GUILTY FL - Jordan Davis, 17, shot to death, Satellite Beach, 23 Nov 2012 #8

Status
Not open for further replies.

tlcya

Old and Tired Websleuth
Joined
Oct 28, 2009
Messages
38,854
Reaction score
31,778
Then, there is the possibility of book deals to consider.

lol, the length of time a WS member has been trial watching can be directly correlated to the amount of cynicism with which they view jurors and their future willingness to give public statements or interviews. :)
 

Tricia

Owner Websleuths.com
Staff member
Administrator
Moderator
Joined
Sep 13, 2003
Messages
27,847
Reaction score
38,185
Don't forget coming up at the top of the hour, 8 PM Eastern, we'll be discussing the Michael Dunn case on True Crime Radio.

Joining me is Cathy from CourtChatter.com and Levi Page from Levipageshow.com

CLICK THIS LINK TO LISTEN LIVE TONIGHT 8 PM EASTERN

Hope you join us :)

Tricia
 

YESorNO

The Queen (aka "mrsmuir") SWBB
Joined
Apr 6, 2013
Messages
34,377
Reaction score
68,852
To a certain degree O/T:

I am not doubting you, just jumping off from your post.

I know from personal experience that being on a jury can be surprisingly intimidating to the point that one might not behave in real life as they believe they would hypothetically.

I am a perfect example of this.

I was a juror on a federal case regarding whether someone was guilty of smuggling drugs across the border. The man was caught red-handed at the border with the drugs hidden in his car. Not even the defense disputed that.

The defense was SODDI: his car had been in the shop, so smugglers planted the drugs there intending to have him followed across the border and the drugs retrieved afterward, all without the defendant knowing. This scenario not being completely unheard-of, as I later found out.

The defense presented no receipts or proof at all that the car had actually been in said shop, but we were told that this is typical of the way such transactions are conducted in Mexico in contrast to what we are used to here.

When we went into the jury room, I had no doubts whatsoever that the man was guilty and the defense's case consisted of nothing more than obfuscation and attempts to plant doubts based on no evidence whatsoever.

I figured (back in my halcyon days before I discovered Websleuths, LOL) that everyone else would see it as I did and we'd be out of there in a couple of hours.

Much to my surprise, I was in the minority for guilt! 9-3 as I recall. By the end of that day's deliberations, the vote for acquittal was 11 to 1 and I was the 1.

I was quite disgusted to see at least one juror who was willing to vote with the majority no matter what it decided, just because she didn't want to be there in the first place and just wanted to go home. The fact that a man's future was in her hands apparently wasn't an issue. :facepalm:

I held out to continue the deliberations the next morning. On the way home was the worst traffic jam I have ever seen in San Diego since I moved here in 1997 and all I could think about was how those other jurors must be cursing me stuck in that traffic because had I just given in, they would have already been home.

I was so distraught I hardly slept that night, I kept getting up and making notes to support my argument. When I presented these points the next day I was more or less shouted down. Not literally shouted down, people were civil, but I was so tired by that point that my thinking was so muddled I couldn't make a clear and cogent counterargument to them. So it became obvious I had a choice: cave in or deadlock the jury.

I am not proud of this, but I caved.

Besides being so tired from lack of sleep by that point that I couldn't even think straight to counter their arguments, I had also formed the impression during the trial that the accused was basically a good, honest person who fell into business difficulties and saw the drug run as a one-time opportunity to earn a quick infusion of cash to help alleviate his own financial woes.

So I rationalized to myself that he had learned his lesson and would never again try anything so stupid and not much would be gained by sending him to prison.

Also he was clearly not a hardened criminal; he looked terrified every day of the trial and was visibly trembling when asked to stand up to hear the verdict. Also his wife attended every day and his former employers testified to his hard-working, honest nature.

So although I felt he was guilty, I was intimidated by numerous factors to going along with the majority rather than being the one standout who deadlocked the jury. In fact, I just remembered that we sent a message to the judge saying we could not reach a verdict and he told us to go back and deliberate some more.

As I said, I'm not proud of that. I should have stuck with my guns. But in retrospect too I see that if my interpretation was correct, and he just did this to earn a quick fast chunk of cash as his one illegal act in life (he had no prior criminal record), nothing good would have been accomplished by sending him to prison.

Particularly also considering the drug in question was marijuana, which although I don't indulge in, I also I don't consider too harmful to society at large. Had it been meth, or a case involving murder, I like to think I wouldn't have caved so easily.

Long winded logorrhea just to say like anything else, one never knows what one will do in a situation until actually faced with it.

Thanks for reading to anyone who has made it this far. :blushing:

Wow, Izzy. Thanks for sharing this with us.
I think you are correct in saying that we never know what we would do if we were a juror. It is a hard thing to come to a verdict and I commend the jurors in the MD trial (and you for opening up to us). We, all, can say "this or that" when we are here on WS, but it may be different in the jury room- to try to come to the 'right' decision.


:toastred: to the jurors.

picture.php
 

gxm

Active Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2009
Messages
3,392
Reaction score
23
With all due respect, Izzy, I have been on a jury and I have told everyone who will listen what a terrible experience it was due to the incredible ignorance of half the jury as well as the bias and racism. If the case had national attention, as introverted as I am, I'd be telling all in a heartbeat. And I was the direct opposition to the man who later confessed he should have not been on the jury because he was biased. Yes, we compromised but we got a felony conviction despite the (expletive deleted) who actually said the words "I don't care what these people do as long as they keep it to themselves." (It was a home invasion and a gun had been put to a baby's head. How anyone could not care about that is beyond me.)
 

Jax49

Florida Native
Joined
Mar 3, 2005
Messages
10,041
Reaction score
29,979

tlcya

Old and Tired Websleuth
Joined
Oct 28, 2009
Messages
38,854
Reaction score
31,778
thank you zuri and Jax49 for linking and calling attention to that op ed piece. It was very good and nicely articulated my own sense of disappointment with the lack of verdict on the count pertaining to Jordan's murder.

snipped from the piece:

But it's a hollow victory.

It's hollow because it means that, in 21st century America, the notion that a mouthy young black male could be a threat carries more weight with some people than the fact that an impulsive middle-aged white man could be a liar.

Think about it.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/16/opinion/weathersbee-dunn-davis-verdict/index.html?hpt=op_t1
 

LambChop

Former Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
21,160
Reaction score
29
One thing MD said that made no sense to me was that he watched JD reach down to the floor and pick up the shotgun that he knew it was a shotgun by the 4 inches of barrel sticking up and visible above the window, why didn't he move his car then when he thought JD might have a gun? Most people would move out of the way if they saw someone with a gun and certainly not sit there and then engage in an altercation about are you talking to/or about me. In the time it took him after seeing this metal barrel stick up (towards the ceiling I'm assuming) in the window he could have been on the other side of the truck. It would have solved two problems: the noise and the irritation he was receiving from the person who he believed had a gun.

After MD shooting at the SUV he would have needed to report it to LE that he was threatened rather than face a jail sentence for discharging his weapon. He did not do that knowing that a police vehicle was sitting with his lights flashing across from where he exited the Gate Station. MD never figured on someone getting his marker number nor did he realize the driver of the SUV would return to the Gate.

I will be surprised if any of the jurors speak. After what has happened to other jurors in Florida for speaking after a high profile trial they would be smart to keep to themselves. Maybe talk with the DA's but that is it and avoid the media. jmo
 

tlcya

Old and Tired Websleuth
Joined
Oct 28, 2009
Messages
38,854
Reaction score
31,778
Wow, Izzy. Thanks for sharing this with us.
I think you are correct in saying that we never know what we would do if we were a juror. It is a hard thing to come to a verdict and I commend the jurors in the MD trial (and you for opening up to us). We, all, can say "this or that" when we are here on WS, but it may be different in the jury room- to try to come to the 'right' decision.


:toastred: to the jurors.

picture.php

While not quite ready to toast the jury, I am not anywhere ready to condemn them either. I do not know what caused the mistrial on count 1. So it is hard for me to judge their performance poorly lacking that very basic insight. An even if one person got it wrong, I can't condemn the whole lot.

I think they tried to do their jobs. Something made that impossible in one area of that job. I want to know what that was.
 

TimesPast

Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2011
Messages
56
Reaction score
0
Compare that to Chicago and Los Angeles, which have some of the most restrictive gun laws (remember, even though they're big cities, it's specific crimes per 100K population:
http://www.city-data.com/crime/crime-Chicago-Illinois.html
http://www.city-data.com/crime/crime-Los-Angeles-California.html

But, if you throw in Phoenix........eh......you couldn't pay me to live there, it's lost it's "polite society" image, freeways everywhere, grid lock, gangs, I guess that's what "progress" does, JMO.
http://www.city-data.com/crime/crime-Phoenix-Arizona.html

There is a very high relationship between crime and poverty - I gather there is not much poverty in Scottsdale.
 

TimesPast

Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2011
Messages
56
Reaction score
0
I agree that the assumption in much of the media (and on Twitter) seems to be that the jury must have hung on self defense.

I do think many of us consider it unlikely that one or two holdouts for M1 could not have been convinced to side with a majority voting for M2 -- and not put the grieving victim's family through the agony of another trial.

But all you have to do is peruse twitter to find comments like, "I would never ever agree to 2nd degree murder, even if it meant a mistrial."

There are some pretty hardliners out there. Not that this is necessarily a bad thing -- or not understandable given what a detestable human being Michael Dunn has shown himself to be.

I think I speak for many of us when I express the feeling that I hope the reason for the deadlock on the top count leaks to the media in the next few days.

It is much easier to be a "hardliner" if you are outside a jury room. If the discussion was between M1 & M2 those wanting M1 would surely have preferred M2 than a hung jury & more days spent discussing same.

The questions on self defense on day 3 indicated to me that this was seen by at least one person as the issue. Hanging onto guilty or not guilty - rather than the exact level of the guilty seems more likely than demanding M1 over M2 or even manslaughter.
 

Karmady

Former Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2012
Messages
5,749
Reaction score
15
There is a very high relationship between crime and poverty - I gather there is not much poverty in Scottsdale.

True. But the OP was about being concerned about places with very limited gun control and the incidence of violent crime and the post she was responding to specifically referenced Scottsdale. So the point was -- lots of guns/no crime, rather than lots of money/no crime.

I agree that gun violence has little to do with the guns themselves. Scottsdale being just one good example.

jmo
 

TimesPast

Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2011
Messages
56
Reaction score
0
True. But the OP was about being concerned about places with very limited gun control and the incidence of violent crime and the post she was responding to specifically referenced Scottsdale. So the point was -- lots of guns/no crime, rather than lots of money/no crime.

I agree that gun violence has little to do with the guns themselves. Scottsdale being just one good example.

jmo

I just didn't like the correlation as stated with crime/gun laws. There are multiple reasons why crime in LA is much higher than crime in Scottsdale & I don't think gun ownership has much to do with anything in that regard.

The old saying about lies, damn lies and statistics comes to mind.
 

TimesPast

Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2011
Messages
56
Reaction score
0
To a certain degree O/T:

I am not doubting you, just jumping off from your post.

I know from personal experience that being on a jury can be surprisingly intimidating to the point that one might not behave in real life as they believe they would hypothetically.

..........

Long winded logorrhea just to say like anything else, one never knows what one will do in a situation until actually faced with it.

Thanks for reading to anyone who has made it this far. :blushing:

I hadn't read your post before I replied to another - you have explained so very well what I was trying to say - it is very different when you are with a group of 12 and if at all possible - have to agree on a verdict - than to tweet or comment that you would never change your mind.

If everyone was fixed on their first idea there may never be a jury verdict anywhere.
 

Truth Detector

Your Humble Observer
Joined
Nov 29, 2012
Messages
5,391
Reaction score
0

Kensie

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2013
Messages
8,630
Reaction score
14,376
Actually, crime rates have fallen during the U.S. recession.

While poverty increased, the crime rate decreased -- especially violent crimes.

Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2010/0913/Poverty-rate-paradox-Poverty-rises-but-FBI-crime-rate-falls

In the city I work, it seems like crime has increased. Seems like we have a murder a day. I never really payed attention to crime until the past few years so it may have been happening all along.
 

al66pine

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2011
Messages
7,476
Reaction score
27,017
... I know from personal experience that being on a jury can be surprisingly intimidating to the point that one might not behave in real life as they believe they would hypothetically.
I am a perfect example of this.
I was a juror on a federal case regarding whether someone was guilty of smuggling drugs across the border. ....
So it became obvious I had a choice: cave in or deadlock the jury. ....
...formed the impression during the trial that the accused was basically a good, honest person who fell into business difficulties and saw the drug run as a one-time opportunity to earn a quick infusion of cash to help alleviate his own financial woes.
...one never knows what one will do in a situation until actually faced with it.
:blushing:
BBM S...BM for focus

Izzy
thx for relating your experience.
How long ago? Curious about whether you've tried to google or otherwise ck for arrests or entanglements w crim justice system since then.
Maybe that was his first and only.

Some of us have also done things we never would have predicted of ourselves. :seeya:
 

Steely Dan

Former Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2008
Messages
30,559
Reaction score
79
When police officers discharge their weapons, they are required to file a report, and there is an investigation. I think CHL holders should also have to file a report, within two hours of the discharge of the weapon. I'm sure that would never fly in Florida, but there is no reason for Joe Blow to be held to a lesser standard than law enforcement.

:goodpost:

Maybe one of the jurors will find us here. :seeya: It's happened before.

I would love to know the breakdown in votes. I'm thinking there were 3 camps... 1st degree, 2nd degree and maybe a couple for acquittal (maybe Juror 9 - lots of people were distressed by his reactions per media).

I've never been on a jury and would find it interesting. I am sadly in the minority. A lot of people with sound judgement try hard to get out of duty. :sigh:

There's a saying that juries are filled by people too stupid to get out of jury duty. I wanted to be a juror.

If one were to look at local stereotypes, Arlington is an area many AA's have moved to over the last couple of decades. And, there are many white residents still unhappy about that.

The westside is generally considered the area with the most white racists (red-neck country) where it's not unusual to see rebel flags flying. Well, actually that's not unusual anywhere in north Florida.

JMHO, of course.

I had a job answering phones for a security company. I got a call from someone in the panhandle. She said; "I was talking to my brother... no I mean my husband." :eek:
 

Montjoy

Inactive
Joined
Aug 8, 2010
Messages
5,230
Reaction score
40
I wish I could recall the name of the poster in another thread who bemoaned the number of 'Yosemite Sam' firearm owners in her state. If I knew her address I would send her a big bouquet of flowers and/or some art from the remote area in which I work. I want to believe that the posters here are universally opposed to responses like Dunn's, but I know that I am wrong.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top