Image 01 Image 03

LIVE COVERAGE: “Loud Music” Murder Trial, Day 4

LIVE COVERAGE: “Loud Music” Murder Trial, Day 4

Real-time legal analysis from self-defense law expert and attorney Andrew Branca



Welcome to day four of our live coverage of the “loud music” 1st degree murder trial of Michael Dunn in real time. Here are a couple live video feeds, with the smaller, upper-most feed proving the most reliable yesterday.

Before we get to that, there has been much discussion and some confusion about the number, sequence, and tempo of the gunshots fired by Michael Dunn at the red Durango SUV in which Jordan Davis was followed.  Those interested can hear the shots fired on the gas station surveillance tape here:  “Loud Music” Murder Trial: Sequence of Gun Shots.

At the bottom of the post is a live Twitter feed with my live tweets and those of others reporting on the trial. We plan to do a brief mid-day summary when the court recesses for lunch, then our usual lengthier coverage/analysis after the court recesses that day’s end.

FOX 35 News Orlando

–Andrew, @LawSelfDefense

Andrew F. Branca is an MA lawyer and the author of the seminal book “The Law of Self Defense, 2nd Edition,” available at the Law of Self Defense blog, (paperback and Kindle), Barnes & Noble (paperback and Nook), and elsewhere.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


I wonder where Strolla thinks he’s going with the bullets making right turns in mid air. Retrying the JFK case?

    MouseTheLuckyDog in reply to BrokeGopher. | February 10, 2014 at 12:26 pm

    I just got here so I can only guess. A lawyer has to argue every possibility or he loses the right to argue that possibility in appeals or future retrials. For example if the jury decides that the first six shoots were justified but the last three not ( Omara’s scenario ) and that Dunn is guilty of the murder of Jordan Davis. Strolla cannot come back and argue, I did not anticipate that they would find only the last three shots unjustified, i need a trial to deal with this. He has to deal it now.

    So he is presenting evidence that shows that the last three shots could not have killed Davis, and that he did not attempt to murder the others with the last three shots because bullets don’t make right angles. If he doesn’t ask now he can’t bring it up later.

      We missed you, MTLD.

      Now we’ll back up and try again.

      re bullet angles – you weren’t paying attention to the pictures of the dowels.

      One of the bullets from the rear angle caused the damage to the driver’s visor. Inches from his head. That goes to attempted murder of the driver, one of the counts charge.

Every lamestream news account calls this a stand your ground case despite the fact it is NOT a stand your ground case.

State rests ?

None of the jail calls / letters brought in yet. Can they still be ? How ?

At what point, other than perhaps opening arguements, at what point in evidence did the state get anyone to say ‘Dunn was the shooter’ ?

    BrokeGopher in reply to pjm. | February 10, 2014 at 12:44 pm

    I believe the fiancee testified it was Michael shooting, and that he replaced the gun in the glove box. Maybe the letters would be successfully objected to as irrelevant to the case, but can be used as rebuttal to any character evidence the defense tries to present. Just my non-lawyer guesses at this point.

      tom swift in reply to BrokeGopher. | February 10, 2014 at 1:03 pm

      As per Saturday’s testimony, when she left the store she saw Dunn leaning out his car window, facing toward the rear of the car, but specifically stated that she didn’t see a gun; and as she was getting into the car (as I recall) she saw him putting his gun into its habitual storage place, the glove box. I don’t remember her ever saying that she actually saw him firing the gun.

I heard a lot of talk about “bullet tracts”. I couldn’t avoid the vision of a bullet doing its ballistic thing whilst distributing pamphlets.

I take back one question – the men in the car Id’d him in testimony. My bad.

MouseTheLuckyDog | February 10, 2014 at 1:22 pm

My guess Dunn will testify. Why? The jury wants to hear him say he thought there was a gun. If they don’t hear him say it, they will not acquit. So he will testify, and hope that he doesn’t get rough up too much on cross.

MouseTheLuckyDog | February 10, 2014 at 2:24 pm

What? Defense calling the father?

MouseTheLuckyDog | February 10, 2014 at 3:14 pm

I understand bringing up the puppy, but I think Corey is overdoing it a bit. Maybe she doesn’t understand dog lovers. Then again if someone gave her a dog she would probaby eat it.

    Dunn’s main proferred reason for leaving and going home was concern over the puppy.

    Corey is driving home the point that he had family in town that would have taken care of it for him.

    IOW, she DESTROYS his argument for leaving town.

      BrokeGopher in reply to pjm. | February 10, 2014 at 4:15 pm

      The puppy was with them in the hotel, so that’s not a reason for leaving town. That was their reason for leaving the wedding a little early. The reason Rouney gave for leaving town was stress over the shooting.

        tom swift in reply to BrokeGopher. | February 10, 2014 at 5:13 pm

        I think she did say that at one point after the shooting she thought that they would all be arrested (all meaning “both” in this context) and wanting to ensure that the dog would be cared for when that happened.

        That’s her, not him. He said, as I recall, it was about the puppy.

        And having the puppy in a hotel room is not a hell of a lot different than having it in the car.

        “The puppy was with them in the hotel, so that’s not a reason for leaving town. ”

        I don’t even understand the logic there. Are you saying ‘they could have just left it in the hotel’ ?

        Rita 65 in reply to BrokeGopher. | February 11, 2014 at 1:28 pm

        Well the dog totally caused them to not call 911 on their way back to the hotel. And the dog caused them not to call police after knowing the boy had been shot… that is some good lying.

All pathological liars BELEIVE EVERYTHING they say to the point that it can permanently scar anyone around them and others that they trap in their web of lies.

This prosecuting attorney is coming across like a dumb-ass. Why do they continually go over PAST testimony (and seemingly try to change the facts as stated by the witness)?

Tim Lookingbill | February 11, 2014 at 3:43 pm

Just FYI from my one time calling 911 on a massive gang fight I tried to bust up in the small town of Kerrville Texas at the end of Pascal street. Google maps will show you how remote this area really is and how far from any inner city influences.

Two what looked like very thin and tall teenage boys? Men? in white t-shirts and droopy pants were battling it out surrounded by a horde of individuals comprised of tattooed/pierced biker types to hispanics to African Americans as I watch them beat each other up outside my window as I called 911.

Immediately after I put the phone down to wait for the police the entire crowd dispersed in a hurry and got in their vehicles and disappeared into the night as the police car arrived. I told the police officers that I called and asked what caused them to disperse so quickly after I put the phone down.

Police officer said…”They were using police scanners. You should’ve told dispatch to use the regular landline phone network to call their squad car. My mistake.

If these are the new ways that gangs connect with each other in their community in a small town in Texas, I can’t imagine what it must be like in a big city such as Jacksonville, Florida.

That gang of people never showed up at the end of Pascal street again. They clearly weren’t from my neighborhood. They just disappeared and hid in plain sight within the community.