Florida's loud music case

[Simon_Jester]

Just proves yet again that Floriduh juries are goddamned idiots. How is it that you convict this pondscum racist shitbag of 3 counts of attempted murder yet deadlock on the murder charge? It's illogical unless you think being black is enough of a mitigating factor to knock it down to murder 2. Ridiculous, inexcusable, and the various minority communities should be commended for not rioting. Because if the races were reversed there WOULD be rioting.

I'm almost certain that's precisely why the jury let him off. I've heard that the Republicans are trying to make the "Stand you Ground" law even more broad by letting people fire "warning shots" if they feel threatened. And if those shots just "happen" to kill a black person... well, no doubt the juries will view it as an "accident" and let the white guy go.

This is the biggest and most frustrating reasons NOT to have provisions for things like "stand your ground." I can think of lots of good reasons for such provisions to exist in an ideal frictionless court system... if only we could trust our system to be free of idiot racial bias.

After thinking about it a bit, my theory is the prosecutor went glory hogging and lost. A murder 2 conviction plus all the firearms related charges would easily put Dunn in jail for the rest of his life, even manslaughter + firearms violations would be enough to do it and either of those options is an easy conviction. Murder 1 gives the option of the death penalty, but other than that there's no difference since the guy's never getting out of jail. But it is a more prestigious conviction IF the prosecutor can get it. Problem is proving it is highly questionable at best in this case.

now THIS reminds me of the Zimmermann trial.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/01 ... ing-shots/

Yep, I think I can rule out Florida on my list of place to live, or perhaps even visit.

Again, I can think of reasons to allow warning shots- because IF a person is sincerely trying to fire a gun into the air to deter an attacker, that is better than simply pulling out the same pistol and putting the rounds into the attacker's chest.

However, the potential for "they were warning shots and I hit him by accident!" to be used as a defense in an actual murder ("So I took the shotgun off the wall and fired two warning shots... into his head," to quote Chicago) presents its own problems. And, well, Florida juries aren't covering themselves in glory lately.

Sigh.

"A person with a firearm is a citizen. A person without a firearm is a victim." - Republican Sen. Greg Evers

Jesus, the more I read, the worse it gets.

The problem here is that his concept of "citizenship" is tied up in the ability to defend oneself, and in the firm belief that there are hordes of evil murdering bandits out there to defend oneself from.

The latter belief is particularly poisonous. Because it creates the mindset of "We Few have to bristle with guns and shoot at the drop of a hat to protect ourselves from... Them!" Which motivates Floridans to pass more of this sort of law (castle doctrine, then 'stand your ground' when that's not enough, then 'warning shots' when that isn't enough either).

But it never makes the place safer, because the logical endpoint of all these laws is an urban ghetto or a Wild West boom town complete with shootouts at the O.K. Corral.

[Wing Commander MAD]

Premeditation only requires a split second of forethought. Since the victim had no gun, nothing resembling a gun, and was (excuse the language please) an "uppity nigger" (heard almost daily by white people at work when I lived in that cesspool of a state) that's premeditation.

Care to back that up, because I severely doubt premeditation is defined so loosely? If it were pretty much all murders would be premeditated making the distinctions between Murder 1 and Murder 2 pointless.

This is not a case of Florida laws suck or jurors are morons, it's the prosecution fucking up by trying for a 1st degree murder charge when there was no way to prove it.

This. Is this literally the same prosecution as the Zimmerman case, or was that hyperbole on Flagg's part? If it is, then sounds like the Florida Attorney Generals Office needs to look into the prosecutor and their team as this would be two relatively high profile cases in a relatively short period of time lost* due to seemingly trying to overreach on the conviction compared what they have a case for.

Edit: *: Well lost in the sense of getting the accused for murder. This time they at least got the guy for four counts of attempted murder.

[General Zod]

Premeditation only requires a split second of forethought. Since the victim had no gun, nothing resembling a gun, and was (excuse the language please) an "uppity nigger" (heard almost daily by white people at work when I lived in that cesspool of a state) that's premeditation.

Care to back that up, because I severely doubt premeditation is defined so loosely? If it were pretty much all murders would be premeditated making the distinctions between Murder 1 and Murder 2 pointless.

It is per Florida's AG.

http://www.firstcoastnews.com/story/new ... r/5519925/

Premeditation doesn't rely on a certain length of time, Corey said.

"Ten times out of ten, when someone fires ten shots into a car full of unarmed teenagers, we will file first-degree murder and attempted first-degree murder charges," she said.

This. Is this literally the same prosecution as the Zimmerman case, or was that hyperbole on Flagg's part? If it is, then sounds like the Florida Attorney Generals Office needs to look into the prosecutor and their team as this would be two relatively high profile cases in a relatively short period of time lost* due to seemingly trying to overreach on the conviction compared what they have a case for.

Edit: *: Well lost in the sense of getting the accused for murder. This time they at least got the guy for four counts of attempted murder.

It's the same attorney general. She apparently has a history of going for charges that might not stick.

[aerius]

It is per Florida's AG.
http://www.firstcoastnews.com/story/new ... r/5519925/

Premeditation doesn't rely on a certain length of time, Corey said.

"Ten times out of ten, when someone fires ten shots into a car full of unarmed teenagers, we will file first-degree murder and attempted first-degree murder charges," she said.

And she wonders why the charges didn't stick. By her standards, if my buddies and I were trying to run someone over with my car, and the dude I was trying to run over pulled out a gun and shot & killed me, that person should then be charged with 1st degree murder. What a maroon, how the fuck is she not disbarred, let alone the goddamn AG?

[Flagg]

It is per Florida's AG.
http://www.firstcoastnews.com/story/new ... r/5519925/

Premeditation doesn't rely on a certain length of time, Corey said.

"Ten times out of ten, when someone fires ten shots into a car full of unarmed teenagers, we will file first-degree murder and attempted first-degree murder charges," she said.

And she wonders why the charges didn't stick. By her standards, if my buddies and I were trying to run someone over with my car, and the dude I was trying to run over pulled out a gun and shot & killed me, that person should then be charged with 1st degree murder. What a maroon, how the fuck is she not disbarred, let alone the goddamn AG?

They were driving away from Dunn you fucking moron. If someone in a car in Floriduh, the state where if your reverse indicator lights come on the cops will obliterate you to hamburger and get away with it, were chasing you down and you blew them away... STAND YOUR GROUND would apply every time. Why do you keep trying to find ways to exonerate this racist murdering cocksucker?
Btw do you have a degree in criminal law? Do you have even a class in criminal law in Floriduh? Because I happen to have a class D security license and one of the things we were taught about was the differences between 1st and 2nd degree murder. Namely a mitigating factor. There was none. The second Dunn went for his weapon to shoot Davis he was going to be guilty of murder in the first degree. And the prosecution had no intention of seeking the death penalty so that little theory is out the window. They charged him with the crime a grand jury believed he committed.

[Wing Commander MAD]

Fair enough, I'm also probably interpreting Flagg too literally (something I'm prone to), as premeditation in Florida according to my research is defined in Coolen v State as:

Premeditation is defined as more than a mere intent to kill;  it is a fully formed conscious purpose to kill.   This purpose to kill may be formed a moment before the act but must exist for a sufficient length of time to permit reflection as to the nature of the act to be committed and the probable result of that act.

My guess is that a literal fraction of a second would fail the "sufficient length of time to permit reflection" bit, but that's probably moot since Flagg was probably referring to the "purpose may be formed a moment before the act" part when he said split-second.

Sorry, Flagg.

[Simon_Jester]

They were driving away from Dunn you fucking moron. If someone in a car in Floriduh, the state where if your reverse indicator lights come on the cops will obliterate you to hamburger and get away with it, were chasing you down and you blew them away... STAND YOUR GROUND would apply every time. Why do you keep trying to find ways to exonerate this racist murdering cocksucker?
Btw do you have a degree in criminal law? Do you have even a class in criminal law in Floriduh? Because I happen to have a class D security license and one of the things we were taught about was the differences between 1st and 2nd degree murder. Namely a mitigating factor. There was none. The second Dunn went for his weapon to shoot Davis he was going to be guilty of murder in the first degree.

So, just to be clear, you are saying that in Florida law, the act of drawing a weapon constitutes premeditation? Gotcha.

Can you cite precedent for that? It goes against the normal understanding of 'premeditated.' Otherwise, all murders involving a weapon would be premeditated, except maybe for stabbings where the killer was carving a roast and already had a knife in their hand or something.

And the prosecution had no intention of seeking the death penalty so that little theory is out the window. They charged him with the crime a grand jury believed he committed.

I think you may be misunderstanding aerius a bit. Aerius's argument seems to be that the prosecutor here is making charges that will not stick. That may partly be because the juries they deal with are nuts, but it can also be for other reasons.

[Flagg]

Fair enough, I'm also probably interpreting Flagg too literally (something I'm prone to), as premeditation in Florida according to my research is defined in Coolen v State as:

Premeditation is defined as more than a mere intent to kill;  it is a fully formed conscious purpose to kill.   This purpose to kill may be formed a moment before the act but must exist for a sufficient length of time to permit reflection as to the nature of the act to be committed and the probable result of that act.

My guess is that a literal fraction of a second would fail the "sufficient length of time to permit reflection" bit, but that's probably moot since Flagg was probably referring to the "purpose may be formed a moment before the act" part when he said split-second.

Sorry, Flagg.

No worries I should have been clearer.

[Flagg]

They were driving away from Dunn you fucking moron. If someone in a car in Floriduh, the state where if your reverse indicator lights come on the cops will obliterate you to hamburger and get away with it, were chasing you down and you blew them away... STAND YOUR GROUND would apply every time. Why do you keep trying to find ways to exonerate this racist murdering cocksucker?
Btw do you have a degree in criminal law? Do you have even a class in criminal law in Floriduh? Because I happen to have a class D security license and one of the things we were taught about was the differences between 1st and 2nd degree murder. Namely a mitigating factor. There was none. The second Dunn went for his weapon to shoot Davis he was going to be guilty of murder in the first degree.

So, just to be clear, you are saying that in Florida law, the act of drawing a weapon constitutes premeditation? Gotcha.

Can you cite precedent for that? It goes against the normal understanding of 'premeditated.' Otherwise, all murders involving a weapon would be premeditated, except maybe for stabbings where the killer was carving a roast and already had a knife in their hand or something.

No. I'm saying that in this case the simple act of drawing the weapon by Dunn when faced with four unarmed teenagers sitting in a vehicle (which by itself constitutes assault with a deadly weapon) before practically unloading it as they attempted to flee constitutes premeditation. It may not take all that long to draw aim and fire a gun, but it's long enough for it to be premeditation.

And the prosecution had no intention of seeking the death penalty so that little theory is out the window. They charged him with the crime a grand jury believed he committed.

I think you may be misunderstanding aerius a bit. Aerius's argument seems to be that the prosecutor here is making charges that will not stick. That may partly be because the juries they deal with are nuts, but it can also be for other reasons.

Sure. I think it comes down to either overconfidence or pure incompetence. Because murder 2 should have been an option for the jury. And they pooched the Zimmerman case as well but were not getting into that clusterfuck if I have anything to say about it.

[aerius]

They were driving away from Dunn you fucking moron.

Which is why Dunn got convicted of everything he was charged with for shooting at them!

If someone in a car in Floriduh, the state where if your reverse indicator lights come on the cops will obliterate you to hamburger and get away with it, were chasing you down and you blew them away... STAND YOUR GROUND would apply every time. Why do you keep trying to find ways to exonerate this racist murdering cocksucker?

Corey's words, not mine. She claims that every time you shoot at people in a car it's murder 1.
BTW, I haven't even clicked on the news link or seen any pictures, I have no fucking clue if Davis & Dunn are black, white, or purple fucking aliens.

Btw do you have a degree in criminal law? Do you have even a class in criminal law in Floriduh? Because I happen to have a class D security license and one of the things we were taught about was the differences between 1st and 2nd degree murder. Namely a mitigating factor. There was none.

You need to find the dumbass who taught you law in that class and get your fucking money back. Seriously.

The second Dunn went for his weapon to shoot Davis he was going to be guilty of murder in the first degree. And the prosecution had no intention of seeking the death penalty so that little theory is out the window. They charged him with the crime a grand jury believed he committed.

He was going to be guilty of murder 1 as soon as he went for his gun? Really? How'd that work out? And how exactly are you going to prove premeditation & intent beyond a reasonable doubt?

And I'm serious here, how are you going to prove premeditation & intent beyond a reasonable doubt?
This is not a case where my wife comes home to find me in bed with sister, then goes over to the next town to borrow her dad's shotgun and comes back to splatter my brains on the wall.

[Flagg]

They were driving away from Dunn you fucking moron.

Which is why Dunn got convicted of everything he was charged with for shooting at them!

If someone in a car in Floriduh, the state where if your reverse indicator lights come on the cops will obliterate you to hamburger and get away with it, were chasing you down and you blew them away... STAND YOUR GROUND would apply every time. Why do you keep trying to find ways to exonerate this racist murdering cocksucker?

Corey's words, not mine. She claims that every time you shoot at people in a car it's murder 1.
BTW, I haven't even clicked on the news link or seen any pictures, I have no fucking clue if Davis & Dunn are black, white, or purple fucking aliens.

Btw do you have a degree in criminal law? Do you have even a class in criminal law in Floriduh? Because I happen to have a class D security license and one of the things we were taught about was the differences between 1st and 2nd degree murder. Namely a mitigating factor. There was none.

You need to find the dumbass who taught you law in that class and get your fucking money back. Seriously.

The second Dunn went for his weapon to shoot Davis he was going to be guilty of murder in the first degree. And the prosecution had no intention of seeking the death penalty so that little theory is out the window. They charged him with the crime a grand jury believed he committed.

He was going to be guilty of murder 1 as soon as he went for his gun? Really? How'd that work out? And how exactly are you going to prove premeditation & intent beyond a reasonable doubt?

And I'm serious here, how are you going to prove premeditation & intent beyond a reasonable doubt?
This is not a case where my wife comes home to find me in bed with sister, then goes over to the next town to borrow her dad's shotgun and comes back to splatter my brains on the wall.

Because there was no threat to him you idiot. Unless you think 4 black kids sitting in a vehicle are enough provocation to mitigate it to second degree murder. It's also in the penal code that aggravated child abuse resulting in death is first degree murder. Well, Davis was a child under the law, so I'd imagine shooting him for no other reason than you hate his music falls under aggravated child abuse. You need to brush up on Floriduh law, because premeditation doesn't require any planning beyond "I'm gonna kill that person".

[Wing Commander MAD]

Simon, from what I've gathered the quoted definition I gave above is how Florida Law defines premeditation, though I believe I have the specific case wrong. I'm no lawyer and trying to follow the case law back to where premeditation is first defined is proving a bit more difficult than I'd thought. Regardless, it looks like the problematic bit is just how much time "a sufficient length of time..." is in actuality.

[Flagg]

Wikipedia:

Premeditated murder is the crime of wrongfully causing the death of another human being (also known as murder) after rationally considering the timing or method of doing so, in order to either increase the likelihood of success, or to evade detection or apprehension.[1] State laws in the United States vary as to definitions of "premeditation." In some states, premeditation may be construed as taking place mere seconds before the murder. Premeditated murder is usually defined as one of the most serious forms of homicide, and is punished more severely than manslaughter or other types of murder - often with the death penalty or a life sentence without the possibility of parole.
In the U.S, Federal law criminalizes premeditated murder, felony murder and second-degree murder at Title 18 United States Code Section 1111

[aerius]

Good for you, you can quote Wikipedia. Now, can you prove that the "mere seconds" interpretation applies in Florida, and cite the relevant case laws to back it up?

[Simon_Jester]

So... Flagg, if I understand you, the fact that he drew a gun and fired is not evidence of premeditation, but the fact that he fired at a specific group in a specific situation is evidence of premeditation?

Again, I would be surprised if that were a standard interpretation of the word. "Premeditated" means "thought about it beforehand;" a person who commits a violent act in a fit of blind rage is committing it without premeditation, no matter who they're committing it against.

Moreover, the fact that Dunn fired at the teenagers in the car is not evidence that there was premeditation in his killing of Davis.

[Flagg]

So... Flagg, if I understand you, the fact that he drew a gun and fired is not evidence of premeditation, but the fact that he fired at a specific group in a specific situation is evidence of premeditation?

Again, I would be surprised if that were a standard interpretation of the word. "Premeditated" means "thought about it beforehand;" a person who commits a violent act in a fit of blind rage is committing it without premeditation, no matter who they're committing it against.

Moreover, the fact that Dunn fired at the teenagers in the car is not evidence that there was premeditation in his killing of Davis.

He didn't need to have any specific target for it to be premeditated.

http://statelaws.findlaw.com/florida-la ... -laws.html

[J]

I am not a lawyer, but I did stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night (actually I took a bunch of law courses in university).
It so happens that I do know the relevant legal precedent with regards to premeditation,
however, it's more fun to watch you guys wave your wieners around.

And I'm serious here, how are you going to prove premeditation & intent beyond a reasonable doubt?
This is not a case where my wife comes home to find me in bed with sister, then goes over to the next town to borrow her dad's shotgun and comes back to splatter my brains on the wall.

Under Florida law, I would bludgeon you to death right away and claim that you were raping my sister.
I then cite "use of force in defence of a person", in this case, my sister.
And then I'm a free woman under Florida's laws.

[Flagg]

I am not a lawyer, but I did stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night (actually I took a bunch of law courses in university).
It so happens that I do know the relevant legal precedent with regards to premeditation,
however, it's more fun to watch you guys wave your wieners around.

And I'm serious here, how are you going to prove premeditation & intent beyond a reasonable doubt?
This is not a case where my wife comes home to find me in bed with sister, then goes over to the next town to borrow her dad's shotgun and comes back to splatter my brains on the wall.

Under Florida law, I would bludgeon you to death right away and claim that you were raping my sister.
I then cite "use of force in defence of a person", in this case, my sister.
And then I'm a free woman under Florida's laws.

Well, thanks for that useless post.

[J]

It's a learning opportunity for the rest of you guys.
It's a chance for you to do your own research and hopefully learn something.
Education through current events, my profs loved this stuff!

[Flagg]

It's a learning opportunity for the rest of you guys.
It's a chance for you to do your own research and hopefully learn something.
Education through current events, my profs loved this stuff!

Wow, another +1. Keep it up, maybe we'll get lucky and a mod will lock this.

[Simon_Jester]

Flagg, from your link, the following conditions are first degree murder in Florida:
-Premeditated murder (back to what 'premeditated' means soon)
-Murder in the process of committing another felony.
-Deaths involving drugs (sometimes)

Now let's look at premeditation.

"For a charge of first degree murder based on a premeditated killing, the prosecutor must show the defendant's specific intent to kill. The prosecutor often must establish an advance plan or design formed to carry out the homicide. To establish premeditation, the prosecutor may need to present evidence about the defendant's activities or steps taken to prepare for the killing."

There are two components here, in this Florida doesn't SEEM any different than a normal state.

1) The killer must have made a calculated/rational decision to kill. This is the 'meditation' part.
2) The killer must have made this decision in advance of the actual killing. This is the 'pre' part.

"Pre" is usually proven by showing that the killer had to perform some sequence of actions in order to kill. "Meditation" is shown by proving claims about the killer's state of mind, or about the actions in question being particularly calculated.

Now, you are arguing, basically, that Dunn's act of drawing a firearm and shooting Davis was premeditated. I'm not saying that couldn't be true. What I am saying is that it isn't automatically true- it has to be proven. And you can't prove it by saying that AFTER killing Davis, Dunn then shot at other people, because that would be 'postmeditated,' not 'premeditated.'

So what is the evidence that Dunn's murdering Davis was a premeditated act? All we know for sure from the article is that Dunn drew a gun. The act of drawing a gun (or grabbing some other weapon) is not normally enough to prove premeditation. We know this because not all murders committed with a weapon are charged as first-degree.

It is simply not true in Florida, as far as I can tell, that second-degree murder is "murder with a mitigating circumstance." It means specifically "murder without premeditation."

[Flagg]

Flagg, from your link, the following conditions are first degree murder in Florida:
-Premeditated murder (back to what 'premeditated' means soon)
-Murder in the process of committing another felony.
-Deaths involving drugs (sometimes)

Now let's look at premeditation.

"For a charge of first degree murder based on a premeditated killing, the prosecutor must show the defendant's specific intent to kill. The prosecutor often must establish an advance plan or design formed to carry out the homicide. To establish premeditation, the prosecutor may need to present evidence about the defendant's activities or steps taken to prepare for the killing."

There are two components here, in this Florida doesn't SEEM any different than a normal state.

1) The killer must have made a calculated/rational decision to kill. This is the 'meditation' part.
2) The killer must have made this decision in advance of the actual killing. This is the 'pre' part.

"Pre" is usually proven by showing that the killer had to perform some sequence of actions in order to kill. "Meditation" is shown by proving claims about the killer's state of mind, or about the actions in question being particularly calculated.

Now, you are arguing, basically, that Dunn's act of drawing a firearm and shooting Davis was premeditated. I'm not saying that couldn't be true. What I am saying is that it isn't automatically true- it has to be proven. And you can't prove it by saying that AFTER killing Davis, Dunn then shot at other people, because that would be 'postmeditated,' not 'premeditated.'

So what is the evidence that Dunn's murdering Davis was a premeditated act? All we know for sure from the article is that Dunn drew a gun. The act of drawing a gun (or grabbing some other weapon) is not normally enough to prove premeditation. We know this because not all murders committed with a weapon are charged as first-degree.

It is simply not true in Florida, as far as I can tell, that second-degree murder is "murder with a mitigating circumstance." It means specifically "murder without premeditation."

Well since J apparently knows the answer I'll wait for that post to decide. And it's still first degree murder since Davis was a child and murder with aggravated child abuse equals... First degree murder. And I don't know about you, but I'd consider shooting a child "abuse". So even if him not pulling the gun with the intention to kill (sounds like premeditation to me) is enough, him shooting a child is.

[Simon_Jester]

We could start by diving into the legal definition of aggravated child abuse. From the Florida legislature's website:

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/ind ... 27.03.html

(1) DEFINITIONS.—As used in this section, the term:
(a) “Aggravated child abuse” occurs when a person:
1. Commits aggravated battery on a child;
2. Willfully tortures, maliciously punishes, or willfully and unlawfully cages a child; or
3. Knowingly or willfully abuses a child and in so doing causes great bodily harm, permanent disability, or permanent disfigurement to the child.

"Aggravated battery" is only on the table if Dunn used violence unlawfully. Self-defense is a defense against an aggravated battery charge, as well as a murder charge, and in this case Dunn got off because his lawyer (somehow!) managed to make self-defense stick.

So you'd still have to get Dunn convicted of second-degree murder (or a lesser charge like aggravated assault and battery) to get him convicted via this route.

(1) would be on the table if Dunn's actions had been ruled unlawful in the first place, which they weren't for some reason that is either totally bonkers or unknown to us. (2) isn't on the table because "torture," "punish," and "cage" are not accurate verbs for what Dunn did even if "murder" is. (3) almost certainly does NOT mean what you think it means, simply because if it did mean that it would bypass the legal definition of self-defense, making it automatically illegal to defend yourself against a violent attacker if that attacker is a minor.
_______________________________________________

Also, Flagg, please try to understand that premeditation requires reflection. It requires that the person think "Hm. I am about to commit murder" in a conscious, considered way. Proving premeditation requires proving that there was, if nothing else, time to think.

Thus, you cannot prove premeditation by saying "this person's actions were premeditated because they had to think about it while their fist swung through the air to hit the victim's face." Or "this person's actions were premeditated because they took time out to pick up a rock." These are actions that can easily occur by reflex alone, once a person enters a violent state of mind.

Proving premeditation takes something more like "the defendant had to walk out of the room and end the confrontation, go next door giving tempers time to cool, pick up a weapon, walk back, and kill the victim." Or "the defendant had to position the victim's unconscious body so that it'd look like a suicide." Or something else that is calculated, considered, and by nature requires logical calculation.

Drawing a weapon is not premeditation.

[Flagg]

Simon, Dunn didn't "get off" you blithering twat. It was a hung jury on that single charge meaning that some if not most jurors were perfectly willing to convict him of first degree murder. If you can't be bothered to know the basic facts of the case then sit down and shut the fuck up.

[Flagg]

And still waiting on J to enlighten us all unless it's just trolling in the previous posts. Which seems likelier and likelier.