Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

diabeticman

(3,121 posts)
Sat Feb 15, 2014, 08:48 PM Feb 2014

A question my wife keeps muttering under her breath. (about the Dunn/loud music case)

Why the Hell isn't this DA using Race as a motive for this case and the Zimmerman case when it is obvious that race was a motive in both cases.


My wife says we can no longer ignore the elephant in the glass store. we can't go along pretending that we fixed our "race problem".

23 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
A question my wife keeps muttering under her breath. (about the Dunn/loud music case) (Original Post) diabeticman Feb 2014 OP
It's very difficult to convince the general population a hate crime occurred unless really obvious. Gravitycollapse Feb 2014 #1
My guess would be the prosecutors believe the community (from which jurors are selected) hlthe2b Feb 2014 #2
They need to change the law because it's obvious that there are people out here Baitball Blogger Feb 2014 #8
No doubt... I can not imagine any European vacationer wanting to come to Florida hlthe2b Feb 2014 #11
I was listening to a legal alsame Feb 2014 #3
I think she has an inability to learn from anything. nt arthritisR_US Feb 2014 #10
This was a mixed race jury gerogie2 Feb 2014 #4
He used code words. And if you alsame Feb 2014 #7
Apparently he did in his letter writing from prison. classykaren Feb 2014 #21
You can't find 12 White people in North Florida without finding 1 racist gun nut in the bunch... VanillaRhapsody Feb 2014 #5
I have to agree GP6971 Feb 2014 #6
I didn't see enough of this second case to comment DefenseLawyer Feb 2014 #9
Race is there for everyone to see, it's because of Racism that he was not found guilty on murder JI7 Feb 2014 #12
Very true. n/t GP6971 Feb 2014 #13
Was the racist on the jury just too stupid to hold out and vote not guilty on the other charges? mythology Feb 2014 #14
i'm saying if the races were the other way around it would have been an easy guilty, many racists JI7 Feb 2014 #15
for real: if the races were the other way around it would have been an easy guilty,.......... lunasun Feb 2014 #19
Dunn? No he wasn't. Lizzie Poppet Feb 2014 #16
Without direct proof it seems desperate... Lost_Count Feb 2014 #17
Because that has a filthy habit of backfiring Scootaloo Feb 2014 #18
Apparently we can ... 1StrongBlackMan Feb 2014 #20
A couple of legal pundits on MSNBC this morning asked the same Cleita Feb 2014 #22
because there is no evidence that race had anything to do with it TorchTheWitch Feb 2014 #23

Gravitycollapse

(8,155 posts)
1. It's very difficult to convince the general population a hate crime occurred unless really obvious.
Sat Feb 15, 2014, 08:52 PM
Feb 2014

Any level of ambiguity will generally push people towards acquittal.

Racially motivated crimes open up an entirely new level of investigation and prosecution. At that point, the federal government can step in. It might have been the case that the federal government refused an inquiry and that motivated the state to steer clear of arguing the crimes were racially motivated.

Just my opinion.

hlthe2b

(102,236 posts)
2. My guess would be the prosecutors believe the community (from which jurors are selected)
Sat Feb 15, 2014, 08:53 PM
Feb 2014

disproportionately harbor racist views and thus going after racist motivations would likely backfire, given a single sympathetic juror could (and did) derail.

I don't know, but that would be my guess of what is discussed in this respect (behind closed doors).

Baitball Blogger

(46,703 posts)
8. They need to change the law because it's obvious that there are people out here
Sat Feb 15, 2014, 09:12 PM
Feb 2014

who are trying to pick a fight.

hlthe2b

(102,236 posts)
11. No doubt... I can not imagine any European vacationer wanting to come to Florida
Sat Feb 15, 2014, 09:24 PM
Feb 2014

(nor any particularly rational American)... Unfortunately, there are other states with equally ridiculous gun laws.

alsame

(7,784 posts)
3. I was listening to a legal
Sat Feb 15, 2014, 08:54 PM
Feb 2014

analyst the other night on HLN (don't remember his name) and he said the same thing, it should have been tried as a hate crime but Angela Corey is afraid to do so.

 

gerogie2

(450 posts)
4. This was a mixed race jury
Sat Feb 15, 2014, 08:56 PM
Feb 2014

The DA doesn't have to spell it out to them. Also Dunn never used any racial slurs, so that is a factor.

classykaren

(769 posts)
21. Apparently he did in his letter writing from prison.
Sat Feb 15, 2014, 11:05 PM
Feb 2014

A lot more will be coming out about this case in the very near future

 

DefenseLawyer

(11,101 posts)
9. I didn't see enough of this second case to comment
Sat Feb 15, 2014, 09:14 PM
Feb 2014

But the Zimmerman prosecution was in the tank from the beginning. They weren't trying to win.

JI7

(89,248 posts)
12. Race is there for everyone to see, it's because of Racism that he was not found guilty on murder
Sat Feb 15, 2014, 09:26 PM
Feb 2014

if you bring up race the racists will start complaining about the race card .

 

mythology

(9,527 posts)
14. Was the racist on the jury just too stupid to hold out and vote not guilty on the other charges?
Sat Feb 15, 2014, 09:43 PM
Feb 2014

I think it's far more likely that the jury was deliberating over whether this was premeditated or not. Unless you honestly can say that the juror(s) who couldn't agree on the top count didn't realize that Dunn would go to jail on the other counts too.

JI7

(89,248 posts)
15. i'm saying if the races were the other way around it would have been an easy guilty, many racists
Sat Feb 15, 2014, 09:46 PM
Feb 2014

don't think they are racist .

lunasun

(21,646 posts)
19. for real: if the races were the other way around it would have been an easy guilty,..........
Sat Feb 15, 2014, 10:51 PM
Feb 2014

firing into a car of white teens who have not one weapon among them ....

 

Lizzie Poppet

(10,164 posts)
16. Dunn? No he wasn't.
Sat Feb 15, 2014, 09:50 PM
Feb 2014

Dunn wasn't found not guilty on the murder charge. It was declared a mistrial (almost certainly due to a hung jury), and he's subject to being re-tried. They might not bother, since he's almost certainly spending the rest of his life in prison, but it's still on the table.

 

Scootaloo

(25,699 posts)
18. Because that has a filthy habit of backfiring
Sat Feb 15, 2014, 10:34 PM
Feb 2014

I'm sure you've heard the phrase "playing the race card," yes? Basically it's at the point where acknowledging real and violently tangible racism... is seen as an admission that there's actually no case o be had and all you've got is "getting emotional." It's a white supremacist victory basically, as there is suddenly no such thing as racism, since every time there is, it's poo-poohed into oblivion... or results in the defendant raking in hundreds of thousands of dollars and becoming a celebrity, as was the case with Zimmerman.

even "progressives" aren't immune. read around on DU, see what opinions people tend ot have about Rev. Sharpton.

Cleita

(75,480 posts)
22. A couple of legal pundits on MSNBC this morning asked the same
Sat Feb 15, 2014, 11:12 PM
Feb 2014

question and also asked why this same prosecutor was given the case when she clearly screwed up the Zimmerman case.

TorchTheWitch

(11,065 posts)
23. because there is no evidence that race had anything to do with it
Sat Feb 15, 2014, 11:47 PM
Feb 2014

And I think pulling the race card is more dangerous and is done when the evidence you have isn't enough. There was a TON of physical and circumstantial evidence in this case especially concerning Dunn's actions (and inactions) after he left the scene making it clear that there was never any gun or gun-like thing and that he was never at any time afraid for his life. He shot those boys not because they were black but because they defied him in what he wanted, Davis talked back to him, and he became so enraged by that that he got his gun and let lose on them. Had they been white in the same circumstances playing music just as loud he would have done the same thing especially if they were average teenage boys that wore the same type of clothing and played the same type of music... it's not just black teenage boys that are considered "thugs" by people. Pretty much all the male teenagers where I live wear the same kind of clothes, play the same kind of music really loud and act the same way and most of them are white, and some people consider them to be "thuggish" because of it.

Dunn believes that EVERYONE is beneath him and for someone to defy him and talk back to him particularly a teenager was too much for him. I think it was their youth that was especially galling to him... that a young person would dare to stand up to him, the much older adult. I think he would also react violently were it a woman that defied him though probably not in public. Though he is clearly a bigot from his own words in his letters, their race didn't have anything to do with why he shot at them but because one of them made him so enraged for talking back to him and defying what he wanted them to do. He's the perfect example of a nut with a gun that goes LOOKING to get into an altercation with someone he thinks he could get away with using his gun on them. I don't see what he did as all that much different than the guy that shot someone in the movie theater not because his life was threatened but because he defied him, talked back to him and he had "gun muscles" that made him go LOOKING to get into an altercation with someone and pull a gun on them because they aren't capable of controlling that "gun muscle" impulse... they can't help themselves because they get so angry and can't control the impulse to use their gun.

I don't know why anyone thought that he shot them because they were black. He shot them because he was so enraged that one of them defied him and talked back to him, hence the independent witness that heard him say "you aren't going to talk to me that way" just before going for his gun.

As for the Zimmerman case, I do think Martin was racially profiled and the entire reason why Zimmerman followed him, BUT the court decided that his following Martin had nothing to do with what came after. And in the Zimmerman trial they did use his race in part for the reason why Zimmerman believed that he was up to no good and followed him. What the prosecution needed to do in that case was to hammer on all of Zimmerman's multiple stories and lies about what occurred, and they utterly failed in every possible way so much so that I will always be convinced that the case was thrown on purpose.

In the OJ Simpson case the race card was used on behalf of the defendant, and sadly it worked. And there was nothing at all about race coming into that case. After that case I think it's a mistake to wave the race card especially when there isn't evidence or scant evidence of race being a factor and especially when there is actual physical evidence to convict. Most people believe that using the race card means that your case is weak. And without compelling evidence that says that race was a significant factor I'm inclined to agree. This case had a TON of evidence both physical and circumstantial against Dunn, and THAT'S what thankfully was used against him, as it should. To have used race in THIS case would have been a red flag indicating that the prosecution didn't feel that all the evidence they DID have was enough. And in this case all that evidence was absolutely overwhelming with none of it having to do with race.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»A question my wife keeps ...