Michael Dunn Trial Verdict: Guilty of Three Counts Attempted Murder, Mistrial on Murder 1

How does this even happen?

JACKSONVILLE, Fla. — After four days of deliberation, the jury in the trial of Michael Dunn, a Florida man who shot a teenager to death in a parking lot during a dispute over loud music, said it could not agree on whether Mr. Dunn had acted in self-defense or was guilty of murder. The jurors did find Mr. Dunn guilty of three counts of attempted murder for getting out of his car, and firing several times at the Durango sport utility vehicle in which Jordan Davis, 17, was killed but three other teenagers were not struck. Mr. Dunn continued to fire at the car even as it pulled away. For that crime, Mr. Dunn he could be sentenced to 20 to 60 years in prison. The judge declared a mistrial on the count of first-degree murder. The jury also failed to reach agreement on lesser charges that are automatically included in jury instructions. Those were second- and third-degree murder and manslaughter. Prosecutors are free to move ahead with a new trial on the murder charge, if they wish.

NYTimes

I can understand the 1st degree murder charge as that's premeditated murder whereas this seems to have happened because Mr. Dunn snapped. But how in the hell did the jury fail to reach verdicts on 2nd and 3rd degree murder as well as manslaughter? How can this bastard be guilty of attempted murder but not some degree of murder on the person that actually died from Mr. Dunn shooting him?

He will be acquitted on appeal. If one person threatened him they all did. Co conspirators to cause boldly harm. If a guy robs a bank the get away driver gets it too even if he didn't know his buddy was robbing a bank. I believe dudes had a gun then ditched it. Dunns story would be too crazy had the guy not had a gun.

reply to post by Kali74


Maybe we're not privy to all the facts that the jury heard. Or maybe jury nullification in action.

The deadlock means that at least one person on the jury had reasonable doubt about the prosecution’s version of events.

Wouldn't be the first time the prosecution made up situational evidence to support their case.
Just from looking though one has to wonder why he just didn't drive away.

reply to post by Bassago


I'm more concerned that he continued to shoot as the vehicle drove away, at which point any form of self defense is not applicable.

It also wouldn't be the 1st time a Prosecution team flubbed a case so that someone could walk or face lesser charges.

reply to post by Kali74


Unless they were still pointing it while pulling away. Just because someone is moving away from you does not remove them as a threat.

reply to post by Kali74


10 shots and no conviction on 2nd degree murder? If one of these kids did have a gun, I'm sure they would have at least gotten off one shot. As far as Dunn saying his life was threatened, I would like to know how much time it would have taken for him to hit the gas peddle and floor the car so he could get away from that situation. A couple of shots would have given him time to take off, but 10?
Who in their right mind would pull away from the gas station and not call 911. To go home as if nothing happened and order a pizza sounds like a guy who has no conscience. This should have been a slam dunk case.
One thing young people should take away from this case, is show some respect, because you never know how mentally unstable someone can be. Your music is not worth losing your life.

reply to post by Kali74


the way i understand it the 1st degree murder charge was for the guy he killed.
the three 2nd degree attempted murder charges was for the other three kids in the car. they say he killed the first guy stopped shooting and started again firing the at three others.

so it seems if that the jury could not reach a verdict on the murder1 charge. but found that he did attempt to kill the others, by stopping firie and started firing again as they drove off.

I don't think the jury was at issue with the prosecution's version of the events as the article states.

It was most likely a disagreement between first degree and second degree murder charges. Premeditation just doesn't seem likely, IMO, despite the prosecution saying that he had time to contemplate his actions before he murdered the young man. I thought that for first degree murder to happen, some sort of planning/premeditation has to be involved.

Hopefully they can get 2nd degree murder charges to stick.

reply to post by hounddoghowlie


So was 2nd, 3rd degree murder and manslaughter.

they convict him on attempted murder charges but can't decide if he's guilty of actual murder lol can't make this stuff up ..

if he's acquitted on retrial, I would think those other charges will be overturned on appeal .. wouldn't make sense to acquit him via justified self defense while convicting him of attempted murder .. either he's shooting in self defense or he's not .. in this situation it's too vague to say when the threat was over .. so the prosecution really needs a conviction on retrial I would think

marbles87
He will be acquitted on appeal. If one person threatened him they all did. Co conspirators to cause boldly harm. If a guy robs a bank the get away driver gets it too even if he didn't know his buddy was robbing a bank. I believe dudes had a gun then ditched it. Dunns story would be too crazy had the guy not had a gun.

No gun was found in the kids car so how was he threatened and these kids didn't even get out of the car. Had they gotten out of the car there would have been a trail of blood leading to where they would have hidden a gun not to mention the gas station more than likely had cameras like most stores today. Dunn started the crap by demanding the kids turn down their music what made him think he has the right to order people around. Nice way to make the victim the aggressor.

I am surprised he was convicted of anything after all it did happen in Florida.

WeRpeons
reply to post by Kali74

 

10 shots and no conviction on 2nd degree murder? If one of these kids did have a gun, I'm sure they would have at least gotten off one shot. As far as Dunn saying his life was threatened, I would like to know how much time it would have taken for him to hit the gas peddle and floor the car so he could get away from that situation. A couple of shots would have given him time to take off, but 10?
Who in their right mind would pull away from the gas station and not call 911. To go home as if nothing happened and order a pizza sounds like a guy who has no conscience. This should have been a slam dunk case.
One thing young people should take away from this case, is show some respect, because you never know how mentally unstable someone can be. Your music is not worth losing your life.

Don't forget this happened in Florida. Where the mothers of missing children look for them at wet t shirt contests and you can stalk and chase a person down and then shoot him and cry self defense. If you want to kill someone Florida seems to be the place.

reply to post by buster2010


Angela Corey seems a bit obvious at this point.

Star for bringing this topic to light

As for how this even happened?

Our current justice system allows the accused the right to a jury trial. This jury trial should be selected from societal members that have not shown bias toward the case.

When I first tuned into CNN that night, I had not even heard of the case, so it was easy for me to be without prejudice. During the commerical breaks, before the verdict was announced, I quickly searched the web for anything I could find relating to the murder. The details appeared sketchy; however, I was under the impression that surely enough evidence was there (video surveillance, eyewitnesses in the SUV, shooter never called police) to quickly convict Dunn on the Murder...

however...

there was SOMETHING that a juror (or two) could not agree on about the shooting.

Perhaps it was because since the charge was Murder 1, they had to show pre-meditation, which was not there.

Perhaps it was because the video showed the teens taunting Dunn in a malicious way as to be preceived as a physical threat.

Just as with the Trayvon Martin case, I never take the media's spin on the facts. I gather them from the trial; thus I have always supported George Zimmerman.

Its not that I support Dunn in this one, but that I know that we obvioulsly were not privy to some of the details.

reply to post by Bassago


My point EXACTLY!

reply to post by buster2010


I will have to disagree with your sentiment that "Well, this is Florida".

Actually, this is "America", where the accused has the constitutional Right to their day in court.

Do I think Casey Anthony was involved in her daughter's death? Yes. But her case went the proper proceedures and she was found 'not guilty'. Doens' mean she absolutely did not do it...just means "not found" guilty.

With all the evidence that came forward in the Martin-Zimmerman case, I support George Zimmerman in the claim of self-defense. Again: evidence, not emotion, even though I was emotionally vested to see Zimmerman acquitted.

Remember, always think of it as if it were you. You would want the system to work for you, that is, have your rightful day in court.

Remember how the media had you thinking Trayvon was a angelic 10 yr old kid wanting some snacks, and ruthlessly gunned down by a racist 'white' man?

Think.

there was no gun in the car. dunn went into is car, opened the glove compartment and got his gun and opened fire. even "if" the teens were taunting him, they are words. he could just as easily got into his car and drove away. this was a confrontation that HE CHOSE to engage in. words can hurt and make a person sad, but they still do warrant a violent response.

i have no problem with one defending ones self. this law, the way it is written, is a bad law. it makes it to easy for a person to shoot and kill and say elf defense. after all, when all you have is the shooters word, it is easy for him to say he defended him self. why? the other person is not around to say his side of the argument. he is dead. maybe dunn should have killed the other three? he probably would have not received ANY jail time.

reply to post by blackthorne


Just as I argued in my defense of George Zimmerman: there IS more than the shooters word.

For example, in that case, we had not only Zimmerman's account, but:

Eyewitness testimony (the neighbor who saw the fight- for the Prosecution)
Earwitness testimony (Rachel Jeantel, who heard the altercation- for the Prosecution)
Medical Examiner (examined the body- for the prosecution)
Forensic expert (examined the wounds- for the prosecution)
Ballistics expert (examined the gun shots and determined distance- for the prosecution)

In this case, there simply was not enough evidence to convict on 1st degree, only because pre-meditation was not determined.

reply to post by Kali74


I wondered the very same thing when the verdict first came out. I mean really, he's found guilty of attempting to murder the passengers in the car, yet when one of them actually ends up dead as the result of his "attempt to murder" them, somehow he's magically innocent. WOW!

Then I heard someone on one of the MSM news sources who summed it up pretty good. Apparently, under the "Stand Your Ground" laws in Florida, you get penalized for missing not for killing. Just like the woman who was initially sentenced to 20 yrs. for firing the warning shot.

It's an absolute disgrace!

F&S for the OP!

reply to post by blackthorne


See, you have done like many and have assumed some of the facts.

Dunn did not 'go to his car to get a gun'. He was already in his car and reached down toward his leg to get the gun.

Believe me, it makes a difference in determining pre-meditation and self-defense.

How do I know he never 'went to his car'? This came out in the trial from one of the teens inside the SUV.