Guilty Verdicts In The Loud Music Trial, But Jury Deadlocks On Victim Jordan Davis. What’s Really Going On Here?

When Roland Martin of TVOne’s “NewsOne Now” invited me to appear on his February 18 show to discuss the controversial Michael Dunn trial and verdict, little did I know that my appearance would create such a strong reaction from one of my loyal America’s Court viewers.

Denise immediately wrote on our Facebook Fan Page:

I was a fan of your show…until today! After watching you on TV One, I feel that if [you were] on the jury, you would have voted not guilty. I hate it when people say, and you stressed, that he had never committed a crime in his past. SO WHAT!!!!! Does that make him this wonderful guy or just a TIME BOMB WAITING TO EXPLODE??? Every criminal has a first time and some of them are very serious crimes. How many rapist and murderers had a first time and people said, oh my God, I can’t believe it. His act, the photos of the car, the recording of the shots, the fact that he followed the car and continued to shoot, causes me to believe he is an a**, a terrible person and [it] would not surprise many who know him. When Roland [Martin] asked you if you were the parent of Jordan, how would you feel about still no justice for him… YOU TOTALLY AVOIDED THE D**N QUESTION AND WENT TO DEFENDING THE JUDGE. WERE YOU AFRAID? YOU SPOKE OF, MORE THAN ONCE ABOUT JUDGES MAKING CAREFUL DECISIONS DUE TO THEM WATCHING OUT FOR THEIR NEXT MOVE… IS THAT YOU????????? I refuse to give your show one more look…you lost me and hopefully others.

UPDATE: THREE JURORS BELIEVED MICHAEL DUNN ACTED IN SELF-DEFENSE

So why am I addressing Denise’s letter? Because she watches the show and I value my audience’s perspective. Being African American and the father of two teenage boys, I get  extremely frustrated, cynical and disgusted whenever I hear about these kinds of cases. As a graduate of Morehouse, the only all-male, predominantly black college in the country, I’m very much aware of the toll this genocidal behavior is having not just on black men, but on every single one of us.

Yes, most killings of African-American males are disproportionately at the hands of other blacks. The same is also true for whites killing whites. When a perpetrator is white and the victim is black, however, America’s antenna goes up and suddenly the haze of black enslavement  transforms into a thick fog.

And I get that too. Having been a prosecutor who’s tried cases and as a judge who presided over them, I’ know firsthand how the justice system works. And how it doesn’t — like Florida’s flawed Stand Your Ground Law and it’s racially lopsided effect.

Take jury duty. I’ve spoken with jurors who initially wanted nothing to do with serving on a panel, only to reveal later that it was a life changing experience.  Many found being on a jury was more difficult than they imagined, particularly when the case was a serious criminal matter.  To know you could be responsible for a person spending the rest of their life incarcerated, or worse, put to death, is daunting.  Before the first witness is sworn-in, a judge must read an instruction to the jury indicating the defendant is cloaked with a  presumption of innocent, and the prosecution must prove EVERY ELEMENT of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt to secure a conviction. This is why jurors want to believe a defendant who takes the stand is telling what actually happened.

Watch Judge Ross On TVOne Dissect The Dunn Trial

My role on TVOne wasn’t to ponder whether Mr. Dunn was lying and should rot in hell for killing a kid over rap music that I could conceivably be a fan of. My purpose was to put seemingly nonsensical actions into context. Jurors “by nature” want to believe defendants the same way they want to believe (and rely heavily on the theory) that police officers do not lie. Therefore, in concluding that the jurors had an easier time convicting on the attempted murder charges, it was based on the lack of mitigating factors the defense proffered that would sufficiently explain Dunn’s continued shooting at a vehicle carrying teens speeding away.

What’s still unsettled in my opinion is the question of motive. What would cause a 47 year-old man with no prior criminal history, having just left a wedding celebrating the love of his son and new daughter-in-law, to become so enmeshed where 10 shots are fired and a 17-year-old boy is dead? The average person would find that perplexing, rationalizing that SOMETHING had to cause this to spiral out of control within minutes. All the defense had to do was persuade one person that their client’s self-defense story was plausible. The prosecutor, on the other hand, was tasked with convincing twelve strangers to unanimously find guilt on all counts. On the most serious charge, we see who prevailed.

Should Michael Dunn serve substantial time behind bars for the destruction and wreckage his actions left behind. OF COURSE! Based on the evidence and testimony presented, that’s a logical conclusion. And right now he’s looking at a minimum of 60 and a maximum of 75 years on lockdown. Will a second jury convict this man of premeditated first degree murder showing malice aforethought and without any reasonable justification for believing his life was in danger? The same result as the first trial is definitely within the realm of possibility.

And yet, we did see a partial victory. Had we been given more time on the segment, I would have acknowledged Lucia McBath and Roy Davis. Aside from extending my condolences over the loss of their son Jordan, I admire the strength and grace they’ve shown throughout the entire ordeal. I also applaud their commitment to amending laws that have proven to be unjust and unfair.

That’s not me espousing legal theory or relating as a black man. That’s me being a person  who understands pain, suffering, loss and purpose. That’s hoping we all one day can celebrate our differences, connect, love and respect each other, and focus our gifts and talents on things that matter.

When that happens, I won’t need to provide the type of legal commentary I regularly do.  Until then, I’ll keep giving input on cases and calling them as I see them. Then I’ll hand over my gavel and let you be the judge.

Ladies and Gentlemen, court’s adjourn. All rise!