Today's closing arguments.
Wolfoson for the State first. She always seems to me like an opinionated Girl's High School Head Prefect (not sure what US equivalent is). Sort of an opinionated "spoiled brat" type. Opinion Nazi type who thinks if she boldly states things people HAVE to believe her.
She was making up a lot of what she stated as fact, or at best mis-stating things in a biased way. She is CLEARLY a student of the Corey/Guy smoke and mirrors and play on emotion school. The very approach judges often warn jurors to NOT take, is what these prosecutors promote. Play on emotion and sympathy for "the victim" regardless. It does actually ultimately do "victims" a disservice. Every time they "sugar coat" a victim, by extension they say that victims in all lesser "states of Grace" are to be treated with less concern. For instance, when Prosecutors stress that a victim deserves extra consideration because they are young, or smart, attractive or well behaved etc The converse of the argument is that people who are say, over 30, or overweight, or simply just a "bit of an asshole" character do NOT deserve the same consideration in the Justice system. Presumably fat ugly people are fair game for any crime bad guys care to perpetrate?
Hanania for the Defense was stating more or less the position that I hold, so I have to admit myself to be biased towards her. However she was without question laying out the basics of what a Jury decision should be based on. The (simple) concepts of "Innocent until proved guilty" and the huge burden on The State alone to PROVE beyond reasonable doubt. In this particular case to DISPROVE beyond reasonable doubt Dunn's claim that he acted in Self Defense while in fear for his life. IMO the State did not even come close. It would have been IMPOSSIBLE for anybody to do so because the cops simply FAILED to investigate some things that would be essential to proving that. Hanania did cover this and a lot of things I would have pointed out too. She did a good job, though it is hard to put such matters to an average person in a way that it will be grasped. She did try. She also preempted more (improper) play on sympathy and emotion from Guy when he followed her and got up to deliver final State close.
Like Pavlov's dog.. John Guy could not help himself. He even noticed the preemptive warning about himself, and addressed it specifically. He stated he would NOT play on sympathy and emotion..... then he went right ahead and did it anyway throughout his entire speech!!
I had a fun bet with somebody that he would use "17 yr old kid" theme and I won many times over. Guy closed with "..."Jordan Davis 17 for ever now..." I am pretty sure he copy-pasted chunks of his close on Dunn case from his (failed) close for the GZ case. Apparently, if you are killed at the age of 17 (and are black) you not only automatically go straight to Heaven, but you are are elevated to Sainthood as a starting position.
But, all is not lost. Judge Healey does get last say and THAT will (I hope) be correct instruction on what Florida laws are applicable, and put this case in that context. He should further warn Jurors to base their decision on the evidence that was present and NOT on sympathy and emotion (all of the two State closing speeches). I HOPE he stresses that their FIRST job is to evaluate Dunn's claim of Self Defense. If they accept that as valid then it's Game over.. ACQUITTAL.
From the snippets of discussion in regards Jury instructions it was obvious to me that Corey was up to her old tricks. Trying to Gerrymander the wording of the instructions, especially in regards justified use of deadly force. She failed (I hope) since Hanania insisted on reverting to the standard template version. IMO Corey managed to bamboozle and get her own way last trial and that at least added to a confusing set of instructions, which in turn (IMO) lead the Jury to do it WRONG. First trial Jurors SHOULD have considered SD before all else, and acquitted, or at worse be hung as they were, but on all charges.
I am interested to hear the Judge tomorrow, and see the Jury decision form. That too was confusing first trial. Or perhaps the jury misread it. It has to lay out the decision process in order clearly. It has to say that SD claim be considered first. As always one of my biggest worries is that the Jury will opt for a "compromise verdict". Figure that sine "the victim" is dead they must find Dunn guilty of "something". IMO Using that common fault from jurors is part of Corey's standard, devious and improper ploy. Overcharge in hope of getting lesser included charges to stick because of the "Compromise Verdict" effect.
Login
FAQ
Do not go gentle into that good night.
