“It’s been a long journey—450 days,” said an emotional Ron Davis, on Saturday, February 15, after Michael Dunn’s verdict was finally delivered. The jury deliberated for over 30 hours on the five charges against Dunn. About his son, Jordan Davis, Ron Davis said, “he was a good kid.”


On November 23, 2012, Dunn, 47, and his fiancée, Rhonda Rouer, pulled into a convenience store where Jordan Davis, 17, was parked in his SUV. While Rouer was inside the store, Dunn remained in the vehicle, parked next to Davis. Dunn complained about the teenagers playing their “rap crap” too loudly and asked the four teenagers to turn down the music. According to Dunn, Davis then threatened Dunn with a weapon. The defense argued that Dunn reacted in fear of his life and shot into the SUV. Dunn fired 10 bullets total into the vehicle, even after the teens had begun to drive away to escape the assault. Dunn, then, went to his hotel and walked his dog, ordered a pizza, and drank rum and coke. He never called police and only confessed after he was apprehended close to his home in Brevard County, Florida.


Dunn was charged with one count of first degree murder of Jordan Davis, and three counts of attempted murder of the other teens in the SUV, and with firing a weapon at a person. Rouer testified that he never told her about the teens having any kind of weapon, and no weapon was ever found in the teen’s vehicle.



Little girl educates herself #DangerousBlackKids

Twitter hashtag #DangerousBlackKids becomes satirical outlet for public frustrations with verdict.

When the verdict was reached on Saturday, the public reacted with shock and outrage at the juror’s inability to convict Dunn on the first degree murder charge, which  resulted in a hung jury.

The Twitterverse exploded with #DangerousBlackKids, a satirical hashtag that people are using to demonstrate the idiocy of the argument that Davis was threatening simply because he was black and listening to music Dunn didn’t like.

Many cite the recent case of State of Florida v. George Zimmerman in which Zimmerman was charged second degree murder and found not guilty in July 2013. Both cases were considered to be racially motivated because both of the victims were young black males and both of the defense arguments were heavily dependent upon self-defense.


The cases both bring to light the flaws in Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law, which is a self-defense, self-protection law.  The law states that

“In any place where a person ‘has a right to be,’ that person has ‘no duty to retreat’ if attacked and may ‘meet with force, including deadly force if she or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily hard to himself or herself or another to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.”

How does a jury truly determine whether the person claiming self-defense was in grave enough danger to justify murder?


“It is sad for Mr. Dunn that he will live for the rest of his life in that sense of torment, and I will pray for him,” Lucia McBath, Davis’ mother, said tearfully on Saturday. “[We will] continue to wait for justice for Jordan.”


What are your thoughts on the Michael Dunn murder trial? Is murder ever justifiable? Let’s discuss this important issue here in the comments section below, or you can find me on Twitter @TiffaniJPurdy.