The reality is that in most cases where a young black man was murdered, the perpetrator was a black man.
Does this in any way imply that a young black man unjustly accused of killing another black man in fiction is unrealistic? Because black people predominantly kill other black people, no black man can reasonably be held to be innocent if charged?
Is that what passes for logic in your parts?
Often consensual interracial sex ‘back in the day’ would become, if discovered, “rape” after the fact. For this reason Chuck Berry would take a picture of a smiling topless white woman before indulging in consensual sexual activity with them; so it was that much harder to claim that anything that happened afterward was somehow unwanted.
There is also the fact that one might well be falsely accused, i.e. someone else did it. Interracial identity line ups are notoriously inaccurate. Now that there is DNA evidence this is less of a problem; but they are sure clearing up a lot of cases where the ‘guilty’ party couldn't have possibly been the actual perpetrator.
While you seem fixated upon the “fact” that most interracial rapes are black on white; most rapes (like murders) are within the same racial group; and there ARE and HAVE been those who have been falsely accused.
“TKMB” is a novel that explores racial tensions, and a man doing the right thing even when it costs him. It in no way seeks to establish that no black man ever did rape a white woman; or that any who were accused were innocent; any more than every Perry Mason episode sought to establish that the person charged was NEVER guilty, but you could always get the actual guilty party to admit it in court.
The reality is that in most cases where a young black man was murdered, the perpetrator was a black man.
This is true.
Does this in any way imply that a young black man unjustly accused of killing another black man in fiction is unrealistic?
No. This story reflects reality. Its also true that black men typically kill black men and white men typically kill white men.
Because black people predominantly kill other black people, no black man can reasonably be held to be innocent if charged?
Let's run that in reverse. Because white men predominantly kill other white men, no white men can reasonably be held to be innocent if charged. This argument is called reductio ad absurdum. Good for ignorant evil democrats
Is that what passes for logic in your parts?
Mere sophistry won't buy you lunch around here. Its the problem with most colleges these days. They teach rhetoric without teaching either morals or logic.
Harper Lee played the same slight of hand that Joseph Conrad did in the Heart of Darkness. Conrad was in the belgian congo in the 1880's then returned to England where in 1891 he heard about the English foray into the Benin--modern day Nigeria-- where the the Brits reported massive cases of human sacrifice. Conrad then wrote Heart of Darkness in which he imputed to Kurtz what was done in the Kingdom of Benin by the Beninese. Here look it up yourself in google under Benin human sacrifice. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_sacrifice Here's a google search of Joseph Conrad Benin Today you will read in British newspapers about nigerians turning up mutilated in London who are victims of human sacrifice. Nigerian Episcopals have broken with the English episcopal church because they know something about evil.
Educate yourself because right now you are what the communists used to call a useful idiot. You cannot serve even the people you think you are serving as you are now. Rather you injure them to death.