by Rick Stack
It has been said that justice delayed is justice denied. In the case of Florida teenager Jordan Davis, that legal aphorism is not entirely accurate. More than seven months after the jury in the first trial of Jordan’s killer, 47-year old software developer Michael Dunn, deadlocked on first-degree murder charges after deliberating for about 30 hours, a Florida jury convicted Dunn of the first-degree murder after a scant five and one-half hours of deliberations. In the retrial, a mostly-white jury consisting of eight men and four women heard evidence over a period of six days. Under Florida law, Dunn will now spend the rest of his life in prison, without the possibility of parole.
In the previous trial, the jury found Dunn guilty of three counts of attempted murder for shooting in the direction of Davis‘ three companions and one count for firing at the vehicle at the same time that he shot and killed Davis. Dunn had faced as little as 30 years to as much as 70 years in prison for his convictions on those charges (20 years for each count of attempted murder, or a total of 60 years if the sentences were to run consecutively rather than concurrently, plus a 10 year enhancement for his use of a firearm in committing those crimes).
This case tested the outer limits of Florida’s Stand Your Ground (“SYG”) law, sponsored by the neo-fascist group American Legislative Exchange Council (“ALEC”), which promotes a business-friendly, anti-democratic legislative agenda in all 50 states. ALEC, with the assistance of Republican state legislators, is the same group that has promoted voter-suppression laws, restrictions of women’s constitutional right to have an abortion and birth control, and a loosening of gun laws so that citizens can carry guns practically anywhere, even in bars, churches, and schools (note the so-called “Guns Anywhere” law recently enacted in Georgia).
As readers of this blog may recall, on November 23, 2012, Dunn killed Davis in the parking lot of a convenience store following the two men’s argument over the loud rap music blaring from the Dodge Durango SUV in which Davis was a passenger in the back seat. Dunn had pulled up and parked his vehicle next to and very close to the SUV. After Dunn requested the teens to turn down their 
music, one of Davis’ friends initially obliged but then Davis asked his friend in the front seat to turn the music back up, which he did. An argument ensued between Dunn and Davis, during which Davis allegedly called Dunn a “cracker.” (In this author’s opinion, Dunn could also accurately be characterized as a “WORM,” or a White Old Rural Male). Dunn also testified that Davis called him a “cracker,” pointed a shotgun his way, and then tried to scramble out of the SUV. Dunn then proceeded to fire a total of 10 shots at the teenagers’ SUV, three of which hit Davis. Dunn told the jury, “I’m petrified. I’m in fear for my life. This guy threatened to kill me – and he showed me a gun.”
In the retrial, the prosecution convincingly rebutted Dunn’s claim of self-defense by putting his then-fiancé, Rhonda Rouer, on the stand. During the shooting, Rouer was inside the store buying liquor to enable her and Dunn to continue their private celebration of the family wedding that they had just attended. In tearful testimony, Rouer testified that Dunn had complained to her about hearing “thug” music. In the night and day after the shooting, however, Dunn never once mentioned to Rouer that the teenager had pulled out a firearm or that he had shot someone.
In addition, a police search of the teenager’s SUV, albeit conducted four days after the shooting, failed to turn up any weapon or object which could have been mistaken for a gun or a shotgun, such as a walking stick. Similarly, none of the witnesses to the shooting (including a transient who happened to be in the area) saw a weapon in the possession of the occupants of the SUV.
The jury was unpersuaded by Dunn’s claim of self-defense, apparently because Dunn had left the scene of the shooting with Rouer, had more drinks and ate a pizza with her back at their hotel, and did not even bother to tell Rouer about his violent encounter with Davis at the convenience store. In fact, Dunn did not tell Rouer about his involvement in the confrontation until after they watched news of the killing on television the following morning. Needless to say, the cavalier manner in which Dunn handled this incident and his failure to promptly report it to the police undoubtedly led the jury to discredit his claim of self-defense. In the end, the jury found that Dunn had intended to kill Davis and that he acted with premeditation as he reached into his glove compartment for his gun and fired ten times at the SUV, even after it pulled away to evade the gunfire.
In this trial, the prosecution employed a laser-like focus on Dunn’s actions after the shooting, which it believed cloaked him in guilt. Dunn fled the scene and never called the police, not even after he learned that someone had died. Instead, he and his then-fiancé drove to their hotel, where he walked the dog, poured himself a rum and coke, and ordered a pizza. [Such callous actions are reminiscent of the archetypal hit man who kills someone in his home, makes himself a sandwich from the contents of the victim’s refrigerator, and then proceeds to leisurely dine at the victim’s kitchen table]. The next day, Dunn drove for two and one-half hours back to his house in Satellite Beach, Florida, where the police, who had obtained his license plate number, arrested him. In a news conference after the verdict, the State’s attorney, Angela B. Corey stated, “If you are fighting to defend your life, you don’t then run from the scene.”
After the verdict was announced, Davis’ parents, Ron Davis and Lucy McBath, stressed that this second trial was incredibly difficult for them but they expressed relief that they had finally gotten justice for their son. Ms. McBath gave the following statement at a post-verdict press conference:
“We are very grateful that justice has been served, justice not only for Jordan, but justice for Trayvon (Martin) [who was killed only months earlier by self-appointed neighborhood watchman George Zimmerman, who was acquitted of Martin’s killing based on his claim of self-defense under Florida’s controversial SYG law] and justice for all the nameless, faceless children and people that will never have a voice. And Ron and I are committed to giving our lives too walking out Jordan’s justice and Jordan’s legacy. We know that Jordan’s legacy will live on for others.”
Self-defense was at the core of the retrial, where Dunn faced an even less diverse jury the second time around. This time, the jury was comprised of ten whites and two blacks. The mostly white make-up of the jury raised concerns among supporters of the Davis family and legal observers that Dunn would be acquitted of murder. In the end, however, the racial make-up of the jury was immaterial because it fully considered the evidence and served justice upon Dunn. After the verdict, Mr. Davis stated that this case is an example of how the racial make-up of a jury should be irrelevant:
“I wanted Jacksonville to be a shining example that you can have a jury made up of mostly white people, white men, and to be an example to the rest of the world to stop the discriminatory practices, stop discriminating, stop looking where we have to look at juries and say what the makeup of juries are.”
The retrial of this case is indeed a shining example of how much America has changed in the past 50 years. Since passage of the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act (Section 5 of which was gutted by the conservative Supreme Court in its last term), we have now had a black President, a black Attorney General, and a growing black middle class. Now, a mostly white jury in the Deep South has rejected a white man’s spurious claim of self-defense and instead convicted him of premeditated murder of a black teenager. Slowly but surely, and at least in this case, America is achieving its goal of equal justice under the law. In the immortal words of Martin Luther King, Jr., “The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice.” Somewhere up there, Jordan Davis, Trayvon Martin, and Michael Brown are smiling down broadly upon us as we continue our attempt to form a more perfect union. . .
Rick Stack is a Los Angeles-based tax lawyer working in the private sector. Prior to that, he worked for many years as a Federal Prosecutor in the Tax Division of the U.S. Attorney’s Office. He resides in Los Angeles County and is interested in politics, civil rights, his family and the Chicago Bears. Rick is one of All Things Crime Blog’s earliest supporters and is known for his trenchant and unabashed comments.