Quantcast
Get breaking news alerts via email

Click here to manage your alerts
(Jordan Davis' parents, Lucia McBath, left, and Ronald Davis, speak to the media after the verdict was read in the trial of Michael Dunn, Saturday, Feb. 15, 2014, in Jacksonville, Fla. Dunn was convicted of attempted murder in the shooting death of Jordan Davis over an argument over loud music. (AP Photo/The Florida Times-Union, Pool) )
Verdict in Florida loud music killing again raises self-defense issue
First Published Feb 16 2014 06:29 pm • Last Updated Feb 16 2014 09:12 pm

Jacksonville, Fla. • A verdict in the city of Jacksonville is again raising the issue of self-defense and race in Florida, just seven months after George Zimmerman was acquitted in the shooting of a black teenager, Trayvon Martin.

Michael Dunn, a white 47-year-old software developer, could face 60 years in prison following his conviction Saturday on multiple counts of attempted murder for shooting into a carful of teenagers outside a Jacksonville convenience store in 2012. Jordan Davis, a black 17 year old, was killed in the shooting, but the jury couldn’t reach a verdict on the first-degree murder charge against Dunn. A mistrial was declared on that count.

Join the Discussion
Post a Comment

The verdict is a far cry from one delivered in the Zimmerman case, when he was acquitted in July in the shooting death of 17-year-old Martin in Sanford, about 125 miles south of Jacksonville.

Like Zimmerman, Dunn said he felt his life was in danger when he fired the shots. But the verdict suggested the jury struggled to see it that way.

Following an argument over loud music coming from the car that Davis was in, Dunn said he shot at the car with his 9mm handgun — he said he was afraid and thought he saw a shotgun in the car.

Legal experts say it’s likely that at least one member of the jury believed Dunn’s story — about being scared, pulling a gun in self-defense and firing the first few shots, which killed Davis. After more than 30 hours of deliberations over four days, the jury couldn’t agree on the first-degree murder charge.

"Although I don’t think the evidence supports this, it is possible that the jury felt that Dunn was proper to stand his ground as to Davis, but his shooting of the others in the car was excessive," said Kenneth Nunn, a law professor at the University of Florida.

Nunn and other experts said Sunday that it’s possible the jury was confused regarding first-degree murder and the concept that it must be "premeditated."

Another area of confusion for the general public is Florida’s stand your ground defense law, which was a flashpoint during the Zimmerman case and, to a lesser degree, in this case.

Zimmerman told police he shot Martin only after the African-American teenager physically attacked him; Martin’s family and supporters say Zimmerman, who identifies himself as Hispanic, marked Martin as a potential criminal because he was black.


story continues below
story continues below

In both the Dunn and Zimmerman trials, lawyers decided not to pursue a pretrial immunity hearing allowed by Florida’s stand-your-ground law. But in each case, jurors were told by the judges that they should acquit if they found the defendant had no duty to retreat and had the right to "stand his ground."

That phrase is part of standard instructions given jurors when they weigh a case involving a claim of self-defense.

But the state’s stand your ground law was technically not part of either trial.

"Dunn’s attorney argued self-defense, which has been around forever," said Miami defense lawyer and former assistant U.S. Attorney David Weinstein. "I think people will say that because some of the language from the stand your ground statute gets embedded into the jury instructions, that stand your ground has an effect."

Judge Russell L. Healey could impose a 60-year sentence — state statutes call for a mandatory minimum sentence of 20 years on each second-degree attempted murder conviction.

But the Florida Supreme Court could reduce the total sentence to 20 years if it decides that consecutive sentences are not appropriate when the sentences arise from one criminal episode, said Weinstein.

"This will make the decision to retry Dunn on the murder charge a little more complicated," Weinstein said. "Agreeing on a sentence of less than 60 years and forgoing an appeal might be something that Dunn would be willing to do and it would provide finality for the Davis family."

Dunn could also face 15 years in prison for shooting into the car. A sentencing date won’t be set until a hearing next month.

Meanwhile, Dunn’s attorney vowed to appeal.

"I basically told him to stay strong," Strolla said Saturday night, "and we’re still going to fight."

———

Follow Tamara Lush on Twitter at http://twitter.com/tamaralush



Copyright 2014 The Salt Lake Tribune. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Top Reader Comments Read All Comments Post a Comment
Click here to read all comments   Click here to post a comment


About Reader Comments


Reader comments on sltrib.com are the opinions of the writer, not The Salt Lake Tribune. We will delete comments containing obscenities, personal attacks and inappropriate or offensive remarks. Flagrant or repeat violators will be banned. If you see an objectionable comment, please alert us by clicking the arrow on the upper right side of the comment and selecting "Flag comment as inappropriate". If you've recently registered with Disqus or aren't seeing your comments immediately, you may need to verify your email address. To do so, visit disqus.com/account.
See more about comments here.
Staying Connected
Videos
Jobs
Contests and Promotions
  • Search Obituaries
  • Place an Obituary

  • Search Cars
  • Search Homes
  • Search Jobs
  • Search Marketplace
  • Search Legal Notices

  • Other Services
  • Advertise With Us
  • Subscribe to the Newspaper
  • Login to the Electronic Edition
  • Frequently Asked Questions
  • Contact a newsroom staff member
  • Access the Trib Archives
  • Privacy Policy
  • Missing your paper? Need to place your paper on vacation hold? For this and any other subscription related needs, click here or call 801.204.6100.