Crime

No Justice in Trial of Killing of 17-Year-Old Jordan Davis

Published

12 years ago

February 20, 2014

Commentary

In the wake of the killings of Oscar Grant in Oakland and Trayvon Martin in Florida, Bay Area residents are again witnessing the emotional uproar over the killing of another young Black man, which once again raises the question if Black lives are less valued in America’s judicial system.

The verdict in the murder case of 17-year old Jordan Davis, apparently shot and killed in a dispute over loud music, caused the same emotional uneasiness as in the other cases.

Although Michael Dunn, 47, was found guilty on three accounts of attempted murder and for firing into an occupied car, the jury was hung on the first-degree murder charge of Davis.

How is possible to find him guilty of attempted murder but not on the main charge of murder?

;“This is the third recent case in Florida where the ‘stand your ground’ law has apparently complicated rather simple cases of murdering young Black teenagers,” said Rev. Jesse Jackson in a statement released this week.

San Francisco Defense Attorney Damone Hale says ultimately Dunn’s defense attorney Cory Strolla “outplayed the prosecution.”

“A trial is a battle of impressions,” Hale said. “A good defense attorney is going to paint the picture that Davis posed a threat.”

Davis was reported to have argued with Dunn, described as getting out of the car, which under Florida’s ‘Stand Your Ground Law’ could support Dunn’s fear. However, when the vehicle is pulling away there is no reasonable danger caused since the person is leaving, which then explains the jury’s verdict on the attempted murder charges but not the murder charge.

The jury deliberated for 30 hours, which Hale says shows the back and forth limbo, but ultimately the defense was able to get at least one non Black juror to relate to a time when they saw a young Black male in a mall or store and felt threatened.

But given the evidence, he believes a seasoned prosecutor could have destroyed Dunn, Hale said.

“Our system works when the pieces do their job and part of the prosecutors job was to tell the story,” he added. “The prosecutors in Florida are looking like amateurs.”

Rev. Jackson also raised questions about the “competence of State Attorney Angela Corey who has refused to address one of the central issues in both the Jordan Davis and the Trayvon Martin trials – the issue of race.”

“Race was central to all three trials yet Ms. Corey has been reluctant and has refused to bring the relevant issue of race into the two trials of Davis and Martin,” he said.

Unlike Florida’s subjective ‘Stand Your Ground’ Law, which focuses on what a person believes, Hale says California’s law examines if a person’s actions are reasonable.

Based on the facts of the case, he believes if the case tried in California, the only way Dunn would have been able to avoid a life sentence would be if he were offered a plea deal.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Up Next

Marin County Hires New Director of Public Works

Don't Miss

Stirring the Pot: Keeping Black History Real

Oakland Post

Click to comment

Alameda County

Oakland Council Expands Citywide Security Cameras Despite Major Opposition

In a 7-1 vote in favor of the contract, with only District 3 Councilmember Carroll Fife voting no, the Council agreed to maintain its existing network of 291 cameras and add 40 new “pan-tilt-zoom cameras.”

Published

2 days ago

December 21, 2025

Oakland Post

At the International Association of Chiefs of Police Conference, Flock Safety introduces new public safety technology – Amplified Intelligence, a suite of AI-powered tools designed to improve law enforcement investigations. Courtesy photo.

By Post Staff

The Oakland City Council this week approved a $2.25 million contract with Flock Safety for a mass surveillance network of hundreds of security cameras to track vehicles in the city.

In recent weeks hundreds of local residents have spoken against the camera system, raising concerns that data will be shared with immigration authorities and other federal agencies at a time when mass surveillance is growing across the country with little regard for individual rights.

The Flock network, supported by the Oakland Police Department, has the backing of residents and councilmembers who see it as an important tool to protect public safety.

“This system makes the Department more efficient as it allows for information related to disruptive/violent criminal activities to be captured … and allows for precise and focused enforcement,” OPD wrote in its proposal to City Council.

According to OPD, police made 232 arrests using data from Flock cameras between July 2024 and November of this year.

Based on the data, police say they recovered 68 guns, and utilizing the countywide system, they have found 1,100 stolen vehicles.

However, Flock’s cameras cast a wide net. The company’s cameras in Oakland last month captured license plate numbers and other information from about 1.4 million vehicles.

Speaking at Tuesday’s Council meeting, Fife was critical of her colleagues for signing a contract with a company that has been in the national spotlight for sharing data with federal agencies.

Flock’s cameras – which are automated license plate readers – have been used in tracking people who have had abortions, monitoring protesters, and aiding in deportation roundups.

“I don’t know how we get up and have several press conferences talking about how we are supportive of a sanctuary city status but then use a vendor that has been shown to have a direct relationship with (the U.S.) Border Control,” she said. “It doesn’t make sense to me.”

Several councilmembers who voted in favor of the contract said they supported the deal as long as some safeguards were written into the Council’s resolution.

“We’re not aiming for perfection,” said District 1 Councilmember Zac Unger. “This is not Orwellian facial recognition technology — that’s prohibited in Oakland. The road forward here is to add as many amendments as we can.”

Amendments passed by the Council prohibit OPD from sharing camera data with any other agencies for the purpose of “criminalizing reproductive or gender affirming healthcare” or for federal immigration enforcement. California state law also prohibits the sharing of license plate reader data with the federal government, and because Oakland’s sanctuary city status, OPD is not allowed to cooperate with immigration authorities.

A former member of Oakland’s Privacy Advisory Commission has sued OPD, alleging that it has violated its own rules around data sharing.

So far, OPD has shared Flock data with 50 other law enforcement agencies.