The police told him to stay in his car, he chose not to. He followed this Trayvon. Trayvon should have called the police saying that there was someone following him and then went home. Instead Martin decided to confront Zimmerman. Zimmerman was getting his head bashed into the ground and then because his life was in danger, he chose then to shoot Trayvon, who died instantly. It was not a racial issue, it was the fault of two parties, George Zimmerman who chose to leave the car and Trayvon Martin who chose to not walk away. The problem is Trayvon Martin paid for his mistake. Zimmerman should have been tried for manslaughter, and nothing more, but the prosecution wanted to make this a race issue, because that's what sells.
    You're right and wrong... Zimmerman was never told to not follow him. The dispatcher said "we don't need you to do that" which does not translate to "do not follow him." They mentioned nothing about him needing to stay in his car. However the rest of your statement is right. The prosecution also tried to portray Trayvon as a scared child who was doing nothing suspicious, as well as giving it the racial spin.
    That Zimmerman shit wouldn't have flown in the UK - we have similar self-defence laws but they are based on reasonable force i.e you can't shoot an unarmed kid.
    The sources I've read stated that Zimmerman was attacked after following the kid, then held on the ground while repeatedly hit. There are recordings of Zimmerman screaming for help, and no one helped him. If this is the truth, and the statements are credible, then I would never want to live where you live if I'm not 'legally' able to defend myself in this given situation.
    Trayvon's friend and mother were both completely sure it was him screaming, so those recordings were judged to be too low of a quality to be admissible.
    Understood. There's so much bias regaurding this case, I don't know what to beleive from what I've read. It's hard to even discuss, as I can only make hypohetical statements around the information I'm working with.
    Were they, or were they just trying to protect Trayvon's memory? Trayvon's own father was unable to come up with a solid-conclusion from the recording early on in the case.
    how does defending yourself translate into shooting and killing someone? If you think that its ok to shoot someone based on your own judgement of if your life is in danger, then I sure as hell wouldn't want to live where you live because I can guarantee that in a pressure situation you cannot be 100% sure if your life is in danger and if you are not 100% sure it is not alright to take that other persons life
    Are you serious? So, in this situation, you'd let yourself get the hell beaten out of you, and possibly killed, because you can "never be sure" that your life in danger? If someone assaults me THAT critically, I have every right to assume my life is in danger. I don't know that person's intentions, and my life is far too valuable to me to take a risk over that. No one should be assaulting me in the first place, I won't give anyone attacking me the benefit of the doubt and be like "Oh, you were just trying to beat me senseless, rape my girlfriend, and steal my wallet? It's ok then, you should have just told me my life wasn't in danger man."
    Are YOU serious? I wasn't expecting this kind of stupidity from UG. He FOLLOWED a random UNARMED kid simply because of the way he looked, CONFRONTED him, and when the kid tries to DEFEND HIMSELF (from what could be a stalker/murderer for all he knows), the person who ACTIVELY INITIATED the situation can claim defense? Now that's all-American logic for ya!
    Goddamn Muricans, having guns and shit, thinking its ok to shoot everytime they feel threatened. Two words, natural selection
    You obviously didn't watch much of the trial or know much of the facts except what you've been spoon fed on MSLSD and MSM. I did. You are wrong on the facts on so many counts I'm not even going to start. Just do some research on the facts before you spew your propaganda of how Al Not So Sharpton and Jesse Jerkson tell you it went down. Pull up testimony of the prosecution and you'll get the evidence.. not even defense but PROSECUTION witnesses proved the defense's stance.
    ye and why does potentially getting beat up warrant killing someone?
    No, I would rather shoot someone than DIE just because some scum felt like having my money, or whatever else they want.
    except no one was robbing him and the kid had every right to be there
    so what you are saying is you would rather shoot someone than feel threatened? that's sickening
    But you don't have to shoot a guy cause they're kicking your ass. Man up and fight back.
    Are YOU serious? Who the hell uses this site? If you're randomly being attacked, and getting the hell beaten out of you by someone much bigger than you, you deserve to die because you weren't "man enough" to fight off a completely random thug (or whoever else was attacking you)?
    Just thought I'd like to clarify: Zimmerman was around 180 lb, and was 28 or so. Trayvon Martin was about 150, and 17 years old. Maybe Trayvon was a good fighter, but why couldn't Zimmerman fight back with 30 extra pounds and 10 more years of experience? Oh well, doesn't matter anyway, he's free.
    I'd like to clarify: Zimmerman is 5' 7" and 185 while Martin was 6' and 160lbs. Zimmerman's BMI=29.0 (borderline OBESE) while Martin's BMI=21.7 (middle of normal). 30 extra pounds of fat is a hindrance against someone who is more fit, agile and played football for years.
    he wasnt randomly attacked though, Zimmermann followed and provoked him. if you see someone with a gun going towards you, maybe you would fight for your life too, maybe that happened but we dont know but as a neighborhood watch, shouldnt he know the dangers of confronting people who "look like criminals"? He is a watch and carrying a gun and we should all believe that he was never trained for these situations. Truth is, he would of never followed him if he didnt have a gun. And strip everything from this case, no one black or white should EVER get away with killing a kid. Ever.
    Aren't you guys in the UK not allowed to have guns? So in the hypothetical UK version, the victim would probably have been stabbed to death, if a UK version of Zimmerman was walking around. Would that then be reasonable though? Not stating an opinion, just asking opinions.
    Again, a knife vs. someone who is unarmed probably wouldn't be considered reasonable force unless the circumstances proved that the use of the knife was necessary to keep the guy alive. But the whole situation is messed up because the law doesn't protect people and justice is incredibly hard to be served...well, justly. But Draiman is right, you don't need the media further fogging the facts. I'm sure people on here all have different views of what happened/should have happened based on what source they read rather than their own moral outlook.
    no in the UK we have more sense than to kill someone because the look shifty so this situation wouldn't have arisen
    Apparently people in the UK also get all of their information from biased liberal news channels.
    Zan's comment is exactly kind of comment that just infuriates me. Not because of any of the points they're making, I'm not going to even try to get involved, I don't know nearly enough to even bother, but discrediting something on the grounds of it being "biased and liberal" is the most pathetic dismissal of anything I've ever heard. "Oh, it doesn't agree with my political views, therefore it's automatically wrong". Nope.
    our news isn't biased, ironically you probably heard that on fox news
    Haha, I hate Fox News, and most American news channels. I'm not left or right wing, I just believe in self defense. Letting people do whatever they want to me without defending myself doesn't sound like a good time to me.
    Lol, I disagree with all the downvotes you're getting but Rupert Murdoch has a stronger grip on the UK media than he does in the US. Only difference is that in the US a higher number of people get their news from the TV exclusively
    Except for that soldier who was hacked to death in broad daylight. One of the attackers stood there and talked to a bystander, hands completely red with blood. Chances are some people would still question who was the victim based on the lunacy after the Zimmerman acquittal.
    Exactly. Paranoia does not constitute actual threat, and the U.S. is apparently full of paranoid beliefs.