Talk:Murder of Jordan Davis

Article title
I'm glad to see people are creating an article about this case, which somehow has eluded Wikipedia. But I think the right article for it would be Shooting of Jordan Davis, much like the Shooting of Trayvon Martin article. Michael Dunn should not have his own article per WP:BLP1E; relevant information from this article can go into the shooting article. Fnordware (talk) 01:29, 19 February 2014 (UTC)


 * I agree. Wikipedia should not have a biography article about the life of Dunn.  We should have an article about the notable recent murder case (shooting of Davis).   Thanks.   Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 04:36, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Agree completely. If he becomes independently notable, we can revisit this article.LedRush (talk) 15:40, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Agree. WP:BOLDly moving. Gaijin42 (talk) 16:18, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Now that Michael Dunn was officially convicted of murder, perhaps the title should be "Murder of of Jordan Davis" ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.114.132.30 (talk) 19:02, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Agree that article title, following conviction, should be changed to "Murder of Jordan Davis".I am the radiohead (talk) 18:54, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Agree as well, given that it is different from the Shooting of Trayvon Martin where the perpetrator was found not-guitly. Epluribusunumyall (talk) 10:59, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Categories
I added some cats (many copied from the Trayvon Martin article). The Defensive Gun Use one may be controversial. I am not trying to say that this was in fact a defensive gun use, but defensive gun use is certainly a topic which is discussed in the article and the case at large. Gaijin42 (talk) 19:58, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Argument
I'm not sure why there is a problem characterizing the exchange between Jordan Davis and Michael Dunn as an argument. It is widely characterized as such - just Google "Jordan Davis argument" and watch the reliable sources pop up. Or this article, already cited, calls it a "conversation" that "escalated", which is a polite way of saying argument. As the shooting approached, Davis was yelling "f--- you" at Dunn according to both Dunn's testimony and the testimony of Davis' friends, who started rolling up the window to calm him down. This is an important point in the case, that no one denies Davis was getting pretty aggressive. Fnordware (talk) 05:55, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Jailhouse phonecall
I previously took the paragraph with quotes from the jailhouse phone call out, but it has been put back in. Aside from now being a little redundant, I don't think the quotes really add anything. The important information is contained in the sentence "According to Dunn's testimony, Davis threatened to kill him, then opened his car door and pointed what appeared to be a shotgun at him." I don't want to get into an edit war, but I'd like to take that paragraph out again. Fnordware (talk) 16:36, 20 February 2014 (UTC)


 * The paragraph continued to bother me (and nobody objected), so I took it out again. Is there a need for the quotes from the phone call? We already know that the whole basis for his side of the trial was that it was self-defense. Fnordware (talk) 16:54, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
 * His quote is a lie made to look like fact, is contradicted, tries to draw pity, And it's offensive. It's an inappropriate quote from him, and its unencyclopedic. These reasons could be why it bothers you. It could be removed altogether or summarized. Parts of the disputed passage are only necessary if it differs from his testimony and is an important contradiction. We don't have to know everything everyone said, unless its important. Is it possible to summarize how he tried to play the victim, without resorting to pov? The facts make him look bad. - Sidelight 12 Talk 17:25, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Michael Dunn's neighbor
It wasn't presented in the trial as evidence, but there is a very interesting interview with Michael Dunn's neighbor here. I'm not sure there is a real reliable source for it, so I'm not sure it can be included in the article, especially in light of WP:BLP. Anyone got a good WP:RS? Fnordware (talk) 16:47, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Im finding some refs to it at the NYPost and Mailonline, but as those are both considered tabloids I think they also won't meet WP:RS. have to wait for someone big to cover it. Even after that, if they are just commenting on the YouTube video, it probably would still have BLP issues as the ultimate source is WP:SPS Gaijin42 (talk) 16:57, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
 * The New York Post can't be a reliable source? Was this discussed in a Wikipedia forum somewhere? Maybe we just don't like them because of articles like this? Fnordware (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Depends on the context. They are brought up at Reliable_sources/Noticeboard all the time, generally with negative results. They are only a few steps above the enquirer, maybe something like People or Cosmo.  For WP:BLP issues, making entirely negative statements,   for a story based almost entirely on a YouTube video, I can't believe it would pass, but you are welcome to try at RSN and see what happens. http://nypost.com/2014/02/16/loud-music-shooter-put-gun-to-ex-wifes-head-investigators/ is the story I found there. Gaijin42 (talk) 17:23, 20 February 2014 (UTC)


 * His neighbor spoke on CNN. I'm looking for it. The caption is not titled descriptively about the neighbor. - Sidelight 12 Talk 03:23, 21 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Aha, here it is. Is there a transcript? Fnordware (talk) 03:33, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
 * good, you found it. It's also here at 2:18 . There is also a different transcript of his same neighbor [Charles Hendrix] - Sidelight 12  Talk 03:48, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Saw your edit, Sidelight12. I think you can do better than that! There should be at least some description of what the neighbor said. In order to keep our WP:NPOV, you may want to mention the comments made by his daughter. This transcript also mentions that he is estranged from the son whose wedding he was coming back from, and I think the neighbor says that Dunn is estranged from his own parents due to shady business dealings. Fnordware (talk) 04:44, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
 * You're right. It was sort of lazy. Also, its hard to comment without using a pov. I just wanted to open the door from access to the sources. I also didn't know if you were going to spend time editing, and tried to avoid an edit conflict, but no big deal.- Sidelight 12 Talk 04:49, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Its difficult to use this without appearing to have a point of view. I'll try. - Sidelight 12 Talk 04:52, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Is it ok to mention how he threatened and abused his ex wives? I think it needs to be mentioned. - Sidelight 12 Talk 04:57, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
 * If it's in the reliable source (not just in the self-published YouTube video), then it's fair game. Just write "Dunn's neighbor claims that Dunn..." so that the article itself is neutrally reporting facts (that the neighbor said this), not stating that the threatening is itself an incontrovertible fact. Fnordware (talk) 05:01, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I danced around it and included Hendrix labeling him as abusive. It is accessible from there, and if anyone wants to add it, have fun. Those two are the same transcript. Here is a source of cnn video Dunn's daughter I can't understand a word she says, except she sees her father as protective (your source has it written). - Sidelight 12 Talk 05:20, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Transcripts will show up here eventually, but it does not look like this one has been posted yet. http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/acd.html Gaijin42 (talk) 03:40, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Hendrix transcript has two parts on Hendrix's interpretation that Dunn was interested in a hitman, and he contacted the police about this. He also said, he didn't think Dunn wanted to kill the young man, but he lost control, then thought he would get away with shooting. Read the transcript before removing passages, and before merging sources to support information not said in it. ie. this transcript didn't mention his alleged abuse against his former wives. - Sidelight 12 Talk 06:47, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Charles Hendrix phone interview with Jane Velez-Mitchell w/ video of his other interview. Here's what you're looking for. - Sidelight 12 Talk 11:44, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Transcript
John Phillips [Davis family attorney] says Dunn had a silencer in his trunk. He also mentions, that Davis likely didn't enough have room to be in a position to hold up a long shotgun. [Near the end of the transcript ] - Sidelight 12 Talk 08:20, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Juror 8
CNN interview. Convenience link for discussion here, but we probably need a better link for citing. http://legalinsurrection.com/2014/02/black-juror-in-dunn-case-trial-about-justice-not-race/ Gaijin42 (talk) 02:33, 21 February 2014 (UTC)


 * I guess you'd put that under Legal Proceedings? Maybe a sub-section called Jury Deliberations? Also worth noting is that the jury deliberated for a pretty long time—30 hours over 4 days according to this (already cited) article. Fnordware (talk) 02:58, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

See also question
Does anyone think the link to Disturbing the peace as being suggestive? - Sidelight 12 Talk 05:53, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Not suggestive, but not relevant. It's an actual crime, which no one is charged with in this case. Fnordware (talk) 06:04, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Nominated a redirect to this article for deletion
It's Michael Dunn (software developer) For the following reasons. The term software developer is inappropriate because this is not what he is known for. The disambiguation Michael Dunn covers his redirect to shooting of Jordan Davis, it has hardly any links to it, its not commonly used, and only the redirect is in its history.


 * NO. Dunn does not merit a page of his own. HIs inclusion in the Michael Dunn disambiguation page is quite clear and provides the necessary info. We can't be giving articles to every racist liar out there. Jordan Davis doesn't have his own page, nor should he, necessarily. Shooting of Jordan Davis is fine as is, IMO. Quis separabit?  15:18, 23 February 2014 (UTC)


 * The redirect was just an artifact of the move. That was the original title of this article, which I moved here. Gaijin42 (talk) 15:59, 23 February 2014 (UTC)


 * OK, I see. Thanks. Sorry for misunderstanding. I still don't think it's necessary to recreate the redirect, though. Quis separabit?  16:06, 23 February 2014 (UTC)


 * glad everyone here understands. opinions about him aside, he's not known for being a software developer, (and no one cares about what he's done as a software developer). If there were two people named Linus Torvalds, then "Linus Torvalds (software developer)" would be appropriate. I hope the initial naming before the move was a meaningless mistake. - Sidelight 12 Talk 08:43, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Reactions
Wayne Brady's reaction to the verdict, but its not very helpful. - Sidelight 12 Talk 14:59, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

What is the *minimum* sentence Dunn could face for his current convictions?
We read that Dunn already faces a (maximum) penalty of 75 years for his current convictions, prompting some to wonder: why bother prosecuting him again on a charge that looks more like second- than first-degree murder. The article should also state the minimum penalty, including the possibility of "concurrent" sentences. A life penalty for second-degree murder looks more worthwhile, if the possible default is a concurrent year in prison and 5 years of probation.Hcunn (talk) 17:14, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Race of shooter and victims
Why does the article not make any note of the race of the shooter or victims, despite it being categorized under BLM, and despite the later references to the Trayvon Martin case? Surely this is enough to make this information relevant to the average reader without some tangential notion that it adds bias to the article. 2601:197:301:DB90:8119:EFE0:432A:BF01 (talk) 04:47, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
 * August 2020, and this has still not been addressed. Kdammers (talk) 08:57, 23 August 2020 (UTC)


 * I've added a context template to draw attention to the lack of racial information—if I have time later I'll see if I can add that in, but in the meanwhile maybe someone working on content editing (with more experience than me!) can fix it.
 * 14:57, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

I understand that writing an entire new section on the case's broader context in relation to racial justice requires some effort, but I'm a bit appalled that the article has gone this long without even a mention of the races of the people involved. It took less than five minutes to add a mention, and most of that time was just verifying that their races were already in the citations. This should not be taking so long. Waterfire (talk) 05:11, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * So an anonymous user removed references to the races of the perpetrator and victim. I've added them back. Is it possible to get more eyes on this so that we can get this whole thing sorted out? Waterfire (talk) 23:40, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Has Dunn been sentenced yet? (Asking on August 16, 2017)
Has Dunn been sentenced yet? (Asking on August 16, 2017) HandsomeMrToad (talk) 17:26, 16 August 2017 (UTC)