Law of Self Defense Tag

Readers of Legal Insurrection will have noted our ongoing coverage of the Florida “loud music” trial, in which the defendant Michael Dunn is charged with 1st degree murder in the shooting death of 17-year-old Jordan Davis. The general narrative of events at the scene of the killing is that both men (Davis accompanied by three friends, Dunn by his fiancé) were fueling their cars at a local gas station. Davis’ vehicle was playing music at a sound unpleasant to Dunn—and indeed, forensics photos show a massive set of speakers mounted in the rear of Davis’ SUV—and he asked them to turn the music down. The youths declined, and an escalating and increasingly hostile verbal confrontation began. Here the prosecution and defense narratives differ. The State essentially argues that Dunn was so enraged by the music that he drew his licensed pistol and shot Davis and his friends, Davis mortally. The defense argues that Davis and his friends were making explicit deadly threats against him, and he only shot at them when he reasonably perceived what appeared to be a weapon. (No weapon was actually recovered from the vehicle, although this fact is of course not dispositive in a self-defense case, so long as Dunn’s perception of a weapon was reasonable even if mistaken). [caption id="attachment_77488" align="alignnone" width="450"] Michael Dunn on trial on charges of 1st Degree murder for the shooting death of Jordan Davis[/caption]

Presiding Judge Russell Healey Becomes Center of Focus for Media Coverage of Trial

Much of the news about the trial, however, has had little to do with either the State’s case against Dunn or Dunn’s defense against the charges. Instead, rather unusually, much of the last several week’s attention has focused primarily on the Judge overseeing the case, Judge Russell Healey. One might wonder, then, who is Russell Healey in terms of judicial background, experience, and temperament?

The ongoing drama in the Michael Dunn “loud music” murder trial over whether jailhouse phone recordings should be released to the media has taken yet another turn. Yesterday the 1st District Court of Appeals once again felt compelled to step in--now for the third time--to reverse the Healey’s Wednesday ruling tossing the matter to civil court, and to demand an emergency hearing of all parties. (I haven’t yet seen yesterday’s 1st DCA ruling, so I don’t know if it literally says, “Get in our courtroom, NOW!” but I wouldn’t be the least surprised.) In addition, they’ve ordered that Healey’s immediate superior, Chief Judge Donald Mora, appoint yet another judge to hold an evidentiary hearing on whether the State’s estimated cost (~$6,300) for redaction of the recordings is reasonable, taking the matter out of Healey’s hands. (A kind interpretation of this last would be that they recognize Healey will be busy with jury selection for the start of the Dunn trial on Monday.) Some brief history of this discovery drama may provide useful context. Keep in mind, the existence of the phone recordings was known to all parties as long ago as October 2013, and the media has been demanding access to them since that time. [caption id="attachment_77430" align="alignnone" width="450"] Michael Dunn interviewed by police following "loud music" shooting of Jordan Davis[/caption] As we noted in our blog January 8 post on the case:

Fixing a glitch in the self defense law....

Few among us will soon forget the “eccentric” jurisprudence demonstrated by Judge Debra Nelson during the George Zimmerman trial. I am pleased to discover that, to the good fortune of legal bloggers everywhere, Florida apparently has a surfeit of such judges. You ask for a similarly “eccentric” Florida judge in another Florida self-defense case? I give you Judge Russell Healey in the upcoming Michael Dunn trial. Interestingly, it seems the Sunshine took several swings at the ball before seating Judge Healey to try this case, a pattern also reminiscent of the multiple judges rotated through the early days of the Zimmerman trial. The first judge assigned to the Dunn case, Judge Suzanne Bass, recused herself in May 2013 in response to a defense motion claiming several of her rulings against the defense revealed bias. You can view the defense motion for recusal by clicking here. The second judge assigned, Judge Mallory Cooper, recused herself after only 5 weeks on the case, for reasons not made clear. Judge Healey is thus the third judge—so far—to preside over the Dunn trial. [caption id="attachment_75374" align="alignnone" width="450"] Judge Russell Healey, overseeing trial of Michael Dunn[/caption] Before we get into some of Judge Healey’s more interesting jurisprudence, it may be useful to quickly summarize the case. Michael Dunn is charged with first-degree murder in the death of Jordan Davis, a 17-year-old high school student.

On December 18 a pre-trial hearing was held in the shooting case of Renisha McBride in Detroit. The purpose of the hearing was to determine whether the second degree murder charge against the defendant, Theodore Wafer, ought to be dismissed or whether there existed sufficient grounds to bind Wafer over for trial. The judge ruled the matter was to go to trial. Legal Insurrection previously posted on the Wafer/McBride case here: Analysis: Self-Defense Claim May be Legally Weak in Michigan Porch Shooting. As the title of the piece suggests, the evidence as then available seemed inadequate to support much of a claim of self-defense. In the course of the pre-trial hearing, however, the defense team called to the stand a crime scene reconstruction and firearms expert witness, David Balash. In the course of his testimony under defense questioning facts began to emerge that seem likely to form the structure of the team’s legal defense. Some of the forensic evidence remains in dispute, but for the purposes of this discussion I’ll make several likely presumptions. One of these is that Wafer was standing inside his home, looking through the closed (and perhaps locked) screen door, and McBride was on the other side of the door standing on the rather small front porch, so within two to three feet of the screen door. Finally, that the shotgun round that struck and killed McBride was fired through the screening of the door. When police arrived on the scene in response to Wafer’s 911 call, they found the screen, and its associated frame, had been knocked lose from the screen door proper, and noted the hole in the screen through which the fatal shot had likely been fired. Prior to taking crime scene photos, they replaced the screen in its proper position in the door, the position in which they assumed the screen was placed when pierced by the shot.

Earlier this month, a man allegedly shot a woman through the front screen door of his porch when the woman knocked or banged on it after reportedly crashing her car nearby in suburban Detroit, Michigan.  The case has since made news headlines. I've been asked repeatedly to comment on the purported self-defense shooting by Theodore Wafer of Renisha McBride in Michigan, and now that the factual situation appears to have stabilized a bit it seems suitable fare for the Thanksgiving weekend. Most of you will know that I was a vigorous supporter of George Zimmerman's legal claim of self-defense in his shooting of Trayvon Martin. I also consider myself very much a member of the self-defense community, being an NRA instructor in personal protection (and other stuff) for ~20 years, a long-term competitor in the International Defensive Pistol Association (IDPA# 13; to provide context, membership now exceeds 20,000), and someone who arms himself as a routine matter of personal protection. That said, the facts as currently available to me, considered in the context of Michigan self-defense law, suggests that Theodore Wafer is going to have considerable difficulty in successfully advancing a claim that the shooting of Renisha McBride was in lawful self-defense. One caveat: The "facts" on which I rely are derived from the press, so as always should be taken with a grain of salt. I have, where possible, relied upon press sourced in the UK, rather than the widely discredited US press.

Michigan's Law of Self Defense

Theodore Wafer has been charged with second-degree murder, manslaughter, and possession of a firearm used in a felony, for the shooting death of Ranisha McBride. He is claiming self-defense which, if successfully argued, would require an acquittal on all charges.