Criminal Justice

Michael Dunn Found Guilty of Attempted Murder, Three Related Charges, Mistrial on Murder Charge

Shot and killed a teenager allegedly over music

|

The Florida jury in the case of Michael Dunn has found him guilty on four charges, including three for second-degree attempted murder.

But they were unable to reach a verdict on a fifth count of first-degree murder. The judge—who moments before had said that the jury had reached a verdict on all counts—declared a mistrial on this count alone.

NEXT: NSA Reportedly Spied on US Law Firm That Represented Indonesian Government in Trade Dispute

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. How could anyone possibly believe Dunn was justified in killing one teen and yet simultaneously guilty of attempting to shoot all four teens? This verdict is irrational.

    1. I assume “reasonable doubt” on the murder while “beyond a reasonable doubt” on riddling a fleeing car with gunfire”?

      1. My understanding is he fired into the car, paused 10 seconds, then started shooting at the car again.

        So those 10 seconds may have been enough to conclude premeditation on attempted murder 1 but the opening salvo that killed the kid was not premeditated. So they deadlocked on murder in the first.

        Although I do believe juries are instructed to consider murder 2 if the evidence is not sufficient to convict on 1st degree. Is it possible the judge fucked up or do we just have an exceptionally stupid jury?

        In any case, Dunn is going away for a long time. At least 20 years.

        1. I’m just trying to get my head around the idea that someone could be found not guilty of killing someone but guilty of attempting to murder the same person based upon a 13 second encounter.

          When the victim dies is attempted murder even a responsive verdict?

          How many fact patterns are they trying to squeeze out of the same 13 seconds?

          Is each bullet fired an attempted murder charge?

          The jurors who found not guilty on the murder charge but convicted on the attempted murder charge have some explaining to do.

          I wish we could record jury deliberations. I would love to hear these conversations.

          1. Dunn was convicted of attempted murder of the 3 survivors.

          2. He wasn’t found not guilty of murder. There was no verdict on murder.

            1. He wasn’t found not guilty of murder. There was no verdict on murder.

              Of course he wasn’t but one or more jurors voted not guilty on the murder charge but convicted him on the attempted murder charge hence “jurors who found not guilty on the murder charge but convicted on the attempted murder charge have some explaining to do”.

    2. It’s really simple. Some jurors (maybe just one) had reasonable doubt about whether Dunn thought he saw a gun. If he did, then the first shots were justified.

      There is no excuse for shooting at the car as it drives away. That’s not self-defense by any stretch of the imagination, therefore he’s guilty of attempted murder and shooting into vehicle.

      1. There is no excuse for shooting at the car as it drives away. That’s not self-defense by any stretch of the imagination

        Let’s imagine Dunn is telling the truth about the back seat passenger having threatened his life and brandished a shotgun. Under this scenario it’s not unreasonable to fire at the threat in the back seat even if the driver is moving the vehicle away from Dunn. The backseat passenger isn’t driving the vehicle and could easily shoot while the vehicle is in re-positioning or in retreat.

  2. The incomplete finale to this emotional, hot-button trial — partly because of the fact Dunn is white and the teenagers who were shot at, including Davis, are black — echoed George Zimmerman’s trial for the killing of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin about 120 miles down the road in Sanford, Florida. While stand your ground wasn’t used by Dunn, his lawyers did argue that he fired in self-defense.

    Reading this, you’d be forgiven for assuming that “stand your ground” was used as a defense in the Martin trial.

  3. no doubt he will feel “threatened” in prison. Dunn is a lowlife motherfucker.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.