Picture this scenario: A white man gets into a relatively harmless traffic dispute with a black man on a quiet street in California. The black man involved ​(William)​ becomes irritated ​and, at least according to the white man’s attorney, resorts to “tailgating and accelerating and driving extraordinarily aggressively.” He eventually follows the white man (James​)​ and his wife — who is also in the car — into his driveway while the two are still driving.

​James drives into his garage and attempts to use the automatic door closer to keep ​William​ out​. ​​​William keeps driving and the ​garage ​door strikes his car​ but he doesn’t make it into the garage.​

Then things go downhill quickly: ​James — a physician — ​retrieves a .357-caliber revolver, and ​fires a warning shot into an empty hillside across from his home. But ​William​ — unarmed — decides to get out of his car anyway​. Now we have no idea what William was going to do next. Was he going to yell at Simon as so many do in road rage incidents? Sternly lecture him? Something more? ​James​ claims ​William​ yelled, “I’m going to get you!” ​(​William says he has no clear recollection of the incident), and James proceed​s to shoot ​William​ twice in the stomach.​

“I got scared,” recalls​ James during his recorded interview with local police. “What do you do at that point?” He added he didn’t want to be “a victim.” In a related story, police found 50 guns and 200 rounds of ammo in James’s home. The owner says all the guns are registered and most are World War II collectibles.

However, despite being shot twice, ​William ​survive​s​ and ​James​ ​is​ charged with attempted voluntary manslaughter. ​The prosecutors argue that James’ reaction was “unreasonable” under the circumstances and therefore criminal. ​Yesterday, a judge rule​d​ against the prosecution​ after a two-day preliminary hearing,​ ​finding ​that there was no probable cause to believe James committed a crime and that his actions were not unreasonable given the way things unfolded.

​James, who claimed self-defense, told local reporters on hand after the decision was handed down, “I’m proud to live in America.”

So, wait? ​Why​ exactly hasn’t this been the lead story every night on cable news over the past the week? Where’s Sunny Hostin on this? Nancy Grace? An unarmed black man is shot ​and almost killed ​by an armed white guy ​who had loads of ammo in his home ​and a judge simply throws the case out? And from a media perspective, it doesn’t even penetrate the national cable news scene?

Remember, Darren Wilson‘s reaction to Michael Brown punching him and going for his gun in his squad car was ultimately about being scared due to Brown’s race (if you believe the narrative out of many media circles). Race apparently had lots to do with the Eric Garner case and especially Trayvon Martin as well. The story goes if a black man wasn’t involved in either scenario, the outcome would have been decidedly different.

Okay, so here’s why a seemingly ​compelling case like the road rage one above ​has​ ​hardly received​ a mention by most news outlets: The man who was shot twice, William Osenton, isn’t black. He’s as white as Tom Brady. So is James (full name: James Simon). But can you imagine what the reaction would have been if ​William ​Osenton was African-American?

For starters, much of the media analysis would focus on the Simon quote of “being scared.” Why would that be? Because Osenton is a black man in the account above? And instead of a .357, Simon would have been questioned why he didn’t just reach for a golf club (after all, the guy is a doctor in California, making the chances of him having a bag somewhere in his garage around 97 percent) and start swinging an 8-iron like Tiger Woods’ ex did when she lost her temper. Or…why not just go in the house and call 911? ​Why start shooting unless race was a factor in that whole “scared” excuse?

According to​ a report on​ WebMD​,​ more than 50 percent of all drivers have experienced road rage at some point. That makes this a story many in the audience can relate to (not in terms of shooting, but regarding losing one’s temper in some capacity against another driver). Add in the “What would you do​” factor, plus the fact the judge simply dismissed the case​ without sending it to trial​, and you have all the ingredients for the perfect cable news avalanche.

But since this was simply a case of road rage almost turning deadly between two old white guys having a bad day, the media ignores ​it. ​

Without the ​media’s ​money motive — ​r​ace​ — it’s just another local news story. ​

— —

>> Follow Joe Concha on Twitter @JoeConchaTV

Have a tip we should know? [email protected]