GUILTY FL - Jordan Davis, 17, shot to death, Satellite Beach, 23 Nov 2012 #8

[popsicle]

#5 is interesting. I wonder what comments Tommy made to his PO.

http://www.michaeldunntrial.com/files/81999997.pdf

 

[Karmady]

I think Ron Davis is going to do everything in his power to modify this stand your ground law. He is retired from Delta after many years there and hopefully has the time and energy needed to take this fight on. I'm not sure how he got to Florida...they apparently lived in Atlanta most of Jordan's life. Not sure where the mother lives. Bet they wished they had not moved. He is so well spoken but you can feel the fire in his heart to do something now...Jordan's mother is a bit more forgiving but bet she will fight too. They are really impressive people who maybe can make a difference. Anyone that says stand your ground is working as intended is not living in Florida.

~bbm

He may do that. But it won't have anything to do with his son's case or the verdict. I'm not sure why the SYG keeps being incorrectly dragged into this.

Snipped from the link:

No, Florida's Stand Your Ground Law Did Not Determine Either Zimmerman or Dunn Cases

Feb. 17, 2014
LEGAL ANALYSIS by DAN ABRAMS
Dan Abrams More from Dan »
Anchor, Nightline and Chief Legal Affairs

* * *

As in the case of George Zimmerman, acquitted in the killing of Trayvon Martin, the public outrage was often directed or misdirected, at the Florida law.

Many, including legal commentators who should know better, repeatedly citing the statute as a crucial issue in both cases.

And yet neither defendant invoked the controversial aspects of Florida's law. In fact, both defendants argued basic self defense law that would have been similar in just about every state in the nation. ***
http://abcnews.go.com/US/floridas-stand-ground-law-determine-zimmerman-dunn-cases/story?id=22543929

 

[turaj]

~bbm

He may do that. But it won't have anything to do with his son's case or the verdict. I'm not sure why the SYG keeps being incorrectly dragged into this.

Snipped from the link:

No, Florida's Stand Your Ground Law Did Not Determine Either Zimmerman or Dunn Cases

Feb. 17, 2014
LEGAL ANALYSIS by DAN ABRAMS
Dan Abrams More from Dan »
Anchor, Nightline and Chief Legal Affairs

* * *

As in the case of George Zimmerman, acquitted in the killing of Trayvon Martin, the public outrage was often directed or misdirected, at the Florida law.

Many, including legal commentators who should know better, repeatedly citing the statute as a crucial issue in both cases.

And yet neither defendant invoked the controversial aspects of Florida's law. In fact, both defendants argued basic self defense law that would have been similar in just about every state in the nation. ***
http://abcnews.go.com/US/floridas-stand-ground-law-determine-zimmerman-dunn-cases/story?id=22543929

I do understand the SYG was not used here as it would have required a hearing etc. however I think it is naive to think that SYG is not in the mind of the defendent as the defense is worked out...somehow there is a bit more leeway in their minds about what they are empowered to do...I call it extreme self defense...it seems in Florida the difference is they have no "duty to retreat" and the gray areas are really blurry...here the juror said only when the "line was crossed" as Dunn shot at the car leaving were they okay not considering it self defense. I'm no legal pundit but just am a lay person living in the north not liking at all what I am seeing going down in these cases in Florida.

 

[ShadyLady]

What I gather is that jurors believed what Dunn said instead of three teens.

 

[Jax49]

What I gather is that jurors believed what Dunn said instead of three teens.

Three believed one over three -- plus all the other witnesses.

 

[Softail]

Page 3, number 4 relates to any statements/comments by MD in jail calls and letters etc days, months and a year following the shooting. Judged ruled them inadmissible because they are irrelevant as to his state of mind on that day or whether he acted with a premeditate design to cause Jordan's death.

Statements/comments made on the day of the incident, on the day of arrest or to police officers following the shooting are admissible.

http://www.michaeldunntrial.com/files/83304904.pdf

:tyou:

I thought so. Otherwise, I'm sure they would have tried to get them in.

It really sucks that this defendant as well as so many others cannot be shown for what they truly are in court. Too often it seems the defendants have more rights than the victims. :sigh:

 

[rob]

I think this guy is/was a big jerk, who was also intoxicated, and happened to legally have a gun in the car. This teen should have never ended up shot or dead. But at this point, the guy is going to prison for the rest of his life, and that is good enough for me. I remember thinking that if Casey Anthony got convicted of agravated child abuse, and up to 80 years in prison on that charge, I think I remember reading, that would have been good enough, even though she too, IMO, was a killer. I also couldn't understand how the jury forman, who had a son about the age of Travis, felt sympathy for Jodi.
I have followed many trials, with outcomes that I couldn't understand, but every juror comes from a different place and life, and that is our system.

 

[gxm]

For the retrial, the prosecution needs to explain and emphasize consciousness of guilt. They need to really drive home why Dunn’s actions after the shooting are so important. They need to point out that Dunn's actions were self-serving, not fearful.

 

[LambChop]

don't understand reply...it is my understanding that merely the fact that he "thought he saw the gun" is enough for self defense and thereby acquittal. It does not matter...there were 3 others but just trying to think about the impact this has on this rampant use of "self defense"...essentially stand your ground while not technically used here has been upheld.

Sorry, I was replying to the portion where you said if Jordan had been alone in the car. There would have been no gun so MD could not have pled self-defense.

 

[LambChop]

What I gather is that jurors believed what Dunn said instead of three teens.

And Dunn's girlfriend, RR, who testified on the stand that MD did say " music", that MD never mentioned that he thought JD had a gun to her, just that JD was advancing on him. Plus the man standing by MD's car on the passenger side who testified that MD said something like you're not going to talk to me like that while reaching for his gun and this man testified he never saw JD with a gun, nor did he see JD get out of the SUV.

I think what really struck me as strange is when RR testified that after she heard the shots and walked to the door that she turned and told the cashier that it was okay, it was only Mike shooting. Why would she ever say that? Has he pulled his gun before during an altercation and that is why she went out and got into the car? That seemed like an odd thing to say. jmo

 

[LambChop]

For the retrial, the prosecution needs to explain and emphasize consciousness of guilt. They need to really drive home why Dunn’s actions after the shooting are so important. They need to point out that Dunn's actions were self-serving, not fearful.

I believe Guy did try to make that clear. The team pointed out that MD left the scene with a police car right across the street. They pointed out that MD left his loaded gun in the glove compartment of his car at the hotel, went up to get the dog and then walked it outside in full view of anyone driving by. He ordered a pizza. Never told RR that JD had a gun until after his arrest. Lied about calling the crop cop to discuss turning himself in. Never called LE even when he knew JD was killed but headed home. The list goes on. That picture was painted right down to the last detail and if nothing else who is in fear of their life runs after a car to continue shooting? That is common sense. You don't do that. The worst part was that MD never said he actually saw a gun. He stated he saw what looked like the barrel of a gun, or it was a stick, or a pipe. Not sure what they were thinking when they said self-defense. We all got it here (of course we had those jailhouse letters) but we got it even before those were released. I don't know what these jurors were thinking, except maybe they weren't. jmo

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

I think that this time, They should go for murder 2. Not murder 1. I think it is too far for people to reach.

 

[JusticeJunkie]

Sorry, I was replying to the portion where you said if Jordan had been alone in the car. There would have been no gun so MD could not have pled self-defense.

If Jordon were alone in the car, he may not have responded to MD in the same way.
If the gun gave MD courage, did the three friends of Jordon give him "courage"?

MD is not the only witness that may have given self serving testimony. The three boys with Jordon also had reason to tailor their testimony toward themselves and Jordon.


This is a statement of Jesse Jackson, who also had reason to be afraid because of statistics:

There is nothing more painful to me at this stage in my life than to walk down the street and hear footsteps and start thinking about robbery. Then look around and see somebody white and feel relieved....

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

I believe Guy did try to make that clear. The team pointed out that MD left the scene with a police car right across the street. They pointed out that MD left his loaded gun in the glove compartment of his car at the hotel, went up to get the dog and then walked it outside in full view of anyone driving by. He ordered a pizza. Never told RR that JD had a gun until after his arrest. Lied about calling the crop cop to discuss turning himself in. Never called LE even when he knew JD was killed but headed home. The list goes on. That picture was painted right down to the last detail and if nothing else who is in fear of their life runs after a car to continue shooting? That is common sense. You don't do that. The worst part was that MD never said he actually saw a gun. He stated he saw what looked like the barrel of a gun, or it was a stick, or a pipe. Not sure what they were thinking when they said self-defense. We all got it here (of course we had those jailhouse letters) but we got it even before those were released. I don't know what these jurors were thinking, except maybe they weren't. jmo

BBM. That is what gets me. He did not even say for sure he saw a gun. When he made that comment about a "pop" that was heard being the shotgun, I was sold that he was lying. I knew he was trying to make it look better for him, But we all know a Shot gun does not go POP.. It goes BOOM. Completely different sound.

I think that part of the problem was that Guy kept saying we only want 1st degree. I wish he would not have said that. I think that we have 2nd degree that can be proven, But I think when you push them to 1st degree, It becomes too much of a battle.

I found myself saddened today when I agreed with Alan Dershowitz. He said Murder 2 and Battery should be the charges and I agree.

I think that had this been a 2nd degree case from the beginning it would have been guilty on all counts.. JMO

 

[LambChop]

If Jordon were alone in the car, he may not have responded to MD in the same way.
If the gun gave MD courage, did the three friends of Jordon give him "courage"?

MD is not the only witness that may have given self serving testimony. The three boys with Jordon also had reason to tailor their testimony toward themselves and Jordon.


This is a statement of Jesse Jackson, who also had reason to be afraid because of statistics:

There is nothing more painful to me at this stage in my life than to walk down the street and hear footsteps and start thinking about robbery. Then look around and see somebody white and feel relieved....

But the three passengers did not tailor their testimony about what happened in the SUV. They were truthful in the statements they gave to LE when they were questioned separately. And you are right it might not have happened if JD had been alone. But we did not see any of the witnesses changing their statements vs. their testimony in court. The only person who changed his testimony was MD.

My point about being alone in the car was that a poster said MD would have still claimed self-defense even if JD was alone in the car. But if JD were killed no one would be driving the car away and within 1 minute it would be clear to LE that JD had no gun so the outcome would not have been the same.

Praying on people's fear in terms of what MD was claiming to the jury will not solve our problems and it really was not a true picture of what happened. There was no gun found, none seen by any of the witnesses and MD admits not really seeing a gun, just what he thought was a barrel. That is not enough to fire your gun into a car. MD said he was parked too close to get out of his car because his car and the SUV were too close, yet he claims JD opened his door and got out and was advancing on him (only he does not say JD in prior statements, MD claims THEY were advancing towards him.) So if he is mistaken about THEY advancing towards him when TS was the only person who was out of the car couldn't he also be mistaken about seeing a barrel of a gun.

MD also claimed the window was down in the back, driver's side but we can see it was not down. It could have been put up by the passenger in the back but from the passenger's testimony his attention appeared to be focused on JD and getting help. With the window up MD would not have been able to see that far into the car without the light on so he has tailored his new statement to fit his description of the nasty looks from the other passenger in the back seat to make it sound more in line with THEY.

MD has a lot of inconsistencies in his statements. Maybe we should start to list them. lol JMO

 

[gxm]

If Jordon were alone in the car, he may not have responded to MD in the same way.
If the gun gave MD courage, did the three friends of Jordon give him "courage"?

MD is not the only witness that may have given self serving testimony. The three boys with Jordon also had reason to tailor their testimony toward themselves and Jordon.


This is a statement of Jesse Jackson, who also had reason to be afraid because of statistics:

There is nothing more painful to me at this stage in my life than to walk down the street and hear footsteps and start thinking about robbery. Then look around and see somebody white and feel relieved....

I disagree, the teens had no reason for self-serving testimony. They weren't on trial. Further, their testimony was corroborated by all other witnesses. Even Dunn's GF did not back up Dunn's lies.

Nothing in Dunn's behavior, from beginning (asking the teens to turn down the music) to end (arrest) supports his story that he was frightened for his life. All evidence points to Dunn firing at the teens in anger, not fear.

The Jesse Jackson quote is a meaningless distraction when discussing this case. Dunn was not alone as there were people in the store and in the parking lot. He was safe inside his car which he could have locked and rolled the windows up. He was in a well lit parking lot. Presumably his keys were in the ignition so he could have backed out in less time than it took to get his gun and load it. If Dunn had truly been afraid, he would never have confronted the teens and asked the teens to turn their music down. His actions are completely inconsistent with someone who is fearful.

 

[gxm]

I think listing the inconsistencies in Dunn's testimony is a great idea.

 

[turaj]

And Dunn's girlfriend, RR, who testified on the stand that MD did say " music", that MD never mentioned that he thought JD had a gun to her, just that JD was advancing on him. Plus the man standing by MD's car on the passenger side who testified that MD said something like you're not going to talk to me like that while reaching for his gun and this man testified he never saw JD with a gun, nor did he see JD get out of the SUV.

I think what really struck me as strange is when RR testified that after she heard the shots and walked to the door that she turned and told the cashier that it was okay, it was only Mike shooting. Why would she ever say that? Has he pulled his gun before during an altercation and that is why she went out and got into the car? That seemed like an odd thing to say. jmo

I was struck by that right away...oh just Michael...gives one the impression that he opened fire in public places all the time..I mean she really did not seem concerned. There is lots that RR could tell us about Michael. He is just hoping that she keeps quiet...I imagine "daddy" is working hard to keep her quiet.

 

[LambChop]

I was struck by that right away...oh just Michael...gives one the impression that he opened fire in public places all the time..I mean she really did not seem concerned. There is lots that RR could tell us about Michael. He is just hoping that she keeps quiet...I imagine "daddy" is working hard to keep her quiet.

I think what made an impression on me was when Strolla was cross-exanimating RR during rebuttal and she had a tissue in her hand that she had rolled into a ball and she kept turning it round and round and twisting her fingers. That is extreme stress and fear. She seems to be caught between what her original statement was and not crossing MD. Just my impression. I'm sure she will hear from him, big time.

 

[jaxibear]

IMHO, the prosecutor made a huge mistake during cross by allowing Dunn to repeatedly call the victim his "attacker" during his responses.

Shouldn't he have put an end to that? It just seemed inappropriate for a prosecutor to allow that to happen over and over.