“JACKSONVILLE, Fla. -- Michael Dunn was found guilty of three counts of second degree attempted murder Saturday night and one count of throwing or shooting a deadly missile at an occupied vehicle in the shooting death of 17-year-old Jordan Davis.”
A multitude of homicides have been committed in the name of ‘Stand Your Ground Laws’. The greatest problem is that nobody knows what that law really says. That includes the jury who is listening as well to the case as possible. It was not mentioned that in the case of Michael Dunn, just as in George Zimmerman trial, the victims were pursued by those who took their lives. There is a problem with that law.
"The misunderstanding of what Stand Your Ground laws do is harmful. The right to self-defense allows a person to use deadly force if she reasonably believes it is necessary to prevent an imminent use of deadly force by an aggressor—but she has a duty to retreat rather than use force if it is safe to do so in most states. What Stand Your Ground laws do is remove the duty to retreat when attacked. That’s it. They do not give you a right to attack when you are not in imminent danger.”
CHAPTER 776 ~ JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE
776.031 Use of force in defense of others.—A person is justified in the use of force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to prevent or terminate the other’s trespass on, or other tortious or criminal interference with, either real property other than a dwelling or personal property, lawfully in his or her possession or in the possession of another who is a member of his or her immediate family or household or of a person whose property he or she has a legal duty to protect. However, the person is justified in the use of deadly force only if he or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony. A person does not have a duty to retreat if the person is in a place where he or she has a right to be.
History.—s. 13, ch. 74-383; s. 1189, ch. 97-102; s. 3, ch. 2005-27.
776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.—
(1) A person who uses force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who was acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer. As used in this subsection, the term “criminal prosecution” includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.
The jury could not reach a consensus on whether Michael Dunn. Was this law clearly explained to the jurors? Were they unable to convict Michael Dunn because they actually did not understand the law? The jury could not reach a consensus on whether Michael Dunn was guilty or not.
"It is impossible to discuss stand your ground laws without first explaining the concept of the duty to retreat. In its most extreme form, the duty to retreat states that a person who is under an imminent threat of personal harm must retreat from the threat as much as possible before responding with force in self-defense. These days, states that retain the duty generally incorporate a variety of the duty with somewhat less stringent requirements."
Was there racial bias? If the prosecutor had revealed Dunn’s thoughts about black people, would it have been perceived as the race card? If so, it was pulled from a stacked deck. Dunn's racist letters were not used in the trial. If they had been, he would have been found guilty on all 5 counts. Nevertheless, according to The Tampa Bay Times a white person killed a black person under SYG walked 73% of the time. In reverse, black people walked only 59% of the time.
In a letter to his brother from jail Dunn wrote; "It's spooky how racist everyone is up here and how biased toward blacks the courts are. This jail is full of blacks and they all act like thugs," he noted. He went on to say, "This may sound a bit radical but if more people would arm themselves and kill these **** idiots when they're threatening you, eventually they may take the hint and change their behavior."
Dunn could receive up to 60 years for second degree attempted murder of three people, and 15 years for shooting at the car as the boys tried to drive away. There will be an appeal for first degree murder, albeit Dunn who is 47 will never see daylight given 75 years.
If you enjoyed this article, subscribe. You will receive each article as soon as it is published.