Return to Transcripts main page


Did Jury Hear Enough about Michael Dunn

Aired February 13, 2014 - 19:00:00   ET


JANE VELEZ-MITCHELL, HOST: Breaking news tonight with an exclusive new interview that busts this case wide open. Yes, we`ve got exclusive new information that puts a brand-new spin on this trial and particularly on the defendant.

Meanwhile, we`ve been on pins and needles all day, waiting to hear whether they`re going to have a verdict today in the thug music murder trial. Deliberations are going to continue tomorrow. Right now the jurors are eating at a hotel. Are they divided? Are they split?

Jurors are struggling to decide whether Michael Dunn murdered 17-year- old Jordan Davis or shot in self-defense? The longer deliberations go, the most fearful protesters are that this trial could be the George Zimmerman acquittal all over again. You remember the Neighborhood Watchman?


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Michael Dunn should do the time. Murder is a crime.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Michael Dunn should do the time. Murder is a crime.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Michael Dunn should do the time. Murder is a crime.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: For Jordan Davis. Justice. For Jordan Davis. Justice.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: For Jordan Davis. Justice. For Jordan Davis. Justice.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: For Jordan Davis. Justice. For Jordan Davis. Justice.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Now Dunn, a middle-aged software developer, fired his pistol ten times at a red SUV with Jordan Davis and three of his friends inside. Three bullets hit Davis, killing him.

Dunn insists it was self-defense. Dunn says the victim threatened to kill him and flashed a shotgun or some other weapon at him.

Now his attorney, Dunn`s attorney, says prosecutors overcharged his client, because they were trying to make up for losing the very high- profile trial of Neighborhood Watchman George Zimmerman. You remember, he was acquitted of murdering Trayvon Martin.


CORY STROLLA, DEFENSE ATTORNEY FOR DUNN: I personally believe there`s a lot invested in the outcome of this case politically. Because of the George Zimmerman case, a lot more was focused on this case, where had we never heard about George Zimmerman, I don`t think you or I would be in this room talking about Mr. Dunn.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Now, right after that defense attorneys` news conference, the attorney for victim Jordan Davis` family responded by releasing a video of Dunn`s former neighbor. This neighbor makes alarming explosive accusations about this defendant.

And I just talked exclusively to the neighbor, Charles Hendrix, a little while ago. And he says, this guy, Michael Dunn, once asked him to carry out a hit and kill someone.


CHARLES HENDRIX, NEIGHBOR OF MICHAEL DUNN (via phone): The gist of the conversation was you know anybody that can take care of this guy for me? And when I asked him to expound on what he meant, "Beat him up, break his leg, what are you talking about?"

He said, "I`d like to see him dead."


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Straight out to my Lion`s Den panel. Hendrix was reportedly on the prosecution`s witness list, but he was never called. Why? We`re trying to figure that out.

Now Rolonda Watts, host of "Sundays with Rolonda" on Blog Talk Radio, the lawyers are saying, well, it`s hearsay. Well, that`s not hearsay if he`s saying it to him. He`s claiming that Dunn actually approached him and said that. So do you have a frustration that this portrait, this terrible portrait that this guy paints of his former neighbor, the jurors are hearing nothing about that?

ROLONDA WATTS, HOST, BLOG TALK RADIO`S "SUNDAYS WITH ROLONDA": Absolutely I`m upset that they didn`t hear about that. I`m still upset about those letters that were written in jail that the jury never got to hear about.

I mean, I understand what the attorney earlier was saying about that not being able to be brought into court under these circumstances. But my goodness, it just says so much about this man. It says that every -- that he`s like a menace to society. It`s not even that he thinks he`s better than just black people. He thinks he`s better than everybody. And this is something where he`s trying to get over on the system. I mean, it says a lot about his character, I think.

I think -- I wish that those -- those types of explosive and very controversial things about his character had been allowed in and particularly in his own handwriting. Say that`s hearsay if you want. But in his own handwriting from the jail, he talks about how he thinks more of situations ought to happen where people are blowing people away. I mean, these are the type of things. And calling the thugs and the "N" word and all of those things.

Whether this was racist encouraged or not, the guy has a problem with an out-of-control, violent temper. He has preconceived notions. He`s, like, a narcissist and he`s inconsistent in a lot of the things that he does. I think there`s a lot of ways that the prosecution could have gone really hard on these particular offerings. And I am -- I`m disappointed that they weren`t -- they weren`t put out there, particularly this witness.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: OK. We`re referring to the fact that everything that this guy said about Michael Dunn, the juror never heard it. He says Michael Dunn was a racist, thought that whites were under attack, thought that he was superior -- whites are superior to minorities.

And here`s a letter that Michael Dunn wrote from jail where he essentially says something similar. Well, you decide. "The jail is full of blacks, and they all act like thugs. This may sound a bit radical, but if more people would arm themselves and kill these bleeping idiots when they`re threatening you, eventually, they may take the hint and change their behavior," end quote.

Now, I want to go to Danny Cevallos. You know, look, explain it in people terms. Why is it that we can hear Michael Dunn say, "Jordan Davis threatened me," OK, that`s allowed in, but when a neighbor says, "Well, Michael Dunn, the defendant, asked me to carry out a hit on someone," that`s not allowed in?

DANNY CEVALLOS, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: The general rule is character evidence is not admissible. And there`s a reason for that.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: No, this is...

CEVALLOS: We as a society have decided...

VELEZ-MITCHELL: He`s making a specific allegation that the defendant asked him...

CEVALLOS: Of course.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: ... to carry out a criminal act. I`m not -- I`m not saying this really happened. I`m saying this is what he`s saying: "I don`t know; I wasn`t there."

CEVALLOS: Let`s say it happened. Let`s say, for argument`s sake -- just for argument`s sake, let`s say it happened. We as a society have a rule: You cannot introduce evidence that you`ve done bad things in the past to prove that on this particular occasion you did a bad thing.

It may be true, Jane. However, as a society we said that kind of evidence, character evidence is so prejudicial as to be unfair. And that`s why every single state and the federal government has very strict rules about when character evidence can come in. So every guest who said that should come in, that should come in, that`s nice, but it goes against 200 rules of the rules of evidence, just not what we do.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Adam Thompson, criminal defense attorney out of Fort Lauderdale, shaking his head. Why, Adam?

ADAM THOMPSON, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: I have to agree with what he`s saying. You know, by its nature character evidence is unusually so overwhelmingly prejudicial and a lot of times doesn`t go to the heart of the matter, so it`s kept out.

But I will say in this case there was some presentation by the defense that he had a calm demeanor or maybe was non-violent in some way. Now, the prosecution could have argued that the door was now open, that if the defense was going to say, "Hey, he`s a calm and mild-mannered person," well, now you`ve got to hear the flip side of that and introduce these other types of statements or this other evidence. So I think if they made the pitch to the judge, given these circumstances, they might have got it in, and they would have been able to use it.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: John Phillips, attorney for Jordan Davis`s family. You interviewed this man, and that`s where he put these explosive claims against the defendant, Michael Dunn, on videotape.

Now I understand if the judge said these aren`t allowed. But did the prosecution even try to get these in? Did they even make an attempt to show, for example, the jailhouse letter, where he expresses -- you all heard it. You can decide whether it`s racist. It sounds racist to me.

Now this guy, his neighbor, said, "He used to express racist comments to me." Did they try to get any of this in?

JOHN PHILLIPS, ATTORNEY FOR JORDAN DAVIS`S FAMILY: You know, I don`t know. It certainly didn`t come in, in open court. There were 200 hours of jailhouse phone calls. There were dozens and dozens of letters. And there were witnesses like this, not to mention the big gap of Michael Dunn`s life.

Everybody that testified as to his reputation in the community was his dad`s community or his ex-wife from two years ago, you know, three ex-wives removed. There`s so much there that -- that really wasn`t explored that -- that really will give you a depiction of who this guy really was.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Look, John Phillips, you`re the attorney for the family of the young man who was killed. The jury went home today after deliberating 11 hours and 43 minutes all told. Some are looking at the fact that they all wanted to have dinner at the hotel, that there`s a divide. The questions they asked today, there`s a divide.

This is now dragging on. If, if, if there is an acquittal, how will your client -- how will the parents of Jordan Davis feel about that, given all that we are -- all these allegations we`re learning?

PHILLIPS: They`ve known that this man had these things about him since -- for a year now. And they`ve reconciled that, and they`ve reconciled some of the wise points that have been brought out about the criminal evidence standard, that this just wasn`t -- you weren`t allowed to try this man`s character in a murder trial, which to me is a little ridiculous.

I get -- I get your point and I agree with you. But, you know, ultimately, we feel like there`s going to be a conviction, and you know, we`re hoping and praying for that.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, listen, if I had a nickel, and I`m not saying there is or isn`t. I have no idea. I`m not in the jury room. I don`t know what they`re saying. But I have sat for years in this very same situation at different case, where all the experts, all the wise people with all the legal degrees say there`s going to be a conviction, and it doesn`t happen.

It didn`t happen with Michael Jackson. It didn`t happen with Casey Anthony. It didn`t happen with O.J. Simpson. The list goes on and on and on. Nobody knows what`s going to happen. I say you throw everything at that wall and see what sticks. That would be my school of thought. I might have to go to law school.

Let`s go out to the phone lines. Andre, New York, you have been so...

THOMPSON: You`re hired.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: ... patient, Andre. What do you have to say, Andre, New York?

CALLER: Thank you, Ms. Velez-Mitchell, for having me. I want to say first that the kids that are Davis`s friends, all of them are good kids. America wants to stigmatize African-American males all the time and basically create this image that they will do anything, that they are possible of doing such bad things, saying that he had -- that one of them had a shotgun. That`s crazy.

This guy, Dunn, was created by the negativity of American society. He`s allowed, and he`s given this entitlement, to do and say and act however he feels. My grandparents could tell me about how it was when they were younger in South Carolina. They would say, "You know what? You see a Caucasian person, don`t -- you better respect them. You better -- don`t look them in the eye. You better step off the sidewalk."

His image about black people is horrible. Unfortunately, Dunn is -- he`s like a Frankenstein. He was created by these American lies, idealistic (ph) things.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Let me just say this. And I want to say, I don`t want to generalize about anybody. And soon, people are going to be morally corrupt or seriously bankrupt. I believe that this notion of crisis personally, I think it`s part of the human condition. A character defect that -- that we all have to grapple with in different ways. Different people are -- have biases about different things. But it`s something that I think -- a character defect that -- that comes with being a human being that we have to -- we have to confront and deal with.

But I want to go to Boyce Watkins, social commentator, founder of Your Black World. What are your thoughts about the fact that the jury did not hear anything that painted, in any way, shape, or form, a remotely negative impression of Michael Dunn`s past? But they did...

BOYCE WATKINS, FOUNDER, YOUR BLACK WORLD: Well, you know, it`s very interesting. Right. I mean, it`s very interesting that we are allowed to perpetuate an entire myth of thug-like behavior on the part of Jordan Davis, but yet the real thug-like behavior that has been -- that has been proven and that has witnesses on the part of Michael Dunn is not allowed in court.

I mean, you know, the same way we have rape shield laws, when you can`t bring someone`s past into the courtroom, I think we need murder shield laws that protect the victims from being torn apart in court and really being put on trial. Understand, Jordan Davis has been on trial, but for some reason, when it comes to Michael Dunn, it was sort of hands up. And I think this guy might get off, because we`re not prosecuting him the way we should be.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, I mean, is that the fault of the prosecutor?


WATTS: ... we don`t have evidence of thuggery.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Is it the fault of prosecutors to not play dirty? Did they not learn a lesson off the George Zimmerman case?

All right. We`re just getting started. Stay right there. We`re going to play some more of this interview that we did and more of the interview that he gave to the family of Jordan Davis`s attorney, his explosive allegations against Michael Dunn.

I want to say that we reached out to the attorney for Michael Dunn. He`s invited on our show. If you`re watching, Cory Strolla, call us. We want to get both sides. We want to hear what you have to say about this.

Stay right there.


HENDRIX: He disagreed with him. He (UNINTELLIGIBLE). Could be overbearing, try to intimidate people, using his voice. He appeared to me to be very selfish, and there wasn`t much he wouldn`t do to get what he wanted and get his way.




HENDRIX: In my opinion, he believed that black people and Hispanics were beneath white people, that this country was being taken over. White people needed to stand up. That was -- those were his words, not mine.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: That is a -- that man is a former neighbor of the defendant, Michael Dunn. And he says that is the attitude that Michael Dunn expressed toward him, in essence, a racist attitude, something that never got into this trial whatsoever.

Let`s go out to the phone lines. Sharonda, Florida. Sharonda, Florida, what do you have to say tonight?

CALLER: Hi, Jane. Thanks for having me. I have two things to say tonight, and one will not be well-received.

I think I agree with the way the prosecution did not put the neighbor on. And I am a mother of a brown boy in Florida. I believe that it would have been inflammatory, and like in the Trayvon Martin case, I believe that it really had nothing to do with the moment.

I also would like to comment about his attorney going onto the TVs and stating that without George Zimmerman, that this -- we would not be talking to him. I tend to agree with that but for a different reason.

I believe that the George Zimmerman verdict told everyone that it`s absolutely OK to murder black boys, as long as you say that you were in fear for your life. And I believe that it emboldened him, and it may embolden others. And as a mother of a brown boy, that`s what I`m most concerned about.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Wow, wow, extraordinary comment from Sharonda, Florida.

Simone Bienne, behavior expert, radio host, do you agree that the George Zimmerman acquittal emboldened, perhaps, Michael Dunn? Obviously, we can`t be inside his mind, but we can weigh in on what our feelings are about that.

SIMONE BIENNE, BEHAVIOR EXPERT: It`s interesting, because actually, if you look at social media, the more that we`re using it, the more people are actually planning to kill.

And I want to talk about exactly what Sharonda was saying there. This paranoia, that it`s OK to kill black people, that it is embedded in society, your point, Jane, earlier, about the darkness we have inside. If somebody is so paranoid that the world is the ugly, dark place, with the ugly, dark people, then what happens is they act out. But what really we`re talking about is they cannot handle the devil inside of themselves.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: So what you`re suggesting, and correct me if I am wrong -- and I`d like to get the panel`s response to this -- is that his fear, because of his purported prejudices -- again, Cory Strolla, call us; we`d like to get the other side. But the neighbor says he was very prejudiced. If that`s true, could that create a sense of fear where he might even feel that he`s under attack, feel that his life is in danger when it`s not? And I`ll go to Brian Silber on that on one.

BRIAN SILBER, ATTORNEY: Jane, you know, as objectionable as this guy`s beliefs may have been, the bottom line is this: He`s not on trial for his character. His character is not at issue. This is a question of his actions.

And think of it like this. In a murder trial, would it be a defense to say that he`s a nice guy? He`s loved by everybody. Think of Ted Bundy. The guy was a womanizer.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: That`s exactly what they did.

SILBER: No. You cannot say that. That is not a defense. Being a nice guy is not a defense to murder, and being a jerk is not evidence of guilt. It`s a question of what he did and what he did not do.

And in this case, going back to that car, grabbing that gun, failing to call 911 and sitting in your hotel having a pizza is better proof of guilt than to say he didn`t like a certain class of people. And that`s the bottom line. And getting that clean conviction that will hold up on appeal is the most important thing here.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, a clean conviction? How about a conviction -- yes, of course, you want a clean conviction. But I just see it over and over again, where it seems like sometimes the prosecution is a little bit too square, as it were.

I mean, this attorney -- I think Cory Strolla is a great attorney. He was swaggering and, you know, very confident in court. But he was -- he baffled you. By the time you got done with his explanation of the rods and the trajectory, you didn`t know which way was up. OK? And in confusion there is reasonable doubt.

And you know, I want to go to Rolonda Watts on that. Because as a lay person, did you find the projection of a trajectory that could have shown, in his opinion, that the victim, Jordan Davis, was getting out of the vehicle about to attack Michael Dunn, that his explanation was so convoluted, you might go, "Well, I don`t know. I don`t know about rods and trajectories."

WATTS: Look, that`s exactly what he`s trying to do. Raise any kind of doubt in the jury`s minds.

Listen, we have plenty of evidence that there was a murder there, in my opinion. We don`t have any evidence that there were thugs there. The only thug I see is that guy right there being booked. And I think he actually thought he was going to get a pat on the back and not a pat down and booked.

And what really bothers me is that this -- it`s not just the Jacksonville community that`s getting tense. There are communities all across America that are getting tense. And while you may not hear about it, there are people in their homes waiting to hear what this verdict is going to be.

Because this isn`t the only state with a stand-your-ground law. There are 25 other states in America that have the stand-your-ground law. And there are a lot of people in many communities who believe that there is open season out on black children.

And now, with a jerk like Dunn up there, there`s open season, it seems, on anybody. This is -- this guy needs to go down. Dunn needs to be done. And that`s just my personal opinion. And that`s -- that`s my story. I`m sticking to it.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: And we will continue to...

WATTS: I am outraged over this.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: ... debate this on the other side. Stay right there. We`re taking your calls.



UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: That`s the phrase this defendant said made him fear for his life. Did he tell the detectives that? Nope. He told the detectives, "I don`t know how many kids were in that car." He used the word "kids."




UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did you tell her they had a weapon of any kind?

DUNN: Yes, I did.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You used the word "gun" with Rhonda Rouer?

DUNN: Yes, I did.


DUNN: Multiple times.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Did the defendant ever tell you he saw a gun in that red SUV?


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Did the defendant ever tell you that he saw a weapon of any kind in that SUV?


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: There was no mention of a stick?


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: There was no mention of a shotgun?


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: There was no mention of a barrel?



VELEZ-MITCHELL: And now, to weigh in on this explosive case, one of the stars of "Grey`s Anatomy"," Jesse Williams. We are very delighted to have Jesse with us tonight here on this show.

Thank you for joining us. This is a case that has captivated the nation, everybody waiting on pins and needles to find out what this jury is going to do. So far they`ve deliberated 11 hours and 43 minutes. Why is this case important to you?

JESSE WILLIAMS, ACTOR: Well, I think -- I think it`s important because people are tired. I think people feel tired of this criminalization of the black body. I mean, it`s a tradition in this country, and people are kind of just feeling fatigued about constantly having to go through this all year every year since the beginning of this - - you know, the founding of this nation. This is a tradition in this country when people are able to go ahead and kill black people, because they got sassed, because they are inconvenienced and we become a victim of fantasy.

You know, your fantasy is -- now has become more -- and obviously, I don`t mean you, but this fantasy of what the black body does and can do has become more important than reality, and we pay for it with our lives. And it`s disconcerting, obviously.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, I mean, some would hope that cases like this are an aberration and that the arc towards justice is slow and bumpy, but it aims toward progress and equality and justice. We have an African- American president. I mean, as an African-American man, do you feel that the -- do you feel any stress as a result of cases like this?


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, in other words, that it affects your day-to-day life, cases like the George Zimmerman case, like...

WILLIAMS: Sure it does.


WILLIAMS: Sure it does. Well -- well, and I will say, obviously, better than awful is an improvement, I guess, but it doesn`t -- but it`s still awful. And so these things are -- it`s certainly going to continue to be frustrating.

I think also what I find, the people I talk to, I spend a lot of my time doing a lot of work around creating opportunity access and education for people of color, particularly black males. And -- and the conversations I`m having in the work that we`re doing, we find that people are also, you know, looking to find support and not feel like we`re the only ones and kind of tired of feeling like this is a black problem. It`s not a black problem; this is a white problem. This is an American problem. It`s a societal problem where people should be outraged when a man is able to instigate an interaction with kids and then shoot them when it doesn`t go well. It should be -- it should be an outrage for everybody. We shouldn`t have to -- you know, people were certain that O.J. was guilty, positive. We cracked jokes about it for years. But people are kind of on the fence and kind of, you know, cowering in break rooms and not talking about this case.

I think it was really telling that the prosecutor -- the defense attorney today said that this wouldn`t really even be, you know, a household case if it wasn`t for the Zimmerman trial, which really goes a long way to explain that -- how much, you know, the indifference around black life. So this is -- we`re only talking about this not because a life was lost and because a man shot 10 bullets into a car full of children, but because of some other case? I mean, that says more about him than anybody else.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, it`s interesting, because you`re a star of "Grey`s Anatomy," and many feel that we do have a two-tiered system of justice in this country, that its` one for the rich and famous and the other for everybody else. And a lot of people think that the criteria for being treated favorably in the courts isn`t so much race as it is power: power, privilege, fame, wealth.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: You would, under any criteria, be considered part of the power privilege group.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: You`re famous. You`re handsome. You`re a star of a hit show. Why do you feel also perhaps disenfranchised, despite all your success?

WILLIAMS: Because I don`t think of just me; I think of a collective group of people. And while privilege is very real, whether it`s a class issue that obviously exists, I think it`s another thing -- I`m glad you bring that up. Because people are -- this idea of having to explain why it`s racial while we`re standing in our own blood is silly, I think. It`s racial, because it doesn`t happen to white people.

Because if you look at the crack laws, look at the fact that 51 percent of crack users are white but 95 percent of the people in jail for crack use are black.

Look at the fact that prison is one of the most profitable and growing industrial complexes in this country and they now have for-profit prisons that have a mandated 90 percent occupancy rate to make money. This is an industry.

These are all fingers on the hand of a gross injustice that`s been happening in this country and it has not stopped. We`re waiting for it to stop and that will feel like a triumph.

But it`s not -- there is no question that race is an issue when you look at the amount of boys that are being shot because you feel scared. The idea that -- feeling threatened is not the same thing as being threatened. It`s not the same thing. We pretend that it is but it`s not.

You know, this fantasy that the bogeyman is out to get you. What if he was playing Bon Jovi? What if he was blasting Bon Jovi in the parking lot? Would he be able to have his life then? Would that be ok? Would he have gotten a thumbs up?

And this drunk can go walk back into -- I say drunk because he`s drunk and not a criticism of people who are alcoholic but if, you know, you`re going to the gas station to get wine after having several rums -- he would have gotten a thumbs up and kept walking and would be able to keep his life then?

I mean this is preposterous. I think that`s the frustration that a lot of Americans are feeling. A lot of folks that I`m talking to is that we have to keep fighting to be heard and to be treated as human beings. This is not close this case, this guy is a sociopath. He goes to jail, next. Next. Like this is I think --

JANE VELEZ-MITCHELL, HLN HOST: We`ll see. We`ll have to see what the jury decides. The jury --

WILLIAMS: Yes. That by the way is not -- I don`t guarantee that that`s going to be the outcome. That`s just my personal opinion -- certainly.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, I want to say, it`s a delight to have you on. I think maybe you should consider along with acting running for public office. You have a lot to say and you say it in a very articulate manner. Jesse Williams, star of "Grey`s Anatomy", we`re so delighted to have you on tonight.

And as this case progresses towards its ultimate conclusion the verdict, perhaps you will come back and join us again.

We`re waiting. They`re going to be back tomorrow morning. We have so much more to tell you. They`re having dinner right now. And guess what -- the jury elected to go back to the hotel to have dinner. They didn`t want to work over dinner. Does that mean that they`re divided? They`re asking a lot of questions that may indicate -- may indicate that there are two factions there.

Could we be headed toward a hung jury? We`re going to talk about that on the other side. We`ll take more of your calls.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This is not a conspiracy.

MICHAEL DUNN, ON TRIAL FOR MURDER OF JORDAN DAVIS: This was like clear and present danger.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Mr. Dunn doesn`t have to prove anything.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: He wasn`t shooting just to scare them off.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You`re not going to kill me, you son of a bitch.




DUNN: Now the door opens and this young man gets out and as his head clears the window frame, he says "This (EXPLETIVE DELETED) is going down now.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did he ever say to you that Jordan Davis said "This is (EXPLETIVE DELETED) is going down now?"


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Is everything he said to you contained in what we saw?


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: All right. Thank you.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: The jury has deliberated 11 hours and 43 minutes. And then they decided to go back to the hotel for dinner as opposed to working together through dinner. To me that says there could be some conflict, there could be factions.

We have a graphic of the jury makeup. Let`s take a look at it. You`ve got, this is just some of the things, the different jobs that they do. Software developer, like Dunn. You`ve got one Hispanic white male, civil service contractor. You have four other white males. You`ve got four females who are white females, one in retail, one in home health, one account manager, one a bank business representative. And the four white males, I can tell you, when we get to them. We have two African-American females, nursing student and an occupational therapist. But when we get to the Asian female, the software programmer -- wow.

Let`s get to the final tally here. The white males -- well anyway. It`s seven women and five men. There we go. Four white males, four white females, two African-American females, one white Hispanic male, one Asian female.

All right. Adam Thompson, do you think there could be in this diverse jury panel a conflict -- a conflict between factions.

ADAM THOMPSON, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Jane, Jane, I`m going to say it right -- no one wants to talk about it. I`ve got to always be the guy in the show that does it -- race, race, race, race. Juries decide the outcome of cases.

You know, if a comedian`s in front of an audience who doesn`t get his jokes then the comedian is not funny. If the jury doesn`t understand and identify with the fact representing to it, then you`re going to -- you lose the case, you`re going to get a hung jury.

So in this case, everything starts and ends with who is sitting in this jury box. Here, you have a real racial division. And race permeates everything that happens in society today. People don`t want to admit that but it does.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Unfortunately.

THOMPSON: Are the African-Americans going to hold out and make sure there isn`t an acquittal? Are the whites going to hold out and make sure there is a not guilty? You don`t know.


THOMPSON: The possibility of a not guilty in this case is --

VELEZ-MITCHELL: All right. Let somebody else jump in.

THOMPSON: -- is huge.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Ok, Jon Leiberman. Ok, Adam. Jon.

JON LEIBERMAN, HLN CONTRIBUTOR: They could just as likely, I submit it`s more likely that they`re torn over what to convict him of -- whether it`s first degree, whether it`s second degree or whether it`s manslaughter. Everybody`s talking as if the state didn`t put on a good case.

And I submit to you, Jane, this case is completely different than the George Zimmerman case for the biggest reason there was a lot more direct evidence in this case. For one, Dunn left the scene and we know what he did after that and didn`t call police, et cetera, et cetera. Zimmerman stayed at the scene and talked to police quite extensively.

But anyway, I believe what this jury is actually quibbling over is what to convict Michael Dunn of. The state put on an absolutely exceptional case, pointing out the lack of credibility in Michael Dunn`s own statements from the interrogation to the letters that he wrote to his family to what he said on the stand.

And then, I think the credibility of his own fiancee, that was the turning point, I believe, in the trial. The fact that --

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Very briefly, Simone Bienne, you`re a behavior expert -- sorry to cut you off -- we only have a couple of seconds. Do you get the sense that if they say, let`s go back to our hotel to have dinner which means they can have dinner in their own rooms. They don`t have to hang out together that that means that they`re at loggerheads possibly?

SIMONE BIENNE, BEHAVIOR EXPERT: Yes. Well, loggerheads or are they trying to bond, actually? And try -- I really like the point that was by the lawyer which is actually --

THOMPSON: They`re doing their job.

BIENNE: Yes, exactly. They`re doing their but --

THOMPSON: Bumping heads. Bumping heads.

BIENNE: If you look at the gender differences, women will make decisions based on different facts. On that jury, you have women in management. They`re more capable, researchers show, if you`re a scientist, that they are capable of using both the right and left hand part of the brain, which I believe will mean that -- I`m sorry -- maybe I`m idealistic, Jane, I`m praying to God I`m not, he is going down.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: All right. Well, we have a caller on the other side who has a lot to say. We have so much more to bring you. Stay right there. We`ll be right back.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You are familiar with 911, are you not?

DUNN: Yes, I am.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Three digits, right?

DUNN: Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You didn`t call the police did you?

DUNN: No, never did.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You called the pizza man.

DUNN: Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The reason you didn`t call the police was because you knew you had committed a crime?

DUNN: No, sir.




CORY STROLLA, DEFENSE ATTORNEY FOR MICHAEL DUNN: Why didn`t you go search the plaza where the SUV was? Why didn`t you secure the plaza? Because now we`ve got two crime scenes, don`t we? We have the Gate gas station and we have where the SUV ran and got out of the car. You know they got out of the car because two independent witnesses saw them. What did Detective Musser say to me? It`s not my job.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: All right. Take a look. We have a photo of the gas station, where the incident occurred, the tragic death and then we have the plaza. The cops did not search that plaza where the young men in the red SUV drove to after being fired upon by Michael Dunn. They didn`t search the plaza for five days.

Now does that open the door, Brian Silber, for Michael Dunn to argue well, they had a gun and disposed of it even if there is no gun in that red SUV?

BRIAN SILBER, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Well, you know, the judge is going to have to make that call during trial. But at this point in time, it`s not a question of any of that --

VELEZ-MITCHELL: The trial`s over. The trial`s over.

SILBER: The trial is over. The question is why did he go back for the gun --


SILBER: -- exactly. Why did he go back to his hotel and not call the police? Why did he have dinner without doing anything? Those are the things that are going to get this conviction. That`s exactly what this jury needs to think about right now. And that`s exactly what they`re doing.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Ok. But I`m playing devil`s advocate here. If you have --

THOMPSON: The door`s open. All right? The cops should have went down and --

SILBER: That`s all speculation. Listen --

THOMPSON: If they`re not going and they`re not searching for the weapon that he claims was part of this criminal incident, then that opens the door for the defense to make the argument and it could lead to a reasonable doubt, could be an acquittal. That`s what the defense wants -- it`s simple.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: All right. What do you think, Rolonda Watts?

ROLONDA WATTS, RADIO HOST: Gosh. I can only imagine what will happen if there`s an acquittal. That`s the logical thing. For a defense attorney, that`s the thing you want to bring up because that`s going to -- it will create doubt. That`s all he has is to create doubt.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: He even used the same famous term that Johnnie Cochran used during the O.J. Simpson case -- garbage in, garbage out. Cory Strolla used that phrase over and over again. And echoing that none of it is -- it was a sloppy, sloppy investigation, therefore there is a chance that there was a gun, therefore you have to acquit. He didn`t say if it doesn`t fit you must acquit, he used the other famous phrase.

So you know, to me, I find that concerning. I find it concerning as to whether or not if somebody wants to hang their hat on reasonable doubt, that is a little hook that they can hang it on.

Let`s go to the phone lines. Linda in New Hampshire has been waiting patiently. Linda, New Hampshire, what do you have to say?

LINDA, NEW HAMPSHIRE (via telephone): Thank you for listening to me. I just want to say, as a single mother of three children, one of them an African-American boy, who`s 16, and I hate to see my child walk down a street or go to a store listening to loud music and decide some guy doesn`t like it and he`s going to kill him for that. It`s ridiculous. Our children are dying here over stupid things.

This man could have got in his car or called 911 if he was mad at these children. But these are children. They are children. These are our children. It`s getting ridiculous that we have to go on -- to be on TV like this to protect our children. We have to start -- this is ridiculous. I am outraged.

I hope this man is found guilty and serves a long time in jail because we don`t need people like this on our streets. I`m sorry.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Thank you, Linda, New Hampshire. Here`s the thing. This jury is sequestered.

SILBER: Well said.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: All the debating that we are having here, they are -- let`s hope -- not hearing any of it. They are in a cocoon making a decision based solely on the evidence that was presented to them in court. The question is were they given all the evidence they need to make a just decision?

We shall see what happens. We`re all over it. We`re here.

Stay right there. We`ll be right back.


LISA BLOOM, ATTORNEY: There are just too many holes in Michael Dunn`s story. And the bottom line is you can`t shoot into a car full of kids because you don`t like their loud music or because you had a verbal argument with them. I haven`t heard anybody really defending Michael Dunn on social media or anywhere else. I think he`s going down.




UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The gist of the conversation was "Do you know anybody that could take care of this guy for me." And when I asked him to expound on what he meant, "Beat him up, break his leg, what are you talking about?" And he said "I would like to see him dead."


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Ok, that was our exclusive interview with a former neighbor of Michael Dunn, a man who says he lived near him and just paints a horrible picture of him. And of course all of this coming out not in front of the jurors but actually released initially on a YouTube video by the attorney for the family of the victim Jordan Davis who basically was reacting because Michael Dunn`s attorney held a news conference today and he was like you are going to say that this is not racial and that this is a political vendetta aimed at us because of the George Zimmerman thing. Well, here I`m going to put this up, and it was just explosive.

And you know, what is extraordinary to me, Rolonda Watts, is that all of this completely out of earshot of any of the jurors, properly, but that none of these aspects of his personality -- his alleged personality -- ever made it in front of the jury.

We heard from his friends that he was a nice guy. That he was gentle, that he was peaceful, but the other side of the coin never got in.

WATTS: I think this is crucial evidence. I think so. Like I said, I think there is so much evidence that there was murder, very little evidence that there was a thug other than Michael Dunn. And I think that having -- excuse me.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well you know -- go ahead, finish your thought.

WATTS: No, one of the things I didn`t like also was his attorney saying that none of this would have as much attention had there not been Zimmerman. That is ridiculous and insulting. This guy blew off ten bullets a car with four children in it and you don`t think we need to be knowing about this. This has nothing to do with Zimmerman and this has to do you with, Mr. Dunn.

SILBER: Correct.

WATTS: And I think that thank goodness for the Dunn case and the Zimmerman case so that America is more and more aware of what is going on not only in the judicial system but what is going on in the streets of America because something has to be done after this. This is going to continue on and on and on.

And like I said, America, not just Jacksonville is playing close attention to what happens here because the Stand Your Ground law is not just in Florida; it`s in 25 other states.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: And I`m holding --


WATTS: -- to be open season on --

VELEZ-MITCHELL: You can`t see the Stand Your Ground law but I`ve got here right here on my smartphone and it is really sort of the cloud that hangs over this entire case.

And I`ll throw it to you, Adam Thompson, everybody said well he didn`t use stand your ground because he didn`t ask for immunity hearing before the trial that could have had everything, you know, thrown away because he knew that never would happen.

But the law is still on the books. The statute that you can stand your ground and meet force with force under certain conditions, it`s still there. That is another thing that the defense has going for them -- briefly.

THOMPSON: Right, it is embedded right in the jury instruction that the judge gives. So without even asking for it at the conclusion of the case, when you raise self-defense and justification it`s going to be part of that jury charge.

But about Stand Your Ground, I want to say this because I think it`s so important. Look at the two possible outcomes and what could happen. If there is a conviction in this case, everyone will say, hey look, someone actually got convicted who used Stand Your Ground. So it is ok. But if a big case should come --


VELEZ-MITCHELL: I got to leave it right there. We`ll be back tomorrow -- join me.

THOMPSON: If we get a not guilty --

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Ok. Nancy next.