Let's be clear...Dunn has STILL NOT faced justice for gunning down an unarmed black teenager

[Cali_Democrat]

Dunn was convicted on four counts, but he actually got away with the murder Jordan Davis.

Jacksonville, Florida (CNN) -- A jury on Saturday night convicted a Florida man on four charges related to his shooting into an SUV full of teenagers during an argument over loud music, but could not decide on the most serious charge -- murder.

Michael Dunn was found guilty on four charges, including three for attempted second-degree murder, which could land him behind bars for decades. But they couldn't reach a verdict on the most significant charge: first-degree murder in the death of 17-year-old Jordan Davis.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/15/justice/florida-loud-music-trial/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

Dunn was convicted for the attempted murder of the OTHER 3 kids in the car. Luckily they escaped with their lives. He was also convicted of shooting into the SUV. But he was NOT punished for the murder of an unarmed black teenager.

The kid was playing music too loud, was too uppity and didn't show enough deference to the white man by turning down the music. For that, Dunn felt Jordan Davis (17-years-old) needed to die...and yet...Dunn has still NOT been punished for that murder.

Think about that for a second.

It appears as though it's still extremely difficult to convict white men of murder when they gun down unarmed black teenagers. My take away is that black lives are still viewed as less valuable.

[onehandle]

1. Gunning down an unarmed black teenager is NRA dogma.

It's what pays their dues.

[Hoyt]

6. Exactly.

[aikoaiko]

11. I missed that correspondence from the NRA. Got a link?

[uponit7771]

16. ...and conservatives miss the overt racism in the Southern Strategy too

[freshwest]

2. A mistrial has been called on Jordan's murder. There will be another trial:

Michael Dunn found guilty of 3 counts of attempted 2nd-degree murder. Judge declares mistrial on the count of murder.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/15/justice/florida-loud-music-trial/index.html

A thread with a different title in LBN now:

Fla. Man Guilty Of Lesser Counts In Music Shooting

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014728974

Not in OP, but at the link:

Jurors could have decided not to convict Dunn on that charge but instead find him guilty on lesser charges such as manslaughter. Or they could have acquitted him altogether on this count.

With the hung jury, State Attorney Angela Corey said prosecutors would press for a new trial in Duval County on the murder charge...

Prosecutor Erin Wolfson explained Saturday night that each attempted second-degree murder conviction carries a minimum sentence of at least 20 years. There's also a 15-year sentence possible on the shooting conviction...

Lucia McBath said -- even without a decision on the murder count tied to Davis, her son -- her family is "so very happy to have just a little bit of closure."

See picture at time of the verdict:



Despite Corey's statement of:

"Justice for Jordan Davis is as important as it is for any victim," Corey said.

I feel she was wrong to disallow the emails. That showed malice aforethought, but I'm not sure that this is the way Florida law states such matters. And as usual, my disclaimer, 'Not an attorney.'

[Cali_Democrat]

4. Yep. There will be another trial....

but look how difficult it is to get a murder conviction in cases like these.

It's madness.

[Dyedinthewoolliberal]

13. Imgine if Dunn were black

and kids white. What do you suppose the sentence would be? I think the jury would have given him the max in that situation...

[one_voice]

3. I don't understand how they could find him...

guilty on 3 counts of 2nd degree attempted murder, but not murder on the kid he did kill.

I'm not a lawyer nor do I claim to understand the different charges, but if your guilty of attempted murder of the kids that weren't killed, would you be guilty of murder for the kid you actually did kill.

My heart breaks for the life Jordan will never get to live.

[Diamonique]

8. Not necessarily.

I think he was guilty of all of it.

But a juror could have believed the self-defense lies and figures he was justified in shooting Jordan. But time had passed and the kids' car was leaving and Dunn kept shooting at the car when there was no danger at that time.

So I can see how it could be guilty on the attempted murder because the kids were trying to get away, and hung on the murder charge cuz at least one idiot believes that one was self defense.

These were all separate charges and have to be looked at separately by the jury.

[whopis01]

20. I believe the three counts were for each of the other three people in the vehicle

We won't know unless the jury talks, but my guess is that on the murder charge, they could not agree if it was 1st degree murder or 2nd degree murder. The jury would have to be unanimous no matter what their decision, so if some held out for 1st degree and others for 2nd degree, that would be a hung jury.

The attempted murder charges were attempted 2nd degree murder, while the actual murder charge was 1st degree. So the jury didn't have to debate about premeditation regarding the attempted murder charges - only the actual murder charge.

My guess is that they will have a second trial, and this time only charge him with 2nd degree murder.

[arthritisR_US]

5. Until I see evidence to the contrary, my take on this is the same as yours....

I wish, such were not the reality.

[jberryhill]

7. Do you define justice as a process or a result?

[freshwest]

14. Pardon if you've read this already, but note my emboldened comments near the end:

Michael Dunn found guilty of 3 counts of attempted 2nd-degree murder. Judge declares mistrial on the count of murder.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/15/justice/florida-loud-music-trial/index.html

A thread with a different title in LBN now:

Fla. Man Guilty Of Lesser Counts In Music Shooting

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014728974

Not in OP, but at the link:

Jurors could have decided not to convict Dunn on that charge but instead find him guilty on lesser charges such as manslaughter. Or they could have acquitted him altogether on this count.

With the hung jury, State Attorney Angela Corey said prosecutors would press for a new trial in Duval County on the murder charge...

Prosecutor Erin Wolfson explained Saturday night that each attempted second-degree murder conviction carries a minimum sentence of at least 20 years. There's also a 15-year sentence possible on the shooting conviction...

Lucia McBath said -- even without a decision on the murder count tied to Davis, her son -- her family is "so very happy to have just a little bit of closure."

See picture at time of the verdict:



Despite Corey's statement of:

"Justice for Jordan Davis is as important as it is for any victim," Corey said.

I feel she was wrong to disallow the emails. That showed malice aforethought, but I'm not sure that this is the way Florida law states such matters. And as usual, my disclaimer, 'Not an attorney.'

Can you think of a reason why Corey did not allow the emails? That would have shown premeditation, that attitude of his there. He said that blacks needed to killed in order to teach the rest:

This is frrom an OP by JAG:

Before opening statements begin next week, HLN is taking a look back at everything that has led up to this moment, including stepping into Dunn's world behind bars. Twenty-five of his jailhouse letters have been released to the public, according to Jacksonville's WTEV.

While claiming in a letter to his grandmother that he's not a racist, Dunn repeatedly refers to Davis and his friends as thugs, and in a letter to his daughter he talks about how "the jail is full of blacks and they All act like thugs."

Quotes from his letters to his grandmother at Huffpo –

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/18/jordan-davis-shooter-michael-dunn_n_4123805.html

Excerpts from Letter(s) to Grandma

The jail is full of blacks and they all act like thugs. This may sound a bit radical but if more people would arm themselves and kill these (expletive) idiots, when they're threatening you, eventually they may take the hint and change their behavior.

I'm really not prejudiced against race, but I have no use for certain cultures. This gangster-rap, ghetto talking thug 'culture' that certain segments of society flock to is intolerable. They espouse violence and disrespect towards women. The black community here in Jacksonville is in an uproar against me -- the three other thugs that were in the car are telling stories to cover up their true "colors."

I am amazed at what is going on with the way the media has been covering this case. Their have been several other shootings here in Jacksonville, yet they are all either black-on-black or black-on-white, and none of them have garnered any attention from the media. I guess it's news when someone dares to not to be a victim, but they are twisting it around sand saying I was the "bad guy."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/11875213

Why wasn't it admissible?

[jberryhill]

17. Why wasn't it admissible?

I haven't followed every twist and turn of this thing, but my first question is how was the letter to his grandmother obtained?

But I'm sure there was an argument over its admissibility, and apparently the judge ruled in the defense's favor. Why? For whatever reason was stated, and which I personally don't know. Just offhand, if it was being offered as probative of his state of mind at the time of the shooting, then a letter long after the fact is weak and non-contemporaneous. Perhaps the judge thought its prejudicial impact outweighed its thin probative value.

But there is certainly an answer to your question, which is something of a non-sequitur to mine.

[freshwest]

19. Well, this was obtained through the email that he sent from the jail. I think all communications are

monitored in custody, except for those with counsel. This is on par with whatever his jail mates might hear him say, except he did post the email himself supposedly.

I see it as not having come from one incident. That he had the view beforehand that he had the right to enforce his view of what was and wasn't acceptable behavior in others.

I admit my personal bias in this matter, judging from what my behavior would have been. If I felt threatened, I would not get out of my car. If I felt threatened, I would not go confront a person I feared who was in their own vehicle. I would not have confronted a person over their music in a public place.

That is for lawful authority to do and I am not in charge of my equals in a public place. If I saw someone being hurt, yes, I would. But nothing was being hurt there. John Guy's statement is that Dunn did not feel threatened physically, the only thing threateneed was his sense of pride. I'm not ashamed of myself, but I don't force myself on others.

Having a gun doesn't give one that right, and he did not use his gun as intended by law, IMO.

I say ego has no place in a public venue or dealing with other people, unless they are putting their hands on you and you need confidence to resist. Any other option must be used.

The emails show Dunn had a depraved indifference to the right to live or exist of blacks in general, when he said they needed to be killed as an example. I grant it could be loose talk on his part, feeling aggrieved at being in jail.

But it was wrong in general, and it shows he developed an opinion somewhere that he had more rights than the rest of us do in society. I don't feel that I have the right to go and raise hell like he did. This was a completely avoidable crime.

Please pick my argument apart, what is legal and what is not. I think it was his motive for going to the SUV. A motive of racial malice could be translated into premeditation.

I don't think the emails were illegally obtained. The man is an IT person, surely he knew those were not private. Dunn had an exaggerated sense of his importance and that is the reason for what happened.

TIA for an opinion, if you have the time to shoot holes in my opinion here.

[jberryhill]

23. Can you explain...

...how any of what you have said is responsive to the question:

"Do you define justice as a process or a result?"

[freshwest]

24. Well, that wasn't the point about not being timely to the crime, which I thought you meant.

As far as process or result, it is a process. The result reflects process or LACK of process.

I was asking to get you to explain why the motive I see in the emails matched his actions, was not considered important to that process.

I think it would have given the jury the tools to understand why the state was asking for Murder One, with premeditation.

Naturally it is about the process, I didn't state that as it is assumed in this and all cases brought before a court.

Although others are not satisfied that he was not found guilty of murder in the death of Jordan, the judge did do the right thing and declare a mistrial, meaning he will be tried again. At that time, I hope the emails will be put into evidence of his state of mind, which I think would have caused them to find him guilty of premeditated murder.

And people are counting on that process to fully inform the jury and get that result. I didn't watch the trial, but followed a blog by a law professor and criminal defense attorney which had intelligent commentary and questions and answers, and there is no doubt he killed Jordan who was not in any way threatening him in the way that I said I would have avoided in a similar situation.

TIA...

[jberryhill]

36. Okay...

Again, not knowing much about the case, a quick Google search indicates the emails were released to the media by the prosecutor in advance of the trial, in what appears may have been attempted jury pool poisoning.

If that was the case then, sure I can see a judge excluding it.

You know our system is intentionally biased against the state and in favor of the defendant, yes?

[freshwest]

38. Of course. I'm not sure why you're asking the obvious. It's just so many are complaining he should

have been convicted on that coutnt, I have assured some in my posting that the court is not giving up on that count. And that the jury could have found him not guilty, but did not take that stance, and if all is revealed, he may be convicted.

My feelings are that nothing Dunn did was justified that day, not the controntation, the use of the gun, any of it. That's not self-defense. The Z trial, despite having been a totally avoidable death for the same reasons, did have the elment of close combat self defense. But a prudent person would not have disobeyed the police in the first place, they would have stayed in the car and Martin would still have his life.

But other evidence, physical evidence points to guilt in this case, such as one article that says that not only was Jordan shot in the car, not out fo the car (no physical danger there) as Dunn claimed, and shot in the back. A bullet had gone through him into the plastic upholstery behind him.

I agree with your reason for excluding it. The prosecutor should not have released it for the reason you stated, poison the jury pool. If he did that.

In the Z case, it appears that Florida media gets into these cases in a very improper way. IDK if Fox waged a campaign for him as they did for Z. On second thought, perhaps they got the emails from an illicit source, not released by the prosecutor as that office would kwow they would cease to be of value in proving motive.

I just finished watching a video of Dunn's next door neighbor. They paint a very troubled picture of this man and his relationships to everyone that he came across. It somewhat removes the racial aspect, but it doesn't remove the concept that Dunn wanted to use his weapon on someone, if their statements are believable.

I think they would have been found credible in court, at least their presentation in the video appeared honest. They knew him for 8 years and Dunn was not shy about revealing his motivations to them for several things:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1017&pid=175953

[noiretextatique]

39. a result

When it is a white defendant and a black victim. Too many white people do not get convicted for killing black boys.

[pscot]

9. I read that's good for 20 to 60 years

in prison. Just looking at they guy, I believe he'd rather die than do 20 in Raiford.

[HipChick]

12. I think he'll take his own life..

[arthritisR_US]

26. I don't think he will but I think his attitude and

demeanor could get him killed.

[oldhippie]

10. Let's be clear - yes he has .....

... and he'll get to do it again.

[arthritisR_US]

27. How will he get to do it again? He is looking

at a minimum of 75 yrs at his age he won't see freedom till he is dead

[HereSince1628]

29. Because the prosecutor stated she intends to retry on that charge

[arthritisR_US]

32. I thought you were referring gunning down

another teenager.

[MrScorpio]

15. Apparently, Dodge Durangos are more valuable in Florida than a life taken from a young Black man nt

[arely staircase]

22. the law is regarding vehicles with human beings in them

it has nothing to do with damage to the car. And it will ad 15 years to the shooter's sentence.

[sked14]

18. Dunn didn't get away with anything,

as it was declared a mistrial, the state will try him again and this time probably get a guilty verdict.

[arthritisR_US]

28. I think there is a good chance he'll be found

guilty if they flat out address the elephant in the room ie., racism.

[sked14]

30. If they use his e-mails this time,

it'll probably be a slam dunk conviction.

[arthritisR_US]

33. If defense brings up people to testify as to what

a stand up guy ( non racist) he is then the prosecution should put on the stand his nieghbour of how many years, to show otherwise.

[sked14]

34. Absolutely.

[arely staircase]

21. true, but I doubt the murderer is feeling too good about things right now

He will come up for parole when he is 107 years old, that is if the State can't get a conviction for murder when they retry him. But you are correct. He has not received justice for the murder he so clearly committed. But he is going to prison and probably for the rest of his life.

[DefenseLawyer]

25. I'm not saying he shouldn't have been convicted

By all accounts it looks like he should have been. But, assuming it was a fair trial, he certainly "faced justice". The only way he would not have faced justice is if he had never been brought to trial or if there wasn't a fair trial. You can certainly be disappointed with the outcome, I am too; but you can't say there wasn't justice simply because you disagreed with the outcome. Also, keep in mind, he wasn't acquitted. It was a hung jury. He can be retried and one must assume that he will be.

[sabbat hunter]

31. ok so the jury was deadlocked

on the 1st degree murder charge (Which requires premeditation). But why not convict him on the lesser manslaughter charge (which was their option as well). Unless they were deadlocked on that as well..

[Diamonique]

37. They were deadlocked on all of the murder charge.

In the murder charge they had 4 choices: M1, M2, manslaughter, or acquittal.

They couldn't all agree on any of those, therefore hung jury, therefore mistrial.

I believe at least one juror wanted to acquit. If the issue had been that they all agreed that he was guilty but couldn't decide on a degree, they would have come up with a compromise verdict (probably M2) rather than let this go to a mistrial when all 12 thought he was guilty.

[cali]

35. He's spending the rest of his life in jail.