1) A white law enforcement officer kills/violates the human rights of a black victim
2) 2a. (if there is video evidence of the crime) Whites have sympathy/empathy for the victim.
2b. (If there is no video evidence of the crime) Whites are skeptical of the victim’s account (or eye witnesses) of the incident
3) Blacks initially hold largely peaceful protests, by-in-large sympathetic Whites do not participate in these protests
4) A legal authority 4a) doesn’t charge the law enforcement officer of a crime
OR
A legal authority 4b) charges the law enforcement officer with a crime, only for a jury pooled from a largely unsympathetic white suburb find the law enforcement officer innocent of violating the rights of the black victim (the existence of video evidence is of no consequence)
5) 5a in response, angry Blacks hold public protest or open acts of defiance that eventually, inevitably turn violent
OR
5b Blacks don’t participate in public protest/disturbances of the peace or open acts of defiance
6) (If Blacks protest) White sympathy/empathy for the black victim evaporates. Sympathy/Empathy become replaced with fear, which quickly morphs into resentment and now open support for the White law enforcement officer.
(If Black don’t protest) Whites assume that their initial presumption of innocence of the white law enforcement officer was justified, and that rule of law prevailed.
Wash. Rinse. Repeat.
