who killed a black man no matter what the circumstances were.

I find this outrageous.

Fuck u again amerikka.

convict a White guy for killing a Black guy no matter what the circumstances were...

As to whether the automobile's family would see justice done.

but damn

only Murder 1? Did the jury have the choice to convict him of a lessor charge?

An neither of those fit? I find that hard to believe.

Wouldn't a "racist gun nut" block the convictions on the attempted murder charges?

Isn't it possible that the jurists were split between manslaughter and murder 1? Maybe I'm missing something here.

The racist gun nut had the "self-defense" crap to enable him/them to hang the murder charge. There wasn't anything like that to help them with the attempted murder charges because the so-called danger was over when Dunn shot up the car as it was trying to leave.

They can vote to convict or acquit for any reason they choose. A racist gun nut could've just said "no" to the attempted murder charges and make it a mistrial on every count.

When faced with 11 other rational people, he could argue against the first charge, however weak his reasons may have been. While he could have also simply refused to convict on the other charges, he probably couldn't summon the courage to do it without providing the rest of the jurors some kind of reason. I'd imagine there was quite a bit of pressure on him. Perhaps it took a bit of time to even get him to agree on the other charges and he got tired of trying or refusing to defend a position that had no defense.

Would a racist gun nut be okay with attempted 2nd degree murder charges? Probably not. I suspect the decision was more complicated for some unknown reason.

Dunn made a self defense claim for Jordan Davis, but he failed to make that claim for the other three in the vehicle. That is why the racist had to convict on those charges, there was no self defense claims to hide behind.

As opposed to failing to decide if his actions were illegal. He wasn't acquitted.

This was the key question that tells us how they reached the verdict, at least one person believed it was self defense and then they asked the judge if the self defense claim applied to everyone in the vehicle or if it had to be applied to each person seperately. When the judge said it had to be applied to each person seperately and Dunn had not even made a self defense claim against the other three in the vehicle that pretty much ensured a conviction on the attempted murder charges as there was no longer a self defense claim to hide behind.

could have just said he or SHE (they do exist) did not have enough evidence to convict on every charge. Instead we get this convoluted tale where a racist excuses a guy for murder one but then convicts on all other charges. What is most likely is there was a reason for some of the jurors to buy the self defense argument that we aren't seeing. I don't think it was self defense, but I wasn't there, I wasn't in the courtroom and I didn't have all the evidence. So Occam's Razor and whatnot, the most likely reason is there was enough doubt for murder one, that's not racism, but too many have their viewpoints colored angry red by their emotions to see logic.

You can make ignorant claims like my views are colored by ny emotions, vut you have no clue why I think like I do. It just so happens that not long before this verdict came the jury asked the judge if they believed it was self defense in the case of Davis whether that self defense claim applies to all charges indivdually, the judge said that no they had to determine the risk posed by each member of the vehicle individually. This ensured the convictions on attempted murder because Dunn had not even made self defense claims against the other people in the car. You can say my views are based on emotion but I know the facts of this case better than you realize, maybe that makes your opinion of me a rush to judgment colored by your emotions.

It's not manslaughter because that's unintentional, and this was intentional.

The racism charge doesn't fit the decided counts at all.

If I had been on the jury and thought that it was Murder 1, I would have refused to go down to the lesser charge, because even if this jury hung, the least the guy would ever get would be Murder 2. He'll either have to plead to it (which his attorney should now consider), or he'll have to stand retrial and take the chance of conviction on Murder 1. So there would be no advantage to compromising on the charge - the other convictions basically put him in prison for just about the rest of his life already. Murder 1 would be life without parole.

Under those circumstances, why would any juror convinced it was Murder 1 change his/her vote to Murder 2?

that might have been hard to prove in this case (though just the fact Dunn thought he needed to have a gun with him would, to me, indicate he intended to shoot someone when he had the chance).

The prosecutor may have gotten the jury to see it his way if he'd pushed for a murder 2 conviction.

See, that I didn't know, and now it makes me want to go make out with a belt sander, because fuck my species that's why

Will they be able to shoot and claim fear of being shot and killed under the stand your ground laws? I think not. But it sure is beginning to look like black men, especially black teens are all targets.

That might be the only way to change that ridiculous law. And you know it'll change after a couple of cases like that.

But it's much more likely they'll try to find some kind of way around it.

In Florida right now, how likely is that?

That reminds me of this:

White-on-white slayings tumbled from 63,704 deaths in the 1980s to 46,179 deaths in the 10-year period from 2000 to 2009. Black-on-black killings dropped from 56,931 to 41,457 deaths during the same periods.

Black-on-white killings grew from 8,503 to 8,530, while white-on-black slayings dropped from 4,745 to 4,380. Homicides involving all other racial combinations, including Asians and American Indians, rose from 3,854 to 4,981.

I know what your thinking... this is a Florida thing... Florida's white-on-black killings grew from 338 in the 1980s to 414 from 2000-09. Black-on-white homicides rose from 529 to 858 during the same period.

There might be a few black prisoners who won't take too kindly to him killing a black teenager.

hard time. Prison is going to be a perilous place for the scumbag, there he will meet real threats that would have no remorse in killing him. He will have to spend his prison time in complete isolation if he is to come out alive.

...and gets 15 years for shooting at a VEHICLE, which is apparently worth more and more deserving of JUSTICE than an innocent kid murdered by an angry, racist fuck.

Gotta love AmeriKKKa eh?

Fabulous.

to your statement?

unless he decides to plead guilty to 2nd degree murder. It looks like the jury was split between 1st and 2nd degree murder, since his actions after they tried to flee were found to be attempted murder.

The headline is deliberately inflammatory, implying he is only getting 15 years.

Oh, and because the charges are separate, the time served is sequential, so he is already essentially facing life in prison even before a retrial.

It's a very good outcome. Not perfect because it's not over, but very good. And it will only get better as there will only be more years added to his sentence with the coming re-trial.

...zilch for first degree murder, which he is absolutely guilty of and which he may never be convicted of due to so-called "Stand Your Ground" laws.

It's bullshit. Of course I'm happy he got the time he got and he certainly deserved it.

As for First Degree Murder - this should have been an open and shut case. That it wasn't is absolutely nauseating. What if HE was black and the kids in the SUV were white?

What if he were a black woman firing a simple warning shot in the air to discourage her violent husband from killing her, first? Then, it took a jury a whole 12 minutes to sentence HER to 20 years.

RACE. RACISM.

It needs to be said. Again.

Playing music.
Wearing a hoodie.
Looking 'threatening'
Carrying skittles and iced tea.
Reaching into your own pocket while standing on your own front porch.
Asking for help after an accident.

What's next? Breathing?

Seriously.

then shoot and kill the second person and then claim to have feared for his or her life and stand a good chance of going free. The law won't change until the son or daughter of some big shot in Florida gets murdered and their murderer walks because of the SYG law.

Give me a fucking break. They won't retry.

The kid's poor parents. No justice.

according to the teabagger reporter that questioned Angela Corey. in the post-verdict press conference.

Thank you. I couldn't follow the trial closely, was the prosecution inferior? Or voir dire? I don't understand how they could find him guilty of the assault, but not the murder.

Jordan to be tried, failed to address the elephant in the room; Dunn's racism, ....whole thing has me at a loss on this one count

the two cases she tried. Yet, she tried to burn a Black woman who fired a warning shot in a legitimate case of self defense.

recognize it in others who are such.

They found him guilty of attempted murder because the victims were fleeing when he was shooting at them, so he had no reason to fear them and hadn't even claimed self-defense in shooting at them.

The mistrial part was a bummer but in the end Dunn is likely to go away for a very very long time.

The jury already found him guilty of attempted murder. It was most likely stuck between 1st and 2nd degree murder.

That puts him in a difficult position. It makes it more likely that he's facing either a 1st or 2nd degree murder conviction, so he may be more inclined to plea to 2nd degree rather than risk 1st degree.

Or is there some law/rule against that since they didn't raise the issue the first time around and it's not new?

from answer.com:

"Retrial is a new trial in itself. If granted, it is a second chance to present evidence old and new in order to seek justice. "

http://www.justanswer.com/topics-retrial/

They are referring to somebody being found guilty and then finding new evidence, so would need for a re-trial to be granted. But I would expect that would hold for a new trial after a hung jury. They are starting from scratch, so to speak, so can re-present the evidence and add any new evidence they find. Same with the defense, they can add new evidence and re-present their defense.

In this case, where he was found guilty of all the other charges, I expect the defense will be trying to up their presentation too.

If conditions allow, they'll even be able to present his guilt in the other crimes against him.

I just can't stop thinking about that poor kid's parents

3 20 year counts and a 15 year count to run consecutively is the general consensus of what his sentence will be.

A much clearer example of Murder 1 is in the following link. The jury could not reach a verdict for Murder 1 and she had to be retried.

http://flaglerlive.com/33638/myrtle-mc-kinney-murder-gytonia-cheek/

he is 47 years old, now life in prison. He is going to see what fear and racism really are all about. The rest of this bigots life is beyond his imagination. This guy got himself a fate worse than the death penalty. Did you enjoy that last day of freedom. were you proud of yourself on the way home, did you have a cool story to tell your racist buddies. Did you enjoy your last pizza and beer you will ever have?????? Was it worth it. Will your brave gun toting, racist buddies still go around blasting innocent people after you are made an example of??