Because my life has been chaotic over the last couple of months, I haven’t really followed the trial of Michael Dunn. I don’t feel qualified to have much of an informed opinion about the case, but I did feel that Mr. Dunn did not have an adequate defense for opening fire on a car of black teenagers and killing 17 year-old Jordan Davis. I see that the jury was unable to agree to a verdict on the murder charge, but was willing to convict Dunn on four counts, including three for attempted second-degree murder. Based on those convictions, Dunn will spend the rest of his life in prison, so I don’t think it is even necessary to have another trial on the murder charge. I suppose if Jordan Davis’s family insisted upon a new trial, the prosecutors would be obligated to pursue one, but it would be a waste of money.
This jury didn’t deliver a perfect verdict, but they delivered an adequate one. Sometimes, that’s how our system of justice works. The important thing is that the jury made clear that you can’t shoot at black kids just because they make you nervous. That was really the principle at stake in this trial, and it’s why people compared it to the George Zimmerman case.
This jury didn’t deliver a perfect verdict, but they delivered an adequate one. Sometimes, that’s how our system of justice works.
Stated that way, it’s not unlike Al Capone’s prosecution and imprisonment.
No, it is not unlike that conviction at all.
ya. know this is pretty much the tenor of a lot of white liberal blog post I’ve seen on this subject tonight and it really starting to piss me off so please excuse my language her but…
Le sigh.
I won’t say anything about jury selections or deliberations, or call the jury idiots or maligned the jury in anyway.
But excuse me, for having a visceral reaction to the proceedings and the outcome, not based on the semantics of the legal system, but as a person of color and feeling like the life of your young son or lil brother or cousin is automatically allowed to be suspect in the eyes of some racist schmuck
Excuse me, but you can be satisfied with the conviction that was given, but be damn well pissed about the other thing.
let me ask all of you a few questions:
4)Better yet, are you concerned to even let your teenage son hang out with more than one friend on the fear that the police or some other “Law-abiding” citizen feels threatened by the group of them?
No…well guess what those last 2 questions are two things that my sister has to grapple with and my young nephew has to be advice of at 14. That the “carefree” life that some kids are afforded at teenage is not the same life he can afford by virtue of being Black and a boy.
So yeah, I get the legalese that so many are spouting. I get the “hey at least we got something” spill that some are spouting.
But excuse me if I don’t give a damn, and instead think about what I’ve got to tell my nephew and how I advice him to live a free life, yet be in fear as well. I don’t know about ya’ll, but that seems like a sad life to impose on a teenager.
oh and tell the parents if that dead kid that they should be satisfied that justice was served and that trying to convict the killer of their son for the actual murder he committed would be a “waste of money”..
ugh… good night.
We don’t always agree, lamh in that I think you give the POTUS too much BOD, but I’ll be damned if I don’t agree with your sentiment expressed here. Yes. Agreed on everyhing posted. Consign. And any other way I can express my agreement.
I think it’s a horrible verdict. The attempted murder verdicts were for the other three kids in the car. Jordan Davis got the mistrial. All because this white piece of trash decided well after the killing he thought he saw a gun. Change the races and the outcome would be different.
So yeah. Sometimes this is how our system works: for black kids killed by whites.
Well, two things in response.
First, yes I have teenage sons and no I don’t worry about them playing loud music and hanging out in groups. I worry about other things that might kill them, but murder? Not so much. So, I understand that there is a visceral element to this that I’m not feeling.
Second, let’s look at what the actual mother had to say:
Seems like she understands the point I am trying to make, which is that this is imperfect justice, but it is justice nonetheless.
Let me quote from U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald’s press conference on Scooter Libby’s indictments:
I am not the parent of a black teenage boy. If I was, I probably would have moved to a different country by now. My respect for the people who have to live with that fear, yet still raise a good kid, is boundless. What I do have, however, is a teenaged daughter who last year had a crush on a black boy. She probably will again in the future. And I would never, not in a million years, say anything to discourage that. So there may come a day when my child will be in a car playing loud music and being driven by a black boy. And yes, that terrifies me. So we have had talks about how unfairly black people are treated in this nation, and about the precautions that have to be taken when a black boy is in a car. Fifteen percent of marriages these days are multiracial. Just because my kids aren’t black, doesn’t mean my grandchildren won’t be.
It is terrible enough for me that a kid died. He did not deserve that. Nobody ever deserves to be punished for the color of their skin. But for those who say it doesn’t directly effect them because they are white, I think they don’t understand how quickly that can change. When your daughter brings home a lover who is black, Hispanic, or Muslim, will you be able to say that you have done everything you can to create a society where that man will be safe?
The sad thing about America these days is that no one gives a crap about anyone else. Neither rowdy teenagers nor white racists packing a weapon and ready to use it at the slightest provocation are concerned with anyone but themselves. And when they come together it is bound to end badly.
If you want symbolism, then you’ll hopefully get it with a second trial. If you want justice, it is already done in this case. If you want to change america, you and I are going to have to do it ourselves.
Overcharged, under prosecuted.
This should have been a slam dunk for 2nd degree. The argument that he’ll be facing up to 60 years in prison is salt in the wound for the parents who wanted their son’s death acknowledged as a murder.
All of us lost to the insanity of Stand Your Ground.
Overcharged in response to public pressure, incompetent prosecutors, or the state looking to lose? The latter seems at odds given how fiercely prosecutors fight to win cases — including falsifying evidence.
They’re going to retry. I don’t care if its expensive, its the right thing to do. http://www.firstcoastnews.com/story/news/local/michael-dunn-trial/2014/02/15/corey-retry-dunn-murder
5519925
If they do retry, I hope they seek a jury instruction on finding second degree murder if the case for first hasn’t been proven.
First degree is an overreach. I’ve heard no evidence of premeditation, however firing a gun at someone is adequate to establish intent to kill, so second degree.
I share your loathing of this creep, but that is the law for both white and black. The situation would be no different if the boys had been white.
I wonder how many holdouts there were and which way they leaned.
I know I’ll take flak for this but I see it as hot-blooded murder not cold-blooded.
Going back to your car specifically to get your gun and then come back? And then cocking it? Yeah, imo that’s premeditation.
Well, not in the opinion of the legal professor (NorthWestern?) that I heard on WBEZ discussing the case. He claimed that premeditation takes a longer time frame that that. He’s a law professor and you and I are laymen.
I think it does show intent to kill, hence second degree not manslaughter. I kept thinking, “If he was in fear and was able to get to his car, why didn’t he just drive away, fast?” I’m an old white guy and that’s what I would do, along with every other old white guy I know.
To amplify, according to the professor, for first degree you would have to prove that he went to the store with the intent to kill someone. That’s a pretty high bar and by placing it I wonder (along with others here) if the prosecution was deliberately throwing the case.
Absolutely. Premeditation does not require a “plan.”
The public interest hasn’t been served by the first trial.
The public interest is that you cannot KILL any single person with impunity. Black or white and even if you are convicted of wounding others with intent or negligence.
As this verdict stands right now the proper interpretation of the next white shooter of a black teenager is:
– Your white gun ownership entitles you to 1 dead black teenager. Stay within your limit.
And of course the message to black parents and teenagers is:
– White gun owners make the rules for their world. You can live there if you respect their need for gun rage and don’t incite it with Skittles, Snapple, hoodies, or loud music. And don’t get anyone started with your bad attitude.
Wanton white gun violence, not just for rogue cops anymore.
Tired of Black people being told that they should be happy for the crumbs of justice.
This muthafucka shot at a car 10 times.
He hit it 9 times.
He drove home.
His ass NEVER CALLED THE POLICE.
If his ass had just driven away, Jordan would be alive.
So, no, I don’t have to be ‘ok’ with a racist mofo killing a Black child because said Black child had the NERVE not to go ‘YESSA, MR. CHARLIE’, When ORDERED to do something by said White man.
I don’t think you should be happy. I’m not happy.
Yet, unless you support the death penalty (I don’t), the proper penalty for this murder should life in prison. And that is what the prosecutors procured.
There are two lines of argument about this.
The first is that justice was not done because he wasn’t found guilty of premeditated murder. And this is somehow going to send the message that you can kill black kids with impunity.
I get the frustration and sense of injustice, but the conclusion doesn’t follow from the premise. The jury said that this man should never see the light of day again, and so that is the penalty for opening fire on a group of black teenagers in Florida.
If you are considering opening fire on black teenagers in Florida, you now know that you can’t rely on some kind of Stand Your Ground defense to avoid life in prison. That was the bigger part of the job that the prosecution needed to achieve.
Now, they say that they will retry the case. If you think this is necessary, or if the family thinks it is necessary, then I respect that. But I think it would be a lot of work to prove a point that has largely been proven.
I guess the key here is that a lot of folks dispute that the point has been proven or the principle upheld, but I go back to Patrick Fitzgerald’s explanation for why prosecuting Scooter Libby for obstructing justice and perjury would vindicate the public’s interest in punishing him for leaking classified information and doing damage to national security.
What’s going on here is that a lot of people are doing precisely what Fitzgerald said they should not do.
Maybe he was wrong when he blew off conservative complaints that Libby was not being charged with the underlying crime, but I agreed with him then, and I agree with prosecutors today who make the same argument about the mistrial on the murder charge.
The bottom line is that they made the right mix of indictments to assure that their perp went to jail for the rest of his days.
If you are considering opening fire on black teenagers in Florida, you now know that you can’t rely on some kind of Stand Your Ground defense to avoid life in prison.
The message I got was, leave no survivors.
Yep. If there hadn’t been other kids in the car, this guy might well have walked.
Quote: “Yet, unless you support the death penalty (I don’t), the proper penalty for this murder should life in prison. And that is what the prosecutors procured.”
I don’t support the death penalty either. But what this verdict says about our culture is profoundly depressing. I’m beginning to think Ta-Nehisi Coates is right when he says it will never change. (Sure, I can come up with reasons to hope. That seems to be in my nature. But after lo these many years, I’m beginning to “consider I may be wrong.”)
On the bright side, the defense has a lot more to lose in considering whether to appeal than the prosecution has in considering whether to retry the murder charge.
But whatever both sides decide to do, the questions raised about why we can’t convict a white man for shooting down a black kid in cold blood remain.
I haven’t seen any accounts of what happened among the jurors, but I’ll be interested to read it. If they were able to convict the man for shooting into the car and they were able to convict him for trying to murder the kids inside the car, I’m stumped why they couldn’t agree that he succeeded in committing murder when one of the kids inside the car he shot at died as a result.
If the hangup was only a difference of degree, then this is just stupid.
The matter of degree is not stupid, or why do we have three degrees in the law? From what I understand, they didn’t charge him with attempting to kill the dead victim bit with pre-meditated (first degree) murder and the jury was allowed to consider any lesser charge like second degree or third degree. Granted, third degree doesn’t make much sense. It would be third degree if the gun went off accidentally, but ten accidents?
However, like you, I would very much like to know what went on in the jury room and what the final vote was.
“…dead victim
bitbut with pre-meditated (first degree) murder and the jury was not allowed to consider any lesser charge like second degree or third degree.”I need new glasses or to get the IBM ViaVoice working.
My understanding from stuff I’ve read is that the convictions for attempted murder were for the three shots scumbag fired as the kids’ car was pulling away — not for anything he did before they tried to flee.
So it sounds like the jury — or enough of them to block any stronger verdict — bought scumbag’s defense that he thought they had a shotgun and was in fear for his life; it was just the overkill of the last three shots that got the guilty verdicts.
No, that’s not right. The three counts of attempted murder are as to the three kids in the car who survived, not as to particular shots fired.
ooh l know…thanks aall
Kaos Bayi