Another case of a black 17 year old in Florida getting shot and killed by an adult, this time a white man instead of a Hispanic, and the case is being handled by FL State Attorney Angela Corey.
Jordan Davis is the deceased. Michael Dunn the accused shooter.
Major differences from the Zimmerman Martin Trial.
Dunn pulled into a gas station/quick mart and a nearby SUV was supposedly blaring loud music. Supposedly Dunn complained about the volume and one or more of the 4 occupants in the SUV supposedly had choice words for Dunn's lack of music appreciation. A car door opened on the SUV and Dunn claimed he saw a shotgun. Dunn was out of his vehicle and "fearing for his life" reached inside and grabbed his gun and fired 4 times into the SUV. As the SUV pulled away from Dunn, he fired 4 more rounds at the SUV.
Dunn was away from home, staying at a hotel. He went back to the hotel, ordered a pizza, and then drove home, supposedly preferring to deal with the police in his home town but he never called them. Police tracked him down by his license plate.
Police found no evidence of a weapon in the SUV which never left the gas station.
After investigation Dunn was charged with Second Degree Murder and 3 Attempted Murders but a Grand Jury returned a First Degree Murder indictment.
There was an episode at a bail hearing and the first judge recused herself. S.A. Corey asked for an August trial but it was set for September. The defense attorney requested at least 6 months for trial prep.
I thought Zimmerman was classic "reasonable doubt" based on contradictory witnesses, sustained injuries, and forensic testimony. Dunn's case strikes me as requiring Perry Mason or Matlock to defend. Unlike Zimmerman, Dunn is claiming Stand Your Ground, there are multiple witnesses including the 3 survivors, no injuries to Dunn, no physical contact, and no evidence of a gun in the SUV that was the cause of Dunn's fear of substantial harm, SYG claim. There could have been a gun in the SUV and it could have been tossed after the Shooting but it wasn't found at the scene. Without someone to corroborate a gun or at least something that resembled a gun, such as an umbrella, I don't see grounds for acquittal at this point.
Jordan Davis is the deceased. Michael Dunn the accused shooter.
Major differences from the Zimmerman Martin Trial.
Dunn pulled into a gas station/quick mart and a nearby SUV was supposedly blaring loud music. Supposedly Dunn complained about the volume and one or more of the 4 occupants in the SUV supposedly had choice words for Dunn's lack of music appreciation. A car door opened on the SUV and Dunn claimed he saw a shotgun. Dunn was out of his vehicle and "fearing for his life" reached inside and grabbed his gun and fired 4 times into the SUV. As the SUV pulled away from Dunn, he fired 4 more rounds at the SUV.
Dunn was away from home, staying at a hotel. He went back to the hotel, ordered a pizza, and then drove home, supposedly preferring to deal with the police in his home town but he never called them. Police tracked him down by his license plate.
Police found no evidence of a weapon in the SUV which never left the gas station.
After investigation Dunn was charged with Second Degree Murder and 3 Attempted Murders but a Grand Jury returned a First Degree Murder indictment.
There was an episode at a bail hearing and the first judge recused herself. S.A. Corey asked for an August trial but it was set for September. The defense attorney requested at least 6 months for trial prep.
I thought Zimmerman was classic "reasonable doubt" based on contradictory witnesses, sustained injuries, and forensic testimony. Dunn's case strikes me as requiring Perry Mason or Matlock to defend. Unlike Zimmerman, Dunn is claiming Stand Your Ground, there are multiple witnesses including the 3 survivors, no injuries to Dunn, no physical contact, and no evidence of a gun in the SUV that was the cause of Dunn's fear of substantial harm, SYG claim. There could have been a gun in the SUV and it could have been tossed after the Shooting but it wasn't found at the scene. Without someone to corroborate a gun or at least something that resembled a gun, such as an umbrella, I don't see grounds for acquittal at this point.
Last edited:
