I still don't understand what his motives were. What happened?
It appears we are finally learning the State's theory on DR's motivation to murder his mother. Please read 11/7- STATE’S NOTICE TO ADMIT SIMILAR FACT EVIDENCE PURSUANT TO F.S. 90.404(2)(a) AND/OR INEXTRICABLY INTERTWINED EVIDENCE. (pgs 1-7).
In brief, the State's theory is DR was, at least in part, motivated by a desire to shock others, as well as a morbid fascination with blood, death, and gore. IMO, if not his mother-- an easy target, it would have been somebody else. The kid's not right....
Excerpt from Docket #610 on 11/7/25:
Pages 4-6 /of 7:
ARGUMENT
1. “Similar fact evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is admissible when relevant to prove
a material fact in issue [ ].” F.S. 90.404(2)(a).
2. Evidence that the Defendant shared the “Ronnie Mcnutt” video with others is relevant for
several purposes to prove material facts in issue.
3. First, the “Ronnie Mcnutt" evidence supports the testimony of C.G., as well as the
corresponding digital forensic evidence, that the
Defendant was showing off and laughing
following the killing.
4. This evidence demonstrates that the Defendant enjoys sharing disturbing images with
friends for the purpose of witnessing their reactions of shock and disgust.
5. Much like his late-night call with C.G., and sending photos through the Discord application,
the Defendant shared the “Ronnie Mcnutt” video unprompted, with the purpose of
provoking a reaction.
6. Further, the evidence demonstrates that the
Defendant was motivated, at least in part, due to
a morbid fascination with blood, gore, and death, as well as his desire to share this interest
with others.
7. Indeed, the “selfie” photo depicts the
Defendant posing with his blood-stained hand, with
his tongue stuck out in a playful manner. This photo was taken immediately following the
tragic killing of his mother, less than an hour before midnight on Friday the 13th.
8. The evidence also disproves any misconception that due to the Defendant’s age, he would
not have sufficient life experience, or even psychological capacity, to commit such a
heinous act of violence. His attraction to a graphic, bloody suicide video, in combination
with his interest in showing it to others, demonstrates he has such capacity.
9. Moreover, the “Ronnie Mcnutt” evidence refutes any defense that the Defendant was
manipulated to commit the homicide, or otherwise coerced by unknown persons. The
shared video is independent evidence that reflects on the Defendant’s state of mind on the
date of the incident, as well as his voluntariness when committing the act itself.
10. In addition, this
evidence reflects on the Defendant’s voluntariness and pride in sharing what
he did with others, as well as with detectives and the 911 operator. This includes his
decision to voluntarily waive his Miranda rights and speak with detectives about the murder.
11. Sadly, the autopsy evidence shows that not only did the Defendant want to kill his mother,
but that
he wanted to do it in the most brutal and bloody manner possible, targeting her face
and neck,
specifically the carotid artery.
12. Lastly, admission of the “Ronnie Mcnutt” video would not be to prove “bad character” or
propensity, as there is a temporal and subject-matter nexus
connecting the similar fact
evidence with the crime itself. The probative value outweighs any argument that the
evidence should be excluded under F.S. 90.403.
CONCLUSION
For the aforementioned reasons, the State requests that this Court permit admission of the
following testimonial and digital forensic evidence as similar fact evidence under F.S. 90.404(2)(a):
1. “Ronnie Mcnutt”
video depicting a man committing suicide using a rifle, causing his head
and face to graphically “explode.” (Video)
2. Evidence that the Defendant shared the “Ronnie Mcnutt” video with a group chat
composed of minors
to scare and shock them. (Text messages/testimonial evidence)
3. Evidence that after the
young men in the group chat reacted with shock, the Defendant
sent a text message including a smiley face emoji with a gun to the head, referring to the
suicide victim as a “bozo.” (Text messages/testimonial evidence)
4. Evidence that on the afternoon of the homicide, the Defendant shared the same graphic
video on the school bus with his girlfriend E.P., who also reacted with shock and disgust.
(Testimonial evidence)
5. Evidence that the
Defendant found the video funny, and was “laughing” as it was shown
to E.P. (Testimonial evidence)
6. Evidence that E.P. ended the relationship after seeing the disturbing video later that
afternoon. (Text messages/testimonial evidence)
7. Evidence that the
Defendant wanted to be Jason Voorhees from the “Friday the 13th”
horror movie series, and that the homicide occurred approximately an hour before
midnight on Friday the 13th. (Text messages)
The above-described evidence corroborates other evidence in the case, including the fact that
the Defendant voluntarily shared images of his dead mother in a pool of blood with friends, and
found her death to be a source of amusement and pride.
The Defendant was, at least in part,
motivated by a desire to shock others, as well as a morbid fascination with blood, death, and gore.
Introduction of this evidence is therefore relevant to establish identity, motive, premeditation, intent,
voluntariness, and state of mind on the night of the incident, and to refute any defense that the
Defendant was improperly influenced, coerced, or manipulated by others to commit the homicide of
his mother.
Respectfully submitted,
KATHERINE FERNANDEZ RUNDLE
STATE ATTORNEY
BY: /s/Jonathan D. Borst
Assistant State Attorney
Florida Bar #85739
local12.com
