GUILTY FL - Jordan Davis, 17, shot to death, Satellite Beach, 23 Nov 2012 #7

[evelyn24]

Here are the questions and answers from this morning, in case anyone missed them.

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


-- "Is the defense of self-defense separate for each person in each count?" Judge: "Yes."

-- "Are we determining if deadly force is justified against each person in each count?" Judge: "Yes."

-- "Or, if we determine deadly force is justified against one person, is it justified against the others?" Judge: "No. Self-defense and justifiable use of deadly force applies separately to each count."

Interesting.
What do you all make of these questions?

 

[Nore]

I just read a few comments on the last thread from people who said they too are uncomfortable around black teens because crime stats show they do commit the most crimes. I won't quote them & call them out, but if you are one who posted that, pease think more deeply about what you posted.

The fact that the majority of violent crimes are committed by African-Americans, does not allow one to logically conclude that most African-Americans are criminals. Nor do the FBI statistics actually show that the majority of violent crimes are committed by African-Americans, the statistics show that they are arrested and convicted the most. The statistics are blind to how the criminal justice system treats black defendants differently than it does whites.

----------
Hi, when I was working I was robbed at gun point by two guys. Right away other customers would hem and haw were they? I just looked at them, I was angry! I said NO! they were white as the driven snow. I was robbed 3 times in 18 years. All were white! My mother taught me there is good and bad in all. Including white. She also told me sometimes the smarter they are, the dumber they are..Book smart but no common sense! I get pis**d off.:tantrum:

 

[evelyn24]

Based on their questions yesterday and today, I'd say they found guilty on the shooting into a car, hung on murder and now are arguing over attempted murder on the three passengers since they previously, apparently, assumed that they didn't have to decide those separately.

jmo

What is the official charge of shooting into the car?

 

[Karmady]

What is the official charge of shooting into the car?

I think it's discharging a gun or missile into a dwelling place -- paraphrasing, but something like that. I posted a link to all of the Florida jury charges in the last thread. I have to leave in a minute, though, so I don't have time to go find it. Sorry!

eta: never mind, it was easy to find:

10.13 SHOOTING OR THROWING MISSILES IN DWELLING
§ 790.19, Fla.Stat.

To prove the crime of (crime charged), the State must prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

1. (Defendant)

[shot a firearm].
[threw a missile].
[hurled or projected a stone or other hard substance that would produce death or great bodily harm].

2. [He] [She] did so [at] [within] [into]

[a public or private building, occupied or unoccupied].
[a public or private bus].
[a train, locomotive, railway car, caboose, cable railway car, street railway car, monorail car, or vehicle of any kind that was being used or occupied by any person].
[a boat, vessel, ship, or barge lying in or plying the waters of this state].
[an aircraft flying through the air space of this state].

3. The act was done wantonly or maliciously.

Definitions
"Wantonly" means consciously and intentionally, with reckless indifference to consequences and with the knowledge that damage is likely to be done to some person.

"Maliciously" means wrongfully, intentionally, without legal justification or excuse, and with the knowledge that injury or damage will or may be caused to another person or the property of another person.

Give if applicable.
A "firearm" is legally defined as (adapt from § 790.001, Fla.Stat., as required by allegations).

Lesser Included Offenses

SHOOTING OR THROWING MISSILES IN DWELLING — 790.19
CATEGORY ONE CATEGORY TWO FLA. STAT. INS. NO.
None
Attempt 777.04(1) 5.1
Discharging firearm in public 790.15 10.6

 

[popsicle]

Based on their questions yesterday and today, I'd say they found guilty on the shooting into a car, hung on murder and now are arguing over attempted murder on the three passengers since they previously, apparently, assumed that they didn't have to decide those separately.

jmo

Which, when you think about it, it doesn't make sense because the verdict form would show each charge of attempted murder as separate.

 

[popsicle]

Stephanie Brown ‏@NewsAndNom 50s
It was right around 5 yesterday that jurors surfaced w/ a q after not being heard from all day. No word from them since 940am #DunnTrial

 

[ShadyLady]

Yah so true...like Mr Rogers

With his hair parted in the middle:

http://www.nndb.com/people/762/000092486/

 

[LambChop]

Interesting.
What do you all make of these questions?

It could be they are hung on murder and want to clarify to jurors who are unclear on the rest of the counts. Obviously someone, or some, feel that MD was aiming at JD only and not attempting to hit anyone else. But shooting into a car with other passengers who have not threatened you is reckless.

However MD admitted on the stand that he was aiming at all of them because he was fearful one of them was going to shoot him. He said over their heads but that is not what the bullet path shows. It is pretty clear where he was aiming and that he probably took time to aim. jmo

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Respectfully, BBM. We need to bring back the old castle doctrine statute that required a duty to retreat on behalf of the shooter BEFORE they fired lethal shots (or any shots). I'm not a gun owner nor will I ever be, but the way the the laws are now, it truly is the Wild West in my state. Shoot first and ask questions later.

I think that a "duty to retreat" law would make it easier for a jury to find Dunn guilty. At the same time I feel that the evidence shows he didn't have a legal right to fire his gun at those teenagers within the laws that are in place.

Should we have laws that make it really easy for juries to convict or should we change how we seat juries so that laws that allow people to legally defend themselves when appropriate remain?

I vote for changes in how we seat juries.

 

[Nore]

Interesting.
What do you all make of these questions?

-------
Now I am not good at wording this, bear with me please. I think it is the charges against M.D. for so many shots at the suv when only one kid was needling him. I am hopeful.. I am also usually wrong :floorlaugh:

 

[evelyn24]

I think it's discharging a gun or missile into a dwelling place -- paraphrasing, but something like that. I posted a link to all of the Florida jury charges in the last thread. I have to leave in a minute, though, so I don't have time to go find it. Sorry!

eta: never mind, it was easy to find:

10.13 SHOOTING OR THROWING MISSILES IN DWELLING
§ 790.19, Fla.Stat.

To prove the crime of (crime charged), the State must prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

1. (Defendant)

[shot a firearm].
[threw a missile].
[hurled or projected a stone or other hard substance that would produce death or great bodily harm].

2. [He] [She] did so [at] [within] [into]

[a public or private building, occupied or unoccupied].
[a public or private bus].
[a train, locomotive, railway car, caboose, cable railway car, street railway car, monorail car, or vehicle of any kind that was being used or occupied by any person].
[a boat, vessel, ship, or barge lying in or plying the waters of this state].
[an aircraft flying through the air space of this state].

3. The act was done wantonly or maliciously.

Definitions
"Wantonly" means consciously and intentionally, with reckless indifference to consequences and with the knowledge that damage is likely to be done to some person.

"Maliciously" means wrongfully, intentionally, without legal justification or excuse, and with the knowledge that injury or damage will or may be caused to another person or the property of another person.

Give if applicable.
A "firearm" is legally defined as (adapt from § 790.001, Fla.Stat., as required by allegations).

Lesser Included Offenses

SHOOTING OR THROWING MISSILES IN DWELLING — 790.19
CATEGORY ONE CATEGORY TWO FLA. STAT. INS. NO.
None
Attempt 777.04(1) 5.1
Discharging firearm in public 790.15 10.6

ah bless you!

 

[popsicle]

Vic Micolucci (WJXT) ‏@WJXTvic 2m
#JordanDavis' mom - "Day 13. I feel verdict is coming soon. Calm and peace prevails over me. Praying fervently for justice for all the boys"

 

[Karmady]

Which, when you think about it, it doesn't make sense because the verdict form would show each charge of attempted murder as separate.

I agree. But it would only make more sense if they found self-defense on the murder charge -- and I'm not going to post that

I have to run, so y'all should hear the verdict shortly!

 

[popsicle]

Vic Micolucci (WJXT) ‏@WJXTvic 16s
FYI - #MichaelDunn's parents, family have not spoken out publicly since the trial started.

 

[ShadyLady]

page 49 of the police reports containig the witness interview info from the SUV's time in the strip mall parking lot seems to suggest the witness was cotacted and interviewed by police because he was a 911 caller on the night of the shooting and he called to report having heard gunshots from the vicinity of the gas station, had seen a red SUV (victim vehicle) come from that direction into the strip mall parking lot and occupants got out and walked around the vehicle (victim driver claimed to have been inspecting vehicle for damages in his account), never left the immediate vicinity of the vehicle and then upon seeing something in the backseat that was not visible to witness(Jordan Davis shot) the SUV immediately backed out of the strip mall lot and returned to the gas station. The report seems to indicate that this witness told dispatcher in his 911 call that SUV occupants may have been involved in the shooting incident and he wanted to report their presence in strip mall parking lot in case they had stashed any weapon involved.

My take on this is:

1) THIS is the witness/911 caller that Dunn was hanging his hat on in his letters when he kept referring to being able to prove the SUV had a weapon and the occupants stashed it somewhere LE did not search before returning to the gas station.

and

2) this witness did NOT report he saw the occupants stash or appear to stash anything. The report makes it clear he saw nothing of the sort. The witness mentioned stashing something in his 911 call because he was assuming that the SUV may have been involved in the shooting and MAY have left the scene breifly before returning in order to stash a weapon. In other words it probably went something like this:

911 what is your emergency?

um yeah, I just heard a bunch of what sounded like gunshots across the way at the gas station. then some SUV full of young black men came flying into the parking lot over here at the strip mall. Some of the young men got out and were walking around the vehicle and then just peeled off again, back over to the gas station. If there has been a shooting and a red SUV was involved you should probably check between here and there in case they dumped a weapon.

in other words assumptions were made by this witness at the TIME based on black men, SUV, gunshots, peeling tires and a leaving and retuning to the scene of a shooting. They were not based on anything actually witnessed but were simply assupmtions that the SUV seemed involved in whatever the incident was at the gas station and caller was reporting their location during the time away from crime scene in an attempt to be a good citizen.

What this also means to me, is that the strip mall and the area where the SUV was parked breifly was thoroughly searched for any weapons and none were found.

MD and his "smoking gun" witness were so much BS. No such witness exists, save in MD's own mind.

I wonder why we never heard the 911 calls...

 

[Steely Dan]

Well I've put off my errands as long as I possibly could... You all should expect a verdict within the hour
That's my luck!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

fftobed: Thank God CNN is running something non annoying and will probably break in when the verdict comes down.

 

[tlcya]

Based on their questions yesterday and today, I'd say they found guilty on the shooting into a car, hung on murder and now are arguing over attempted murder on the three passengers since they previously, apparently, assumed that they didn't have to decide those separately.

jmo

To me this seems the most reasonable possibility with the info at hand. I agree with you that may be the reason for the 3 part question from jury.

 

[LambChop]

I wonder why we never heard the 911 calls...

Mr. Dunn decided it was not necessary to make any because by law it was justified. His was the only one that mattered so he could get it documented. Instead he had plenty of time to make up a story that would sound like self-defense, it appears. jmo

 

[evelyn24]

I agree. But it would only make more sense if they found self-defense on the murder charge -- and I'm not going to post that

I have to run, so y'all should hear the verdict shortly!

I think so too but with juries you never know what is going through their minds. I would think by their questions unfortunately they found self defense on JD, but can't come to a decision on whether he was attempting to murder the passengers. If they found MD G on murder one you would think the rest of the charges would be decided fast.

idk

 

[popsicle]

Rachel Leitão ‏@RachelLeitao 4m
I'm not seeing any Dunn supporters or Rhonda Rouer. I'll keep you posted.