Not again! This is the second time in a year or so that
an unarmed African American male has been killed under suspicious
circumstances. George Zimmerman killed Trayvon Martin, but he was ultimately acquitted. Since his acquittal, he has
managed to stay in the news headlines.
He has seemed to enjoy his new found stardom. Although the facts of Jordan Davis and
Trayvon Martin’s cases are different, the cases are inextricably intertwined
for a number of reasons. So, what makes
the cases similar? The facts of both
cases arose out of Florida, the “Stand Your Ground” laws have been implicated,
both decedents were unarmed at the time of their deaths, both decedents were
African American males, and both decedents were killed by armed men. Other than these similarities, the cases are
factually different.
Facts
On November 23, 2012, Michael Dunn, who
was 47 years old, shot and killed Jordan Davis, who was 17 years old. Since that date, Dunn has maintained his
innocence. He claims that his actions
were proper because he invoked a defense—self-defense—that absolves him of
criminal culpability. If the jury finds
that he acted in self-defense, he will be acquitted because self- defense is an
absolute defense to the crimes he has been charged. He has been charged with first-degree murder,
three counts of attempted murder and shooting or throwing a deadly
missile.
On November 23, 2012, Jordan
and a few of his friends were sitting in a red sports utility vehicle. Apparently, the driver of the vehicle was
sitting at the gas pump when Dunn arrived at the gas station. Dunn and his fiancée were coming from his
son’s wedding, and were staying at a hotel not too far from the gas
station. According to Dunn, the music
coming from the red SUV was extremely loud.
He alleges that he asked Davis to turn down the volume, which he
did. Then, according to Dunn, but not
corroborated by any other witnesses, someone in the vehicle turned the music
volume louder. At this point, Dunn
alleges that he and Jordan exchanged unpleasant words. He then claims that Jordan threatened him,
even though no witnesses corroborate his claims, and he felt that his life was
in danger. He claims that he saw about 4
inches of a shotgun barrel in Jordan’s hands, so he started shooting into the
SUV. Despite his allegations that
Jordan, or anyone in the SUV had a weapon, no weapon has even been found. Dunn shot 10 rounds into the SUV and Jordan
was killed from multiple bullet wounds.
The most important fact, however, is
what Dunn did immediately following the shooting. A reasonable person would have called 911 to
report the incident. Dunn did no such
thing. Once his fiancée came out of the
gas station, the two of them drove to their hotel room. His fiancée testified that Dunn never
mentioned to her that Jordan or anyone else had a weapon when he shot them.
Either way, when they arrived at the hotel room, Dunn ordered a pizza, and
watched movies for the remainder of the night.
He was not arrested until the following day, and that is when he claimed
that he acted in self defense. Interesting.
Racial Profiling
Racial profiling. Police brutality. Conversations about each of these concepts
are avoided like the Bubonic Plague.
Despite the feelings of consternation and awkwardness these concepts
cause many people to feel; it is important that we have these tough
conversations about controversial issues. These issues all too often represent the
proverbial elephant-in-the-room that is never discussed. Did Michael Dunn shoot and kill Jordan Davis
because of his race or because he was listening to “thug music,” or “rap crap?” Possibly.
Dunn’s attorney held a press conference the other day, in which he
discussed how he specifically did not refer to witnesses by their gender or
race. I suppose that was his attempt to
keep these issues out of the case.
However, these issues, along with a litany of other issues, are
important to this case. In fact, any
person knows that a party’s age, gender, race, height, weight or other similar
factors can be very important. These
issues can underscore motive, or intent or reasonableness.
Jury Deliberation
The jury has had the case and has been
deliberating for just over 20 hours. The
jury is comprised of 12 citizens—7 females and 5 males. Both parties were involved in the selection
of the jury. Both sides were able to
strike potential jurors for no reason; they were also allowed a certain number
of strikes for specific reasons, which the judge granted or denied. I participated in a civil jury trial last
year, and I can assure you that no party gets every person they want included
on the jury. It is an exercise in
compromise. In the end, you settle for a
group of people who you hope will make the right decision based on the law and
evidence presented during the trial. You
hope that the group of individuals charged with this great burden will make an
unbiased decision. To be completely
honest, I believe asking people to leave their biases at home is impossible. Therefore, it is an imperfect system, but it
is the only system we have and you only hope that justice will be served.
The Verdict
Once the jury has finished its
deliberations, I sincerely hope they reach the right decision. The jury has three decisions it can reach in
this case—guilty, not guilty or, in the alternative, there could be a hung
jury. Based on the presentation of
evidence, it is fairly clear to me the decision the jury should reach. However, the jurors are not lawyers, and
honestly may have difficulty comprehending the complex legal issues and arguments
advanced by both sides. Both sides have
done their best job in presenting their case in the most persuasive manner. The prosecution has the burden of proving each
element of the charges beyond a
reasonable doubt. That is a very
high standard that means—no other logical
explanation can be derived from the facts except that the defendant committed
the crime, thereby overcoming the presumption that a person is innocent until
proven guilty.
I hope it is clear from this blogpost
where I stand with respect to this case.
The State of Florida has dealt with a number of murders of unarmed,
African American teenagers recently. In
the minds of many people, the criminal justice system has failed them. When people feel that way, it becomes very
difficult for them to have faith in a system. Many people are still upset about the George
Zimmerman verdict. Sometimes it only
takes a small straw to break the camel’s back; I hope a bad decision in this
case would not represent that straw. I
hope the citizens of Florida would not react much as the citizens of California
reacted after Rodney King’s assaulters were essentially exonerated. I pray that Florida does not burst into a
state of violence, but I would not be at all surprised if violence ensues after
an unfavorable outcome.
Peace
